General News Thread

Page 463 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
And now for one of the more worrying stories; Awet Gebremedhin has gone missing! (link in Danish)

Short summary:

He travelled back to the Tigray region in Ethiopia where he lives with his wife and son. However a civil war has broken out - or is on the verge of breaking out - in the area, so they have gone into hiding, and haven't been heard from for several days.

Full - Google translated - version:

Israel Cycling Academy rider gone into hiding during war in Ethiopia

The concerns are being raised by some of those closest to Awet Gebremedhin, as the Swede is in a war zone in Ethiopia.

Awet Gebremedhin has gone underground in Ethiopia, where a war is currently raging between the government and local forces in the Tigray region.

This is explained by Marcelino Pacheco, Gebremedhin's agent, to Marca.

The 28-year-old Israel Cycling Academy rider recently traveled home to the town of Mekele in the Tigray region of Ethiopia, where he lives with his wife and son. Meanwhile, war has broken out in the region, which is why he has now gone into hiding to survive.

"His sister in Sweden has told us that he (Gebremedhin, ed.) And his family have gone into hiding until the war is over. We hear that a civil war can break out at any time, but we hope everything calms down soon, ”says Pacheco.

On top of all the chaos, Gebremedhin is facing a contract expiration at Israel Cycling Academy. Therefore, the agent has tried to get in touch with him, but now he is worried after many days of silence from the Swede with African roots.

"We have tried to get in touch with him since we are looking for a team in 2021. It seems that all telephony and internet connection has been destroyed. After all, many days have passed without sound, so we start to worry. ”

Gebremedhin has been hit hard by the corona pandemic this season. In fact, he has only had 11 race days, which were distributed in the stage race Tour Rwanda in February and in the Polish stage race Albertina Baltyk in September.
 
Not sure where to put this.

Only read it now. Lovely read. It's nice to see something written so eloquently and at the same time very direct in its opinion, because I think too often do such articles hide behind suggestive words.
Also, nice pic of Kwiatkowski with Lappartient...
 
Reactions: TourOfSardinia

What a ridiculous proposal and what an even more ridiculous source...

I don't think Theo Bos will be the authority on how to race more safely in the final kilometre.

And in fact, apart from the Groenewegen-Jakobsen crash, sprint crashes have become really, really rare.
 

What a ridiculous proposal and what an even more ridiculous source...

I don't think Theo Bos will be the authority on how to race more safely in the final kilometre.

And in fact, apart from the Groenewegen-Jakobsen crash, sprint crashes have become really, really rare.
Can't disagree more. A lot of close calls. Punishment made on consequences, not actions. This might not be the ending point but it is a great starting point.
 
Can't disagree more. A lot of close calls. Punishment made on consequences, not actions. This might not be the ending point but it is a great starting point.
That is not at all what I was referring to. You know how Theo Bos conducted himself in the sprints, right?

And an obvious problem is that the battle for position would just become even more fierce. You just can't control road racing like that, putting lanes in the final 300 metres...

I do agree with you that punishments based on consequences rather than actions are undesirable.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan

What a ridiculous proposal and what an even more ridiculous source...

I don't think Theo Bos will be the authority on how to race more safely in the final kilometre.

And in fact, apart from the Groenewegen-Jakobsen crash, sprint crashes have become really, really rare.
It would be rather apt, though. I mean, David Millar got to sit on the UCI's anti-doping panel, because of his experience of doping making him more valuable to it than clean riders (thus gaining yet another unmerited advantage), so the same premise suggests Theo Bos should sit on the UCI's anti-sprint-crashing panel, because of his experience of causing sprint crashes.

I also think that this rule is not going to prevent crashes, just move them a few hundred metres up the road. Where in smaller races there might not be barriers. And how big does a group need to be for it to apply, are we going to see an end to two-up sprint tactics entirely?
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
It would be rather apt, though. I mean, David Millar got to sit on the UCI's anti-doping panel, because of his experience of doping making him more valuable to it than clean riders (thus gaining yet another unmerited advantage), so the same premise suggests Theo Bos should sit on the UCI's anti-sprint-crashing panel, because of his experience of causing sprint crashes.

I also think that this rule is not going to prevent crashes, just move them a few hundred metres up the road. Where in smaller races there might not be barriers. And how big does a group need to be for it to apply, are we going to see an end to two-up sprint tactics entirely?
Good question. Would that apply to say LBL where Alaphilippe got regulated for almost causing a crash.
 
And van Aert and van der Poel...

Seriously, even if only for expected bunch sprints, that's a ridiculous idea. Of course the fight for positions will then only happen earlier - or you have fix lanes. The top sprinters of each team have to bring their training results to the table and the best of them get these certain lanes. Ewan lane 2, Démare lane 4, Sagan lane 6 -
If they can't find any other way to make sprints sufficiently safe, then just get rid of all sprint races on the road.
The only interesting thing about sprints is the positioning and tactics. Otherwise leave it be.
 
That is not at all what I was referring to. You know how Theo Bos conducted himself in the sprints, right?

And an obvious problem is that the battle for position would just become even more fierce. You just can't control road racing like that, putting lanes in the final 300 metres...

I do agree with you that punishments based on consequences rather than actions are undesirable.
So my issue was that in general, I try to debate the proposal, not the proposer. But also What Libertine Said™. Bos knows as well as anyone what would actually dissuade riders from doing dodgy things.
It would be rather apt, though. I mean, David Millar got to sit on the UCI's anti-doping panel, because of his experience of doping making him more valuable to it than clean riders (thus gaining yet another unmerited advantage), so the same premise suggests Theo Bos should sit on the UCI's anti-sprint-crashing panel, because of his experience of causing sprint crashes.

I also think that this rule is not going to prevent crashes, just move them a few hundred metres up the road. Where in smaller races there might not be barriers. And how big does a group need to be for it to apply, are we going to see an end to two-up sprint tactics entirely?
As to your question, I think you might be misunderstanding the proposal. You can switch lanes to pass someone. "If you overtake riders from behind, you are allowed to leave the box, otherwise you cannot pass in it." There should be no issues with this vis-a-vis a two up sprint, you it just makes it a bit harder to try to cut someone off, which I think is warranted. The Van Aert and Vanderpoel sprint would be a great example of this. The tactics would be exactly the same, and the sprint would have been the same. This way it just would have made it a bit more obvious had Van der Poel deviated, even though the rules would have been basically the same. If anything you would get more sprints like that, where the tactics play out over a slightly longer stretch and riders would be less inclined to do nervy swerves at the end to hold their leads.

But as to bunch sprints, which is the main point, I think both of you are off on this. The leadout guys are the ones positioning the sprinters up until 300m. I really doubt you"ll see five trains going on simultaneously, you would likely get a couple of trains going and then the fastest guys going at it pretty much as is. Yeah, there would be more of a jostle for position at 300m, but I think that would not be that much different from what happens nowadays anyway -see Sam Bennet at the Vuelta. This would not prevent that, unfortunately. Maybe the emerging trend of harsher sanctions will, or further rules on cutting off riders.

The two things this is trying to prevent, as I see it, is: sprinters who are leading or side by side with other riders, and leadout men who drop off (a point that Bos makes that I had not really thought of) from swerving in any way; and riders from going for gaps -particularly against the barriers- that do not exist. You would just have more consistent sanctioning of that, regardless of outcome. Otherwise, sprints should not change that much. They would just be safer.

Maybe there are other issues that come up. The devil almost always lies in the unintended consequences. But I wholeheatedly believe that something like this warrants a trial.
 
Last edited:
Reactions: Sandisfan

ASK THE COMMUNITY