Fix or remove TTT

[Publicus]

Unfair may be the incorrect word because I am not saying that there is any wrongdoing by any individual or team. Teams are obviously integral to a GC contender's success, from protecting them on the flats, controlling breaks, and setting them up in the mountains. But the TTT is taking the team role too far IMO. The aim for a GC contender is obviously to win the GT, and it would be nice to see the GC contenders go head-to-head to decide the winner, whether it be ITT and/or the mountains. I think it is unfortunate that this may not happen this year because the best team, rather than potentially the best individual, won the TTT and gained such large time gaps to make it very difficult for some of true GC contenders to contend the overall win.

I see your point, but the two GC candidates most impacted by yesterday's TTT, Evans and Menchov, could have done things to address their team shortcomings. Well maybe not Evans. His management just hasn't been able to get (and keep) a decent team around him. That being said, he was the first to admit his guys were young and stressed. They should have practiced more, though I don't know if it would have made a difference with the time lost to the crash (wheel touch). As for Menchov, no excuse for what happened yesterday or on Stage 1 for that matter.

Sastre is still there. So is Andy Schleck. So is Roman K. And the upside is that Evans and Menchov will have to attack in the mountains to get back time. I think this will have the effect making a far more exciting race this weekend than if Evans was within 5 seconds of Contador (can you say wheel suck?).

 

[mr. tibbs]

Unfair may be the incorrect word because I am not saying that there is any wrongdoing by any individual or team. Teams are obviously integral to a GC contender's success, from protecting them on the flats, controlling breaks, and setting them up in the mountains. But the TTT is taking the team role too far IMO. The aim for a GC contender is obviously to win the GT, and it would be nice to see the GC contenders go head-to-head to decide the winner, whether it be ITT and/or the mountains. I think it is unfortunate that this may not happen this year because the best team, rather than potentially the best individual, won the TTT and gained such large time gaps to make it very difficult for some of true GC contenders to contend the overall win.

Too true.

Hearken back to University days with me: I was always told that attending all the lectures in a given course would improve my grade, but this benefit was often manifested arbitrarily by the professors imposing grade penalties for missing class. So even if a student aced all the tests, if she didn't attend the lectures, she would get docked a grade level or two, despite her obvious knowledge of the subject.

The TTT is like that: having a strong team is a definite benefit for doing well at the Tour, but it is not a requirement to win it. In fact, if a cycilst can win WITHOUT a strong team, doesn't that speak much more highly of his abilities? But the TTT is an arbitrary time penalty imposed on GC hopefuls who don't have the horsepower of an Astana, Columbia, Garmin, or Spartacus to pull them to the line. That's why it should be removed.

 

[clydesdale]

More balance in the overall course. Now that's a fair point. That being said, there may not be a ton of mountain top finishes, but there will be some absolutely brutal climbing the last week of the Tour.

As I'm not what you'd call a cycling expert (give me a few years), but having a climb earlier on in the stage when you're fresher would benefit a non climber, no? Or are the stages so long that it makes little difference.

 

[Snake8]

More balance in the overall course.

Not to split hairs here, but no matter how you design a course there is going to be riders/teams that take advantage. I thought Rassmussen nailed it two years ago when he correctly ascertainned that the course was perfect for a rider like him who otherwise (wink wink nod nod needle needle blood blood) could not win a grand tour. Balance is like objectivity, the more you look for it, the less you have of it.

The whining is ridiculous. Only two "contenders" lost siginificant time so as to make their chances very small - Menchov and Evans. The rest of the contenders are still very much in the race. Does anyone think Sastre can't make up 2 1/2 minutes in the mountains? Did anyone actually watch last year's race? The TTT is one of the obstacles in a GT, and riders need to deal with it. A couple years ago, Iban Mayo lost several minutes on the pave section. Was that unfair? Alex Zulle lost several minutes in a crash on a flat stage in 1999. Was that unfair? Should the organizers neutralize flat stages so contenders don't "unfairly" lose time? All of this whining about the TTT is very silly. Yes, it gave Contador an advantage over the other contenders. That's what it is designed to do - give the advantage to the riders on the team that wins it.

And it's not about the budget, it's about the riders. The Astana riders won the stage, not the Astana bankroll. While it's true that a big budget generally allows teams to hire the better riders, that is an advantage on EVERY stage, not just the TTT.

Very well said. A salary cap or reducing the number of riders on a team are ideas that have been raised to address this 'imbalance' but I dont think you'll see that anytime soon. No, the way to play as a smaller budget team is to develop a specialty and try to exploit it, e.g. Garmin, Euskatel (climbers - used to be better).

 

[auscyclefan94]

the team time trial is rad, give me a break..!!

it could not have been a more exciting day. crashes galore and Armstrong and Contador (and levi and klodi) gaping the rest of the peloton in only 39k?

lol that is about the coolest bike racing i've seen in a while!

hard race = the best riders win

is not that how racing is supposed to work?

most epic day ever with the 0 sec GC margin, also

The best riders don't win... Look at Evans, menchov and Sastre yesterday. They really didn't win today.

 

[Franklin]

The whining is ridiculous. Only two "contenders" lost siginificant time so as to make their chances very small - Menchov and Evans. The rest of the contenders are still very much in the race. Does anyone think Sastre can't make up 2 1/2 minutes in the mountains?

He has about as much chance as I do to get 2.5 minutes on AC in a climb... does that answer your question?

Did anyone actually watch last year's race? The TTT is one of the obstacles in a GT, and riders need to deal with it. A couple years ago, Iban Mayo lost several minutes on the pave section. Was that unfair? Alex Zulle lost several minutes in a crash on a flat stage in 1999. Was that unfair? .

Alex Zulle fall was incredibly unfair. Look into why and where he fell and then say hat was a "fair" choice of course. Hint; that day is unanimously seen by all followers, insiders and critics to be irresponsible.

http://autobus.cyclingnews.com/results/1999/tour99/stage2.html

 

[linenoiz]

The simple solution is to give modest time bonuses to the first, second, and third teams, like twenty, twelve, and eight seconds. You keep the spectacle, which is beautiful, but prevent it from damaging the GC.

If there was only a chance of 20 seconds, Im sure some teams would just soft pedal it preferring not to burn through reserve energy and make up the 20 seconds elsewhere.

 

[byu123]

Oh wait, you're drawing a parallel between the TTT and individual performances. . . . /Michael Jordan example)."

Last time I checked, basketball was a "team sport" requiring 5 "team members" working together for the win. "Oh wait" . . . so is the TTT.

 

[byu123]

So which is it???

To all the haters of "that older guy on Astana" which is it . . . . .???

First, before the Tour begins the Armstrong hater line is:

"What?!! Armstrong on Astana!!! Its going to fracture the team!!! The facture will destroy the otherwise solid chances for Astana at a top finish. The devisive nature of Armstrong is going to blow the chances for Astana/Contador. Armstrong is a chump and Bruyneel is a fool!"

Now, post TTT, the Armstrong hater line is:

"What?!! Having Armstrong and the rest of the strong Astana team working together so well on the TTT destroyed the field and ruined the rest of the TDF. The fact that they worked so well together to the detriment of others skews things unfairly. They were just too strong a team. Made it unfair to the others."

So haters which is it???

The answer is they just hate period. Whatever happens they are going to hate. If the story changes the reason for hating will just change with it. Really illustrates the small minded thinking of these types. Its not about the riding abilities. Its not about the preparation or strategy. Its about hating a person.

 

[COLIN LAING]

Team time trials

Being a very old guy, my memory is a bit suspect...but,,

Can anyone remember Steven Roche, answering a call of nature and missing the start of his team in the team time-trial,,,I think it was the year after his win..and his brother Lawrence was on the same team..

Rather than wait or at least slow down a bit, giving Steven a chance to latch on, they all panicked and rode as if he were there...this was before ear-phones obviously...subsequently. Steven finished outside the limit I beleive and was not allowed to start the next day...or, is my memory as depleted as I think it is..

 

[elapid]

To all the haters of "that older guy on Astana" which is it . . . . .???

First, before the Tour begins the Armstrong hater line is:

"What?!! Armstrong on Astana!!! Its going to fracture the team!!! The facture will destroy the otherwise solid chances for Astana at a top finish. The devisive nature of Armstrong is going to blow the chances for Astana/Contador. Armstrong is a chump and Bruyneel is a fool!"

Now, post TTT, the Armstrong hater line is:

"What?!! Having Armstrong and the rest of the strong Astana team working together so well on the TTT destroyed the field and ruined the rest of the TDF. The fact that they worked so well together to the detriment of others skews things unfairly. They were just too strong a team. Made it unfair to the others."

So haters which is it???

The answer is they just hate period. Whatever happens they are going to hate. If the story changes the reason for hating will just change with it. Really illustrates the small minded thinking of these types. Its not about the riding abilities. Its not about the preparation or strategy. Its about hating a person.

Hate really does blind, except for you it is hating the so-called haters. I really don't see much discussion about Armstrong in this thread. This thread is about the validity of TTTs in GTs. If you want to discuss the pros and cons of TTTs, then write away. If you want to rant and rave about an unrelated topic or person, go to a different thread or create your own.

To get back on track, TTTs have always been controversial, hence why the organizers have played with awarding time bonuses for places rather than actual time differences, or why TTT have not been in the TdF for the past few years. I am against them for reasons posted in previous threads.

 

[Escarabajo]

Not to split hairs here, but no matter how you design a course there is going to be riders/teams that take advantage. I thought Rassmussen nailed it two years ago when he correctly ascertainned that the course was perfect for a rider like him who otherwise (wink wink nod nod needle needle blood blood) could not win a grand tour. Balance is like objectivity, the more you look for it, the less you have of it.

I agree.

Remember the tours from 2000-2005 when everybody was trying speculate on a Tour course to dethroned Armstrong? Then Director Jean Marie Leblanc said: "Which course does not suit Armstrong?” I have seen it in the past that when they load up the tour with mountains to favor the climbers, then you see that they are the first ones to "blow out to pieces" (As per Paul Sherwen).

As per the TTT I agree with Brodeal. Just limit the losses of the teams by spacing them out evenly. This has been done in the past anyway. Looks like the new Direction of the Tour is not aware of past errors and want to experience them again.

 

[Escarabajo]

To all the haters of "that older guy on Astana" which is it . . . . .???

First, before the Tour begins the Armstrong hater line is:

"What?!! Armstrong on Astana!!! Its going to fracture the team!!! The facture will destroy the otherwise solid chances for Astana at a top finish. The devisive nature of Armstrong is going to blow the chances for Astana/Contador. Armstrong is a chump and Bruyneel is a fool!"

Now, post TTT, the Armstrong hater line is:

"What?!! Having Armstrong and the rest of the strong Astana team working together so well on the TTT destroyed the field and ruined the rest of the TDF. The fact that they worked so well together to the detriment of others skews things unfairly. They were just too strong a team. Made it unfair to the others."

So haters which is it???

The answer is they just hate period. Whatever happens they are going to hate. If the story changes the reason for hating will just change with it. Really illustrates the small minded thinking of these types. Its not about the riding abilities. Its not about the preparation or strategy. Its about hating a person.

You are off topic now. I don't see the relation of your comments with what we are talking about in this thread.

 

[byu123]

You are off topic now. I don't see the relation of your comments with what we are talking about in this thread.

I am all for staying "on topic" so the forum doesn't degenerate into one big flame session. Your admonishment is well taken. It's just that I recognize many of the TTT critics in the thread as some of the same that criticized the team dynamics of Astana before they dominated the TTT. Their comments now seem somewhat hypocritical. Sure not directly on point to thread theme but definitely related.

 

[Escarabajo]

I am all for staying "on topic" so the forum doesn't degenerate into one big flame session. Your admonishment is well taken. It's just that I recognize many of the TTT critics in the thread as some of the same that criticized the team dynamics of Astana before they dominated the TTT. Their comments now seem somewhat hypocritical. Sure not directly on point to thread theme but definitely related.

Point taken.
Thanks.

 

[Publicus]

Not to split hairs here, but no matter how you design a course there is going to be riders/teams that take advantage. I thought Rassmussen nailed it two years ago when he correctly ascertainned that the course was perfect for a rider like him who otherwise (wink wink nod nod needle needle blood blood) could not win a grand tour. Balance is like objectivity, the more you look for it, the less you have of it.
.

Totally agree.

 

[Jayarbie]

He has about as much chance as I do to get 2.5 minutes on AC in a climb... does that answer your question?

There's more than one climb in the Tour. Sastre got over 2 mins on everyone on Alpe d'Huez last year.

Alex Zulle fall was incredibly unfair. Look into why and where he fell and then say hat was a "fair" choice of course. Hint; that day is unanimously seen by all followers, insiders and critics to be irresponsible.

http://autobus.cyclingnews.com/results/1999/tour99/stage2.html

So do you think that flat stages should be neutralized so that riders don't lose "unfair" time when something happens? Maybe maximum 20 second time gaps on the flat stages?

 

[Franklin]

There's more than one climb in the Tour. Sastre got over 2 mins on everyone on Alpe d'Huez last year.

Zero chance^^. He couldn't topple Menchov, now he has AC to crack. Zero chance.

So do you think that flat stages should be neutralized so that riders don't lose "unfair" time when something happens? Maybe maximum 20 second time gaps on the flat stages?

No I suggested you read about that particular stage and see why that stage was a fine example of an idiotic course. I'll ask again, read about the stage... you shot yourself in the foot with the Zulle comment. But well, you have to follow the sport awhile to know these things.

Hint: it had something to do with a road which is inaccesible 20 hours a day for a practical reason.

 

[benpounder]

So do you think that flat stages should be neutralized so that riders don't lose "unfair" time when something happens? Maybe maximum 20 second time gaps on the flat stages?

Not siding with Franklin per se, but the stage across the tidal flats that took out Zulle was as ill-concieved as this years Milan crit. There is a difference between a challanging track (yesterdays TTT) and one that has built in "road furniture" (sunken tracks parallel to the riders course, a road that is underwater twice a day).

 

[Snake8]

Hint: it had something to do with a road which is inaccesible 20 hours a day for a practical reason.

Not siding with Franklin per se, but the stage across the tidal flats that took out Zulle was as ill-concieved as this years Milan crit. There is a difference between a challanging track (yesterdays TTT) and one that has built in "road furniture" (sunken tracks parallel to the riders course, a road that is underwater twice a day).

Franklin obviously feels the TTT course was as bad as the Gois. Comparing the two exposes your argument for what it is, a red herring.

 

[LugHugger]

Methinks that if Astana had crashed and come in 5th with LA losing 2:15 all this *****ing wouldn't exist. It's an effing race, boys. You go hard or you go home. So is it OK to ***** about mountaintop finishes that disadvantage the sprinter teams? TTing is a part of the sport, as is sprinting and climbing.

I think that you're right, if they had crashed then there would be loads of gloating threads.

But, for me the TTT should be dropped. Isn't this the first time that the event has been included for several years? It is not an essential component of le tour. Keep the ITT's, for sure.

 

[Returnofthewolf]

5. The strong teams already have a huge advantage. The TTT makes team strength too much of a factor

Yep, It's as simple as that.

The guys that think its about "practicing" and reconning, well..its really all about HORSEPOWER when it comes down to it.

 

[Franklin]

Franklin obviously feels the TTT course was as bad as the Gois. Comparing the two exposes your argument for what it is, a red herring.

Sorry, have to correct you here, someone else made that comparison

The whining is ridiculous. *snip* Alex Zulle lost several minutes in a crash on a flat stage in 1999. Was that unfair?

I only explained to him that it was indeed unfair.. after which he huffed and puffed not realising he had no clue what happened that day.

Read up before you put unneccesary words in my mouth

 

[Jayarbie]

Zero chance^^. He couldn't topple Menchov, now he has AC to crack. Zero chance.




No I suggested you read about that particular stage and see why that stage was a fine example of an idiotic course. I'll ask again, read about the stage... you shot yourself in the foot with the Zulle comment. But well, you have to follow the sport awhile to know these things.

Hint: it had something to do with a road which is inaccesible 20 hours a day for a practical reason.

I know all about the course and everything that happened that day, but thank you for making a snide remark anyway, son. My point is that a major contender lost time on a non-mtn-or-ITT stage, just like yesterday. You whiners are calling for either the elimination of these challenges or completely crazy rules regarding limiting time loss. So, should flat stages be neutralized? Or maybe you are suggesting that the parcours for these stages should be approved to make sure they are not too challenging so that nobody loses "unfair" time? It's ridiculous. The TTT is a cycling discipline. It's no surprise it was coming up. Prepare or perish.

The fact is that the TdF and the other GTs are difficult and they're meant to be difficult. If riders can't handle the difficulties, all the difficulties, then they don't deserve to win. Period.

As for Sastre, the Giro was a training ride for the Tour. He can't have better form in the race he was actually training for? Interesting...

 

[Jayarbie]

Sorry, have to correct you here, someone else made that comparison



I only explained to him that it was indeed unfair.. after which he huffed and puffed not realising he had no clue what happened that day.

Read up before you put unneccesary words in my mouth

But if it was unfair, then should the results be neutralized when riders lose "unfair" time again in the future? Because that is what you whiners are calling for. My God, you are a real piece of work.