Giro d'Italia Giro d'Italia 2021 stage 16: Sacile - Cortina d'Ampezzo 212km

Page 57 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.

??


  • Total voters
    70
You can also measure core body temperature on with a small pill and a smartphone these days. It's not rocket science to fix it.
Why..Why are you even replying to him? It's *** inane to compare an event with extremely limited shelter opportunities and where people can simply get lost to a race held in a populated area with multiple support vehicles following and no risk of riders wandering off the race route (ok, bad signaling has happened but the chances of that are almost zero).

Seriously, major league dumb.
 
Why..Why are you even replying to him? It's *** inane to compare an event with extremely limited shelter opportunities and where people can simply get lost to a race held in a populated area with multiple support vehicles following and no risk of riders wandering off the race route (ok, bad signaling has happened but the chances of that are almost zero).

Seriously, major league dumb.
Bad habit.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
Why..Why are you even replying to him? It's *** inane to compare an event with extremely limited shelter opportunities and where people can simply get lost to a race held in a populated area with multiple support vehicles following and no risk of riders wandering off the race route (ok, bad signaling has happened but the chances of that are almost zero).

Seriously, major league dumb.
Yeah. Dumb. I've dealt with hypothermia cases in an urban park , nowhere near mountains and with plenty of people around including medics/first aiders etc.

I like a tough race and tough conditions (I organise mountain running races) but there are times when a race organiser has to weigh up the chances of there being any fatality. They have a duty of care. The danger of death comes not necessarily from exposure but the loss of cognitive function some time before death might occur. On a bike travelling at speed, that would be inviting tragedy along for a party.

But yeah, I'm dumb. (I thought this place had rules).
 
I just saw the 'highlight' of the Astana guy almost hitting the mini-van!
For some historical context of racing conducted in the mountains in atrocious conditions I suggest you watch stage 15 of the 1998 TdF or the 1988 Gavia stage won by Andy Hampsten.

If I recall that 1998 stage over the Galibier, Bobby Julich overshot a hairpin on the descent of the Galibier in pursuit on Pantani.

If today was worse conditions then the race organizers made the right decision. But that isn't what I am reading. Bike racing is inherently dangerous. But these are professionals supported by professional teams.
 
Then it's clear that you don't know much about it. Someone who is hypothermic will likely not know and the team medics wouldn't know. Rain and wind (ie from movement) in temperatures just above freezing is a lethal combination.
How often has hypothermia been lethal in a grand tour stage? I’v seen a lot of folks with hypothermia while working (as a park ranger) and hiking in our Cascade & Olympic mtns, often when it’s 40F and pouring rain. It’s extremely important to pay attention to. However, as noted upthread, hikers and skiiers here don’t have a team vehicle following them and don’t necessarily have all the tech clothing these riders have. So we can take the issue of hypothermia very seriously and also know it’s not enough of a risk (compared to descending these passes in dry or wet weather) to truncate this stage in comparison with many others that aren’t shortened.
 
Just a random factoid: my friend was on top of the Giau (he's a hero) and his 4G was working just fine. He had all the network to "watch" the final descent on ES Player.
That's probably what the problem was; so many people watching the coverage of the finishing line that the 4G mast (singular) didn't have any bandwidth left for the TV motos.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
Yeah. Dumb. I've dealt with hypothermia cases in an urban park , nowhere near mountains and with plenty of people around including medics/first aiders etc.

I like a tough race and tough conditions (I organise mountain running races) but there are times when a race organiser has to weigh up the chances of there being any fatality. They have a duty of care. The danger of death comes not necessarily from exposure but the loss of cognitive function some time before death might occur. On a bike travelling at speed, that would be inviting tragedy along for a party.

But yeah, I'm dumb. (I thought this place had rules).
If hypothermia was a potential problem why did they decide to ride the Giau then? The situation there was not that much different to Fedaia or Pordoi.

Also: I don't recall any TdF stages being cancelled due to excessive heat (not even in 2003), even though doing sports with extreme hot temperatures can become very serious as well.
 
Reactions: Cookster15
How often has hypothermia been lethal in a grand tour stage? I’v seen a lot of folks with hypothermia while working (as a park ranger) and hiking in our Cascade & Olympic mtns, often when it’s 40F and pouring rain. It’s extremely important to pay attention to. However, as noted upthread, hikers and skiiers here don’t have a team vehicle following them and don’t necessarily have all the tech clothing these riders have. So we can take the issue of hypothermia very seriously and also know it’s not enough of a risk (compared to descending these cold in dry or wet weather) to truncate this stage in comparison with many others that aren’t shortened.
The forecast was for rain/sleet/possibly snow over the high ground. Snow would probably not have been so bad. It's the wet with temperatures around freezing point that would be the issue. Probably not so much on the climbs but on a long descent. I've seen people go critical in minutes. The fact that the actual conditions didn't look quite that bad is irrelevant. They had to make a call and probably decided that a shortened stage was better than a cancelled one or a tragic one.
 
Reactions: Carols
If hypothermia was a potential problem why did they decide to ride the Giau then? The situation there was not that much different to Fedaia or Pordoi.

Also: I don't recall any TdF stages being cancelled due to excessive heat (not even in 2003), even though doing sports with extreme hot temperatures can become very serious as well.
Maybe they had other concerns involving rider safety ... I don't know.
 
Who's KB and isn't that very much the role of the EWP panel?

Adding another "panel" when the current mechanism is already being superseded by ad-hoc decision-making ignored sounds like a joke about bureaucracy or the Soviet Union or something.
If it is not working now, that is the perfect time to devise a method that does work.
Easiest solution. Set up an independent EWP body that makes the call.
I do concede the point that the ever present threat of the cyclists to neutralize things on a whim really does provide a veto point that is hard to codify policy to remove, so it is hard to see this ever being anything but ad hoc.

If you want to avoid any neutralizations and modifications during the race, then you might as well stop designing stages like today's - the possibility of extreme weather will almost always be there.

It's one thing to try to minimize the number of cancelations/modifications en route (once again, isn't that what the EWP is for?); it's entirely different to try to minimize it to the point stages are maimed whenever "there's a change". High elevation weather has extreme patterns and is highly unpredictable. Just physics.
I don't think that is warranted. You can design the stages, you just have to be willing to set a reasonable standard for implementing alterations when the situations dictate. Sometimes it will be beyond anybody's control, that is just the cost of operating sports competitions.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
The forecast was for rain/sleet/possibly snow over the high ground. Snow would probably not have been so bad. It's the wet with temperatures around freezing point that would be the issue. Probably not so much on the climbs but on a long descent. I've seen people go critical in minutes.
All that can be mitigated with professional teams and riders. There have been many high mountain grand tour stages conducted in worse conditions than today - back when support and equipment wasn't as advanced as today.
 
At first I thought shortening the stage (but keeping a wet downhill finish) was absurd. But then with the time gaps it is hard to argue that some riders would likely pick up significant health issues doing 6km ascent in awful weather (if it arrived). At least the shortening wasn't seemingly decisive in the race.
 
has anyone heard anything of them releasing the recorded coverage of the end of the stage? i remember in 2013 when the live coverage cut out they released footage of the full entire climb later in the day.
 
So youre telling me you dont want to win a few more iconic stage wins if the opportunity presents itself because it will give him 1% more in September? Hopefully riders like Egan doesnt think like that.
I am not sure, that Bernal care about Vuelta at all.
His heart is much closer to Italy where he began to race and Giro is far more famous race then Vuelta.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
For some historical context of racing conducted in the mountains in atrocious conditions I suggest you watch stage 15 of the 1998 TdF or the 1988 Gavia stage won by Andy Hampsten.

If I recall that 1998 stage over the Galibier, Bobby Julich overshot a hairpin on the descent of the Galibier in pursuit on Pantani.

If today was worse conditions then the race organizers made the right decision. But that isn't what I am reading. Bike racing is inherently dangerous. But these are professionals supported by professional teams.
Not to pick nits, but the Gavia stage was won by Erik Breukink, not Hampsten. He was close, though!
Edited to add a thanks for providing youtube footage of the race. I'm all for safety of riders and race participants, but that race was transmitted live in 1988.
 
No disrespect intended, but he’s beating Caruso, Bardet (who hasn’t looked like a GC contender in years). That’s a long way from going head to head with the ski jumper and aspiring rapper. The others are solid on paper, but underperforming to an extent.
And last year TdF was of course parade of multiple GT winners such Porte, Landa, Mas and Lopez from 3rd to 6th place overall :)
Just remember Roglic in Giro 2019 got beaten quite easilly in Mountains.
 
Reactions: Poursuivant
At work so avoided watching all day to catch up this evening.

Needn't have bothered. What a crock. This is just happening too often nowadays. Glad Bernal won and good to see Bardet in form, but really, that was a shadow of the stage it could have been.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
I haven't read all the posts so it's possible that some of the things I'm gonna write about the whole "stage shortening topic" might have been posted by others already. Anyway...

I think at first it's important to make clear that the whole discussion isn't as easy as some are trying to make it look. At least, we don't know if it was. If the weather forecast was "there is a 50% chance there will be snowfall so bad on the Pordoi and Fedaia that the passes become entirely unraceable" it was the right decision to shorten the stage. Even if there was only a 20% chance I'd argue it was a legitimate option. Both from an entertainment standpoint and a marketing standpoint it's very reasonable to say that you'd rather certainly have a good stage than maybe not having a stage at all. The problem is that once the riders start the climb of the Fedaia there is no turning back. You either race the original route or you have to cancel the stage.

Now I don't know how bad the forecast was. To be honest my guess is it wasn't that bad, since in that case the decision of which route they take wouldn't have come down to the opinions of the riders and teams. And that is what annoys me so much.

Listening to teams and riders seems sensible at first and it gives people a very easy argument to justify the shortening.
"Oh you are just an armchair cycling fan who has no idea what it's like to race under these conditions. You don't understand how hard that stage is and what those riders are going through. You'd endanger them just for the show. Who are you to think you know better..."
But that's besides the point. The problem is that while I'm not the guy to judge whether a race can go through, the riders and teams most definitely aren't either. Because while my opinion might be biased, whose opinion could be more biased than theirs? The problem is that 90% of the peloton, maybe even more, had absolutely no f*cking interest in riding a 200km long mountain stage today anyway.

I ask you this, if today had been a sunny day with 20° Celsius, how many riders still rather would have raced the shortened version? Probably about half the gc riders cause they are better on short stages. Most stage hunters won't mind if they have to be in the break for two hours less, the riders going into the break to support their teammates even more so. And all the sprinter teams and guys not good in the high mountains will definitely prefer an easier stage. Ineos knows that Bernal excels on hard mountain stages, but then again, he is already leading the race and a lot can happen on the Fedaia and the Pordoi. They rather won't take the risk and ride the shorter stage.

And those are the people you are gonna ask about whether a stage should be shortened or not? You think Giacomo Nizzolo has a more objective and unbiased opinion than a random fan? It's like asking a worker if he'd rather go home 2 hours earlier but get paid the same. Of course he's gonna agree to that, you don't have to love your job to do it, but does that mean it's a good idea for the company he is working for?

The reality is, cycling fans live for days like these, when riders blow up left and right, everyone is at their limit and you can see how tough it is in the athletes faces. Does that make it more fun for the riders? Definitely not. But if we cancel that part of the sport then why have the sport altogether. A huge part of why freaks like us love cycling so much is because it brings athletes to their absolute limit and simple one climb, 100km watt fests in sunny weather are not gonna do the job. It's not iconic. This stage was supposed to be and as brutal as it ended up being anyway we will never know how all of this might have panned out over an extra 60 kilometres.
Impassioned plea to the cycling fraternity and your frustration sums it all up. The truth is we as fans have no influence on their thinking these days. Whether the broadcasting team would have provided good oictures anyway would have been in doubt. Its about money and team directors want to protect their assets. The pressure they will put on the Race Directeur would be immense.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY