GT's 2016 event analysis

[TromleTromle]

6. Material regulations --> the BIG gamechanger, cycling could learn (for good or bad) from Formula 1 racing, and devise rules, with max. 3 bikes pr rider in a GT, and with a limit of x gears etc. Simply to even out the playground and make the strongest rider win, not the best supply chain.

A joke, right? Cycling is not Formula 1, in which having one car or the other can literally mean the difference between finishing first or last. The difference between the best and the worst gear in pro cycling is marginal at best.

Well if you kind look into the bikes used in the 70's i.e. the difference in the performance of the gears was significant - and not like today where cover the whole spectra... ...I admit it is a RADICAL idea - but could be considered.

 

[Mr.White]

Re: Re:

I prefer the simpler measure of result unpredictability (which could be quantified as the entropy of the outcome distribution (best approximated by the bookmaker odds)).

Something can still be intriguing if you pretty much know what's going to happen but only from a circus perspective.

So MSR was better than Ronde?

Ronde is much more interesting, but basically their value is equal

 

[carton]

Well if you kind look into the bikes used in the 70's i.e. the difference in the performance of the gears was significant - and not like today where cover the whole spectra... ...I admit it is a RADICAL idea - but could be considered.

Don't follow you there. The difference in gear is, for the lack of a better word, marginal, at best. Froome would've won the Tour with Lance's 15-year-old bike. The rest is just marketing spiel. It's the opposite of Formula 1 where the car is way more important than the driver.

 

[veji11]

The biggest difference between Giro and Tour has been the consistent ability of the dominant team(s) in the tour to castrate the race. the best teams in the tour are miles better than the best teams in other races and it helps controlling the race even more. GC action is almost impossible to be had when Poels, Henao, Nieve, Thomas and Landa are there to pull the leaders' group. Take the one sort of GC action that had an impact on the GC in the Bettex stage where Bardet attacked. Where did he attack ? in a descent where teammates' usefulness is a lot more limited than on flat or climb.

This thread is interesting, I disagree with some of the analysis, I think to some extent we have been focussing way too much on parcours and route for the last 10/15 years because it was the only lever of action that could really be freely experimented with. But actually other levers would be way more potent. In this I agree with OP : less riders per team (5 on one day races, 6 on stage races, 7 on GTs), no radio beyond radio tour (channel 1 local language, channel 2 english : safety info + info about time gaps and such, but all generic and not team specific), no SRM or rather blind SRM, data is recorded for later analysis but not accessible in race (riders keep telling you "I paced myself based on my SRM, I had practised this effort and knew I could keep x for y long"... this is not cycling anymore, this is formula one engineering), more limitations on what type of equipment is allowed (I am personnally against TT bikes, I think the frame should be the same model for a rider for a whole stage race, adjust wheels, saddle, handlebars, gearbox and such as you will, but keep the same frame).

All these would be very good to be experimented with, if only the UCI had just a tiny bit of courage.

 

[DFA123]

It would be interesting to see how much a full strength Sky would be able to control the Vuelta. I think with so many very steep, uphill finishes the role of a team is a lot more limited in the Vuelta than in the Tour. Instead of long climbs at 6-7% which are perfect fo team-mates to suffocate, there are about 10 stages where the main contenders basically have to go mano a mano.

 

[veji11]

Re:

It would be interesting to see how much a full strength Sky would be able to control the Vuelta. I think with so many very steep, uphill finishes the role of a team is a lot more limited in the Vuelta than in the Tour. Instead of long climbs at 6-7% which are perfect fo team-mates to suffocate, there are about 10 stages where the main contenders basically have to go mano a mano.

Meh, to some extent you have to go mano a mano but for minimal gains (if any), and then full scale Sky just kills you on the few big normal climbs + the ITT... 15 second gains here and there compared to 1 or 2mn dropped on the big decisive moments...

 

[TromleTromle]

Re: Re:

It would be interesting to see how much a full strength Sky would be able to control the Vuelta. I think with so many very steep, uphill finishes the role of a team is a lot more limited in the Vuelta than in the Tour. Instead of long climbs at 6-7% which are perfect fo team-mates to suffocate, there are about 10 stages where the main contenders basically have to go mano a mano.

Meh, to some extent you have to go mano a mano but for minimal gains (if any), and then full scale Sky just kills you on the few big normal climbs + the ITT... 15 second gains here and there compared to 1 or 2mn dropped on the big decisive moments...

Apparently we can't have mano-mano while SKY (US Postal) is around - therefore vuelta style finish is the least bad option

 

[veji11]

Re: Re:

It would be interesting to see how much a full strength Sky would be able to control the Vuelta. I think with so many very steep, uphill finishes the role of a team is a lot more limited in the Vuelta than in the Tour. Instead of long climbs at 6-7% which are perfect fo team-mates to suffocate, there are about 10 stages where the main contenders basically have to go mano a mano.

Meh, to some extent you have to go mano a mano but for minimal gains (if any), and then full scale Sky just kills you on the few big normal climbs + the ITT... 15 second gains here and there compared to 1 or 2mn dropped on the big decisive moments...

Apparently we can't have mano-mano while SKY (US Postal) is around - therefore vuelta style finish is the least bad option

No. See this is where you make the usual mistake : we are used to see route selection as the main decisive factor because that has long been the only lever available. Organisers can't change rules, decide no earpieces (ASO tried on the tour a few years back and it led to a DS driven strike from the peloton), or less riders, etc... so they play around with the route.

But Vuelta style finishes are just as bad : take the 2012 Vuelta, without the Fuente De miracle it would have been an abomination of a GT with just endless uphill finishes and Purito doing his 800m thing to get the bonifications and a few extra seconds...

We need to stop thinking in terms of route. Route is an important factor but it has been used to death. Other levers are more important today.

 

[Valv.Piti]

Even without Fuente Dé, the Vuelta would have been the best GT in 2012 by a country mile.

 

[DFA123]

Re: Re:

It would be interesting to see how much a full strength Sky would be able to control the Vuelta. I think with so many very steep, uphill finishes the role of a team is a lot more limited in the Vuelta than in the Tour. Instead of long climbs at 6-7% which are perfect fo team-mates to suffocate, there are about 10 stages where the main contenders basically have to go mano a mano.

Meh, to some extent you have to go mano a mano but for minimal gains (if any), and then full scale Sky just kills you on the few big normal climbs + the ITT... 15 second gains here and there compared to 1 or 2mn dropped on the big decisive moments...

Apparently we can't have mano-mano while SKY (US Postal) is around - therefore vuelta style finish is the least bad option

No. See this is where you make the usual mistake : we are used to see route selection as the main decisive factor because that has long been the only lever available. Organisers can't change rules, decide no earpieces (ASO tried on the tour a few years back and it led to a DS driven strike from the peloton), or less riders, etc... so they play around with the route.

But Vuelta style finishes are just as bad : take the 2012 Vuelta, without the Fuente De miracle it would have been an abomination of a GT with just endless uphill finishes and Purito doing his 800m thing to get the bonifications and a few extra seconds...

We need to stop thinking in terms of route. Route is an important factor but it has been used to death. Other levers are more important today.

A GT course design where rounded riders like Dumoulin and Valverde can realistically challenge for the win, is far better than one where only one of the top three high mountain climbers in the world has the chance of winning.

GTs shouldn't always automatically be won by the best high mountain climber. That should just be one element, but it should really require a much more rounded skillset to triumph in a GT. In the modern era, with the strength of teams, that is all it takes though. The Giro and Tour are awful for this. It's so predictable who will win each edition.

 

[veji11]

Re:

Even without Fuente Dé, the Vuelta would have been the best GT in 2012 by a country mile.

3 horrible GTs in a year rather

 

[veji11]

Re: Re:

It would be interesting to see how much a full strength Sky would be able to control the Vuelta. I think with so many very steep, uphill finishes the role of a team is a lot more limited in the Vuelta than in the Tour. Instead of long climbs at 6-7% which are perfect fo team-mates to suffocate, there are about 10 stages where the main contenders basically have to go mano a mano.

Meh, to some extent you have to go mano a mano but for minimal gains (if any), and then full scale Sky just kills you on the few big normal climbs + the ITT... 15 second gains here and there compared to 1 or 2mn dropped on the big decisive moments...

Apparently we can't have mano-mano while SKY (US Postal) is around - therefore vuelta style finish is the least bad option

No. See this is where you make the usual mistake : we are used to see route selection as the main decisive factor because that has long been the only lever available. Organisers can't change rules, decide no earpieces (ASO tried on the tour a few years back and it led to a DS driven strike from the peloton), or less riders, etc... so they play around with the route.

But Vuelta style finishes are just as bad : take the 2012 Vuelta, without the Fuente De miracle it would have been an abomination of a GT with just endless uphill finishes and Purito doing his 800m thing to get the bonifications and a few extra seconds...

We need to stop thinking in terms of route. Route is an important factor but it has been used to death. Other levers are more important today.

A GT course design where rounded riders like Dumoulin and Valverde can realistically challenge for the win, is far better than one where only one of the top three high mountain climbers in the world has the chance of winning.

GTs shouldn't always automatically be won by the best high mountain climber. That should just be one element, but it should really require a much more rounded skillset to triumph in a GT. In the modern era, with the strength of teams, that is all it takes though. The Giro and Tour are awful for this. It's so predictable who will win each edition.

more largely there is too much of an emphasis on climbing, be it having 10 Murito MTFs like in the Vuelta or 10 mountain stages like in the Giro or Tour. The problem is that since teams control the race so well, differences between riders become limited in most mountain stages so you need many of them to make those differences, whereas the differences in ITTs remain big as they were before : where Indurain would paste a climber with 4 or 5 minutes on a flat 60Km ITT, Dumoulin would do the same.. but in the past a climber had at least a chance to make big differences in the few mountain stages, less so today unfortunately...

 

[TromleTromle]

2015 analysis shows the vuelta to be the least GC active GT, while the Tour had action every day except for 6 - the Giro's numbers are only held up by the two epic Aprica/Ologno stages.

 

[Eshnar]

2015 analysis shows the vuelta to be the least GC active GT, while the Tour had action every day except for 6 - the Giro's numbers are only held up by the two epic Aprica/Ologno stages.

what why didn't you count what happened on Finestre?

 

[Valv.Piti]

Re: Re:

Even without Fuente Dé, the Vuelta would have been the best GT in 2012 by a country mile.

3 horrible GTs in a year rather

Vuelta 2012 horrible, in what world? I'd understand if you would call it mediocre due to your stances of how to construct a GT, but come on man.

 

[Brullnux]

2015 analysis shows the vuelta to be the least GC active GT, while the Tour had action every day except for 6 - the Giro's numbers are only held up by the two epic Aprica/Ologno stages.

what why didn't you count what happened on Finestre?

Or La Toussuire.

 

[TromleTromle]

2015 analysis shows the vuelta to be the least GC active GT, while the Tour had action every day except for 6 - the Giro's numbers are only held up by the two epic Aprica/Ologno stages.

what why didn't you count what happened on Finestre?

Sorry, I neutralised after Landa was asked to waitfor Aru - the most disgusting team order ever

 

[TromleTromle]

2015 analysis shows the vuelta to be the least GC active GT, while the Tour had action every day except for 6 - the Giro's numbers are only held up by the two epic Aprica/Ologno stages.

what why didn't you count what happened on Finestre?

Or La Toussuire.

Nibaoi out of GC - did I do a mistaken?

 

[Brullnux]

I thought it was longer than 14, and perhaps it should be under GC secondary? But idk

 

[Eshnar]

2015 analysis shows the vuelta to be the least GC active GT, while the Tour had action every day except for 6 - the Giro's numbers are only held up by the two epic Aprica/Ologno stages.

what why didn't you count what happened on Finestre?

Sorry, I neutralised after Landa was asked to waitfor Aru - the most disgusting team order ever

not very objective tho...
Also, Nibali out of GC? Wasn't he top 10? he climbed to 4th with that, and Froome followed him the whole day (barring the mechanical)

 

[TromleTromle]

2015 analysis shows the vuelta to be the least GC active GT, while the Tour had action every day except for 6 - the Giro's numbers are only held up by the two epic Aprica/Ologno stages.

what why didn't you count what happened on Finestre?

Sorry, I neutralised after Landa was asked to waitfor Aru - the most disgusting team order ever

not very objective tho...
Also, Nibali out of GC? Wasn't he top 10? he climbed to 4th with that, and Froome followed him the whole day (barring the mechanical)

He was out of contention. But ofc a Landis would f*** he anslysis up... we are still humans

 

[hrotha]

Landa having to stop didn't erase all the previous km of action. I think you should revise your criteria to fine-tune this.

 

[TromleTromle]

Great stage today in terms of secondary racing - but what happened to the GC - I think the Vuelta would do fine with muritos/mountains if they ran 3stage cycle - plain / murito or hill / mountain - they justed wasted a great lean-in. so far 5 km of GC action :s

 

[veji11]

Re: Re:

Even without Fuente Dé, the Vuelta would have been the best GT in 2012 by a country mile.

3 horrible GTs in a year rather

Vuelta 2012 horrible, in what world? I'd understand if you would call it mediocre due to your stances of how to construct a GT, but come on man.

True, the Froome being up there and then fading was nice, but otherwise the littanny of MTFs on Muritos was boring, but true, even withouth Fuente De, it would have been the best of the 3 GTs.

 

[hrotha]

No, without Fuente De it would have been much worse than the Giro. No contest. As disappointing as the Stelvio stage was, it was still miles ahead of anything else the Vuelta had to offer. The other turd stages of the Giro were perfectly comparable to any of those uneventfull uphill sprints at the Vuelta.