500€ for the winner of every single "segment" and 5,000 for the winner of the overall winner (it will be a points classification).RedheadDane said:I think Stef Clement put it very nicely:
Sometimes it's best to ignore when someone else comes up with a truely stupid idea and let it fade out in silence.
Simply don't contest it. Let it be one of those competitions that riders win purely by chance. (After all; how many riders actively contest the Fairplay competition?)
Though I'm still a bit confused about how it'll work. "On the day" prize for those stages which have a timed descend + an overall prize at the end?
Pennino said:People who are moaning about this maybe shouldn't care about cycling at all. Bunch sprints anyone? Can't help it but I like the idea even more since I see so many people crying about it.
don't forget crossing a railway with the train incoming.B_Ugli said:Its so dangerous to have a descending competition
As is:
Holding onto cars
Sticky bottling
Sitting so close to cars they get a tyre mark on their rear bumper
Weaving in and out of cars
Bunny hopping onto pavements, roundabouts etc
Speeding team cars on motorways and race convoys
Bike racing itself
Etc etc etc
Riders are happy to partake in dangerous activities so long as they are the ones putting themselves in danger.
If they don't want a descending competition then don't compete in it.
And yet they know they can still die if they push it too much (as happened in the past). But they are pros and know their limits. In the end, they care about life more than about a win.Googolplex said:F1 drivers are protected by cars and run-off areas.
Alexandre B. said:https://twitter.com/Cyclingnewsfeed/status/859107363130834945
The cruelty of that illustration.
SafeBet said:And yet they know they can still die if they push it too much (as happened in the past). But they are pros and know their limits. In the end, they care about life more than about a win.Googolplex said:F1 drivers are protected by cars and run-off areas.
VO2 Max said:It could be that noone specifically targets this prize, but by the nature of everyone having to complete the course someone is going to be the leader after stage 8 and he and his team will have to make a decision about whether they like being on the Giro podium or not... and the best we can hope for is that someone is a GC rider since they'll have bigger fish to fry and will anyway be racing from the front at the key moments. If it's a mid-pack guy then now the other mid-pack guys have to watch not just the road in front, but also for overtaking maneuvers from behind that have nothing to do with the actual race situation. It's not like opting out of a sprint competition by drifting back out of the way.
RedheadDane said:Of course someone is gonna lead it after stage 8, just like there has always been someone clocking the fastest time on the descends, even without a competition.
And since one of the favourites for the competition could very well be called Nibali - and other favourites, ie the sprinters, might not even make it to Milan - I'd say he probably has a much bigger fish to fry. Things should go really badly for Nibali to start targeting such a minor competition.
I never suggested the sport got safer because drivers learnt to take less risks.Zinoviev Letter said:This is exactly wrong. Formula 1 did not get safer because drivers learnt to take less risks. It got safer because safety measures were forced on the sport that made the risks drivers, as borderline insane competitors, insist on taking less likely to have truly catastrophic consequences. If cars and circuits hadn't been changed there would still be very regular deaths because there will always be racers who will take unwise risks to win. Altering a sport so as to incentivise more potentially disastrous risk taking is barbaric.
SafeBet said:I never suggested the sport got safer because drivers learnt to take less risks.Zinoviev Letter said:This is exactly wrong. Formula 1 did not get safer because drivers learnt to take less risks. It got safer because safety measures were forced on the sport that made the risks drivers, as borderline insane competitors, insist on taking less likely to have truly catastrophic consequences. If cars and circuits hadn't been changed there would still be very regular deaths because there will always be racers who will take unwise risks to win. Altering a sport so as to incentivise more potentially disastrous risk taking is barbaric.
And again, nobody is gonna risk his life for this competition if he didn't risk it to win a stage or a Giro d'Italia.
The Barb said:This is an obviously terrible idea that I feel guilty about liking.