• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Giro d’Italia 2024, Stage 16: Livigno – Santa Cristina Valgardena/Sankt Christina in Gröden (Monte Pana), 202.0k 206.0k

Page 4 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
'Yes I think we should neutralise this guys that's a great idea'

quintana.png
 
I don't know to be honest, maybe we are just giving them hard time and it's not all that justified. As in the end they were perfectly willing to hurt fan feelings.
They're willing to hurt fan feelings, and they're willing to hurt each other by riding like maniacs, but they're not willing to get a little bit damp or cold.

And toby, yes the fact they didn't do anything about that Gavia stage was irresponsible, I just think it's worth highlighting the way the Giro, the riders, the media all highlight stages like that as great epic, monumental achievements in the sport while simultaneously asking us to support skipping whole sections of parcours because the riders don't feel like doing their job (Asti 2020) or just because there's a possibility that at some point it might get a bit inclement (the changes to the Cortina stage in 2021, where cameras shown up on Fedaia and Pordoi later showed that the bad weather mostly bypassed that area).

Throw in the complete farce by both the riders and Unipublic at the 2023 Vuelta (stage 2 in particular, where they neutralised a perfectly safe section of road in order to put the timed finish somewhere where the rain actually was a problem) and now it's very hard to take the riders' claimed concerns about safety of parcours at face value even when they have merit, because they've cried wolf so many times because they just didn't feel like it that day. Like I've said before, Adam Hansen was once a respected, in some circles even revered hardman domestique, but whose legacy will now forever be whining to get a stage shortened because he didn't want to get wet, followed by promising action to make up for it before the péloton had an unofficial day off on the half-length stage anyway.
 
I mean, part of why people are so irritated by this now is that the vast majority of the media (social media included), is going to write biased articles that make it sound like big bad corporate boss Vegni is forcing untenable working conditions upon the hard-working cyclists (partly for weather sensationalism, partly because unions are a good thing),when this is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of the power dynamics at play in normal unionized work and in cycling.
Of course cyclists are the key ingredient to cycling, but this isn‘t your average union- employer dispute, because the riders only receive a tiny fraction of their money from RCS. Meanwhile RCS is entirely dependent on the service CPA cyclists provide. Therefore this is more of a customer-employee relationship. If the cyclists decided to go on strike because an agreement such as today could not be reached, this would not impede them economically at all unless they bring their teams into disrepute while it would almost spell ruin for the race organisers.
In other sports such as American Football, where there‘s only one „race organiser“ of sorts and where this organiser has control over the employment of the athletes, this may work, because the pay of the workers is entirely dependent on them cooperating and reaching a deal with the organizing powers.
Meanwhile in cycling, cyclists could just tell RCS to suck it if they can‘t come to an agreement, because they could just as well enter a business relationship with ASO for example. In fact, the power of the cyclists over race organisers is actually comparable to the power of a trust or a monopolistic company where the CPA has a monopoly over world-class cyclists and therefore can command the price of the service of participating in the races of an organiser. This of course is almost antithetical to the traditional sense of a union and therefore is bound to hurt the fair competition of cycling.
The only exception to this dependency for race organisers is of course the Tour de France. This product the CPA helps produce is actually so economically influential that it would be unsound to forego it to pursue optimal working conditions.
 
I mean, part of why people are so irritated by this now is that the vast majority of the media (social media included), is going to write biased articles that make it sound like big bad corporate boss Vegni is forcing untenable working conditions upon the hard-working cyclists (partly for weather sensationalism, partly because unions are a good thing),when this is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of the power dynamics at play in normal unionized work and in cycling.
Of course cyclists are the key ingredient to cycling, but this isn‘t your average union- employer dispute, because the riders only receive a tiny fraction of their money from RCS. Meanwhile RCS is entirely dependent on the service CPA cyclists provide. Therefore this is more of a customer-employee relationship. If the cyclists decided to go on strike because an agreement such as today could not be reached, this would not impede them economically at all unless they bring their teams into disrepute while it would almost spell ruin for the race organisers.
In other sports such as American Football, where there‘s only one „race organiser“ of sorts and where this organiser has control over the employment of the athletes, this may work, because the pay of the workers is entirely dependent on them cooperating and reaching a deal with the organizing powers.
Meanwhile in cycling, cyclists could just tell RCS to suck it if they can‘t come to an agreement, because they could just as well enter a business relationship with ASO for example. In fact, the power of the cyclists over race organisers is actually comparable to the power of a trust or a monopolistic company where the CPA has a monopoly over world-class cyclists and therefore can command the price of the service of participating in the races of an organiser. This of course is almost antithetical to the traditional sense of a union and therefore is bound to hurt the fair competition of cycling.
The only exception to this dependency for race organisers is of course the Tour de France. This product the CPA helps produce is actually so economically influential that it would be unsound to pursue optimal working conditions.
Everything gets boiled down into outrage at the big bad corporate sponsors and selfish fans forcing the poor riders into unsafe conditions. Poor riders who are already being forced to slave away 4 hours a day putting their bodies at risk in such a brutal and unhealthy sport, because they obviously had no other choice but to be pro cyclists.
 
The cold weather should further advantage Pog. Smashing a 2K wall shouldn’t do anything to jeopardise his recovery for the TdF. I hope he goes for it if he is positioned close enough to any break.

Instead of wasting more energy before the Tour one day Pog should visit a roadside cafe and drink cappuccino during a stage. He deserved it and has enough time buffer to do it. This way he would honor ancient champions: Coppi, Bartali and co. Headlines would be epic the next day!
 
Until now it should be clear to RCS that with EWP we'll see more cancelled and shortened stages. So they should think about a plan B even during the route presentation which should be hard enough (I'd say even harder) than the originally planned stage(s).
But perhaps that's a bit too much forward thinking for RCS.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sciatic
I think it is just to complicated to have a plan b for every stage. Its even difficult to get road cloasures for the planned routes. Stage 15 was also changed after they didn't get the permission from the suisse authorities. It should be nearly impossible to get alternative routes on the short terms.
I think they can't really ride over 2.000 metres altitudes in the alps in may. There is a 50 % chance that it is really cold or rainy.

Now we have a fight from different organisations again shortly before the start of the stage. They all want to the best outcome for themself. Of course we get a mess. Riders don't want to ride in unhealthy conditions. RCS doesn't want to loose money.
 
Well, as I see it; Call Zomegnan for a Monte Crostis downhill finish and abbandone of all the whiners.
The fact Vegni rolls over and plays dead on command certainly doesn't help, but the current forecast has light rain. If the weather is at the worst of the range of possible outcomes, then that's one thing. But if the worst of that weather doesn't come, that would mark the third time in four years (Fedaia-Pordoi in 2021, Gran San Bernardo in 2023) that the Giro would have removed key major mountains pre-emptively, only for those to turn out to be completely bogus, unnecessary modifications.

Still waiting for the 'show' Adam promised me from the shortened stage in 2020, and looking forward to future Giri with the Sella Leonessa being the Cima Coppi.
 

Latest posts