Hammer series

[RedheadDane]

Re: Re:

I'm curious about this but I'm not going to contribute to some Velon gimmick. I'll pass, gonna watch Boucles de la Mayenne on L'Equipe TV and probably the Dauphiné on Sunday.

What exactly has Velon done that's so terrible?

This circus isn't exactly how I want our sport to go in the future. It's the kind of standardized racing I don't like, a bit like the idea a few years ago of defining 5 days for new races, with x days for mtf's, y days for sprint stages and z days for time trials.

And if I understand correctly, this is going to give UCI points? How, if it's a team event?

They're doing one event that's completely different from everything else. How is that standardized racing?
The old races are gonna continue just as they are, maybe with a few changes, but keeping the traditional setup.
If any new races are created, they'll probably also be run with the traditional setup.
So, it'll just be this series being a bit different. Surely one event being different can't be that bad.

As for the UCI points, it's probably gonna give points to the team ranking...

One event now, with success they can capitalize and expand the series until eventually it is the predominant source of new racing. I prefer to kill the "evil" by the roots and not support any bit of it.

Off-topic: All the marketing on Twitter puts me even more off of it. It almost seems that the teams are obliged to praise this, with the notorious PR ****.

They're putting quite a bit on emphasis on how it's a unique event, so it's probably gonna stay like that.

 

[Ricco']

Re: Re:

What exactly has Velon done that's so terrible?

This circus isn't exactly how I want our sport to go in the future. It's the kind of standardized racing I don't like, a bit like the idea a few years ago of defining 5 days for new races, with x days for mtf's, y days for sprint stages and z days for time trials.

And if I understand correctly, this is going to give UCI points? How, if it's a team event?

They're doing one event that's completely different from everything else. How is that standardized racing?
The old races are gonna continue just as they are, maybe with a few changes, but keeping the traditional setup.
If any new races are created, they'll probably also be run with the traditional setup.
So, it'll just be this series being a bit different. Surely one event being different can't be that bad.

As for the UCI points, it's probably gonna give points to the team ranking...

One event now, with success they can capitalize and expand the series until eventually it is the predominant source of new racing. I prefer to kill the "evil" by the roots and not support any bit of it.

Off-topic: All the marketing on Twitter puts me even more off of it. It almost seems that the teams are obliged to praise this, with the notorious PR ****.

They're putting quite a bit on emphasis on how it's a unique event, so it's probably gonna stay like that.

Probably unique as in something innovative. As someone has said, they talked about doing 10 Hammer events for year. I saw today that next year's event is already confirmed to happen in Norway, after the Tour des Fjords.

 

[RedheadDane]

The fact that next year's event will be in Norway, as in a completely different location from this year, just proves to me that it's gonna be a Once a Year event, moving around from country to country.

But most importantly, if other race organisers want to create races using the more traditional setup, absolutely nothing is going to prevent them from doing so. Which means it won't be a case of every new race becoming like this.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

The fact that next year's event will be in Norway, as in a completely different location from this year, just proves to me that it's gonna be a Once a Year event, moving around from country to country.

But most importantly, if other race organisers want to create races using the more traditional setup, absolutely nothing is going to prevent them from doing so. Which means it won't be a case of every new race becoming like this.

From the original press release:

Velon hopes to develop the series over time, with three or four races set for 2018 and even more in the long term.

Even one is too many. So much of the beauty of cycling, what made us all fans in the first place, is tied to certain factors about it. It's an endurance sport - Velon's clown show takes that away ("two hour pain fest?" Do one). It's free and accessible to all - Velon's clown show takes that away. It's a combination of complementary and paradoxical levels of individualism and team effort - Velon's clown show takes that away. The idea to turn it into a series (after all, they called it the Hammer Series) takes away race weekends and harms other races. Sure, this year it's in a nice accessible place (where any other weekend of the year you can watch REAL cycling races for free), but when the bids start coming in from big oil countries, which you know they will, and they start killing off traditional races to make room for more of these dog and pony shows, don't say I didn't warn you. I've seen it before.

I am of the belief that no matter what the feedback is, Velon will just use viewing figures as their yardstick and declare it a success because there will be enough people who watch it out of curiosity, and forge ahead with their plans to expand it and reduce the number of those pesky races which are difficult and long rather than being a 1-2 hour sprint.

If it's what it takes to get rid of stupid ideas like this and get the powers that be looking at solving the ACTUAL problems that cycling has, rather than facing down some marketing execs, making up a problem that fits the solution you want to present, then I will try to crowdfund the return of Team High Road to the sport and watch start to finish coverage of the Scheldeprijs. Every year.

 

[RedheadDane]

Okay, so some races will have this format. The vast majority will still have the old format, simply because that's how the vast majority of race organisers are organising their races.
Besides Hammer Series does not necessarily imply multiple events a year - even if that's the intended goal - once every year would be a serie.

And what makes me a fan is the fact that there are so many ways to do it. This is simply one more way.

But actually, I don't think "oil countries" organising a few events would be too bad. By "oil countries" I assume you mean Gulf States, Arab countries, not a country like Norway, which is - technically - an "oil country". You see, if an event was to be held in the Gulf it would probably be at some point between November and February - those months included - as you obviously can't have a bike race in the Arabic desert during May/June.
In fact, it could potentially function as a fun event in which new riders could have a chance for some early racing with their new team. Of course, if it was in November/December UCI would probably need to hand out some dispensations so riders would be allowed to ride in the kit of their new teams. Otherwise it might cause some confusion.

 

[Anderis]

I find it a disturbing exercise to read how some people get insecure about some new things that will most likely* not have any significant influence on their lives.

*- If this new Hammer series will turn out to be the reason for eventual collapse of the traditional cycling I will come here back and appologise.

 

[Red Rick]

It would be less sh!t if it were used as an alternative form of a criterium. But replacing real races? Definite no

 

[RedheadDane]

What races is it replacing?

 

[Nirvana]

Re:

What races is it replacing?

It's not a replacement but Tour des Fjords organizers announced that the race will be cut to only three stages next year to make room for the Stavanger event.
I can see other races cancelled in the future to find a spot in the calendar.

 

[TommyGun]

Re: Re:

I'm curious about this but I'm not going to contribute to some Velon gimmick. I'll pass, gonna watch Boucles de la Mayenne on L'Equipe TV and probably the Dauphiné on Sunday.

What exactly has Velon done that's so terrible?

This circus isn't exactly how I want our sport to go in the future. It's the kind of standardized racing I don't like, a bit like the idea a few years ago of defining 5 days for new races, with x days for mtf's, y days for sprint stages and z days for time trials.

And if I understand correctly, this is going to give UCI points? How, if it's a team event?

They're doing one event that's completely different from everything else. How is that standardized racing?
The old races are gonna continue just as they are, maybe with a few changes, but keeping the traditional setup.
If any new races are created, they'll probably also be run with the traditional setup.
So, it'll just be this series being a bit different. Surely one event being different can't be that bad.

As for the UCI points, it's probably gonna give points to the team ranking...

One event now, with success they can capitalize and expand the series until eventually it is the predominant source of new racing. I prefer to kill the "evil" by the roots and not support any bit of it.

Off-topic: All the marketing on Twitter puts me even more off of it. It almost seems that the teams are obliged to praise this, with the notorious PR ****.

Absolutely spot on. I am relieved that no French team is engaging in this grotesque circus show.
Velon, destroying cycling one stupid idea at a time...

 

[RedheadDane]

Such as introducing (live) on-board cameras, and data tracking?

 

[TommyGun]

Re:

Such as introducing (live) on-board cameras, and data tracking?

Yeah, everyone has noticed now that onboard cameras are fun for 5 minutes, but the camera is so wobbly and confusing that no one can actually follow what is going on.

Don't even get me started on data tracking: we have seen bits of it during the Giro, where the power and speed data of three random riders is shown live on screen. What is the point of it when they are in the peloton, soft-pedalling? The data never appears when they are attacking.The live tracking app from the Tour last year was no better either, very prone to bugs, false information and eventually disappointing in terms of knowledge gained. I prefer living the mystery of a race through the eyes of a TV consultant, spotting who is in front and who is getting dropped.

 

[RedheadDane]

There's probably a reason on-board cameras isn't gonna be the primary source of coverage anytime soon. However, I personally find it interesting to see for example a sprint from the rider perspective, especially because this way you get to see exactly how messy and shaky it is.
In a more morbid sense, it's also quite interesting to see crashes from on-board cameras.

As for the data: I think the point is that you access it - either online or through an app - and then select the rider you want to see data from. For example, let's say it's an ITT and your favourite rider - or a rider who could potentially have a good result - isn't being shown live for some reason; you would then be able to find his data and get an idea of how fast he's going.

 

[TommyGun]

Re:

There's probably a reason on-board cameras isn't gonna be the primary source of coverage anytime soon. However, I personally find it interesting to see for example a sprint from the rider perspective, especially because this way you get to see exactly how messy and shaky it is.
In a more morbid sense, it's also quite interesting to see crashes from on-board cameras.

As for the data: I think the point is that you access it - either online or through an app - and then select the rider you want to see data from. For example, let's say it's an ITT and your favourite rider - or a rider who could potentially have a good result - isn't being shown live for some reason; you would then be able to find his data and get an idea of how fast he's going.

It might make sense in a TT, but for me, a big part of the emotions I get when watching a race is the uncertainty on the road, i.e. these short moments at the bottom of a descent or when a split occurs, when no one knows where the leaders are, and so on. This is the exciting bit, triggering so many questions that are gradually answered by looking for the riders in the TV coverage.
I vividly remember such a moment: it was the ascent of the Stelvio at Giro 2012, De Gendt and Cunego had gone early and they went into a long tunnel... The cameras only caught the exit of the tunnel, showing De Gendt exiting the tunnel alone after having dropped Cunego. So cool. Live data tracking would not have given you the intensity of discovering the drama unfold live.

 

[RedheadDane]

Then don't log onto the live-data tracking sites. However, if others want to, don't prevent them from doing so.

 

[LaFlorecita]

Re:

What are the actual names of the climbs?

Who cares? Hammer Climb just has climbs. Hammer Sprint has sprints, I don't hear you asking the names of the sprints?
:sad:
I don't think I'll watch this event; simply because I don't want to encourage Velon to create more *** like this

 

[Vesica]

There's not much sense in the point calculation, but I think I got it

In the first stage (Climb) there are 11 laps and in every lap there are points to earn (the 10 - 8.1 - 6.6 etc).
In the second stage (Sprint) there are 7 laps, but in only 3 there are points to earn, lap 2, 5 and 8.

With the addition that the sum of the points finally results in placing points (1 for 1st, 2 for 2nd, etc) for both races.

So far that's clear. The team with the most points starts as first, followed 30 seconds later by the third 25 seconds later, 20 seconds for 4th, 15 seconds for 5th place and lower.

So far still clear, but than.. " Teams can also earn bonus seconds for finishing in the top 10 of the first two races, 15 for first place and then 12, 10, 8, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2 and 1 for 10th place. "

So let's say that the most important lap, is still the last one.

Theoretically it can be that the first placed team after two races doesn't finish in the top 10 in the last lap, but the second placed team wins both races and earns 30 bonus seconds.

Than they're even..so what than?

There's also written in the explanation that it will be likely a mass sprint on TT bikes :lol:

 

[TommyGun]

There's not much sense in the point calculation, but I think I got it

In the first stage (Climb) there are 11 laps and in every lap there are points to earn (the 10 - 8.1 - 6.6 etc).
In the second stage (Sprint) there are 7 laps, but in only 3 there are points to earn, lap 2, 5 and 8.

With the addition that the sum of the points finally results in placing points (1 for 1st, 2 for 2nd, etc) for both races.

So far that's clear. The team with the most points starts as first, followed 30 seconds later by the third 25 seconds later, 20 seconds for 4th, 15 seconds for 5th place and lower.

So far still clear, but than.. " Teams can also earn bonus seconds for finishing in the top 10 of the first two races, 15 for first place and then 12, 10, 8, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2 and 1 for 10th place. "

So let's say that the most important lap, is still the last one.

Theoretically it can be that the first placed team after two races doesn't finish in the top 10 in the last lap, but the second placed team wins both races and earns 30 bonus seconds.

Than they're even..so what than?

There's also written in the explanation that it will be likely a mass sprint on TT bikes :lol:

The way I understood it is that by "winning a race" they mean having the most points, not crossing the line first (but maybe I am wrong).
It is also unclear whether the TT teams will be allowed to draft other teams, etc. If this is the case, then yes, one can expect a big peloton of TT bikes forming pretty soon.

 

[Vesica]

There's not much sense in the point calculation, but I think I got it

In the first stage (Climb) there are 11 laps and in every lap there are points to earn (the 10 - 8.1 - 6.6 etc).
In the second stage (Sprint) there are 7 laps, but in only 3 there are points to earn, lap 2, 5 and 8.

With the addition that the sum of the points finally results in placing points (1 for 1st, 2 for 2nd, etc) for both races.

So far that's clear. The team with the most points starts as first, followed 30 seconds later by the third 25 seconds later, 20 seconds for 4th, 15 seconds for 5th place and lower.

So far still clear, but than.. " Teams can also earn bonus seconds for finishing in the top 10 of the first two races, 15 for first place and then 12, 10, 8, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2 and 1 for 10th place. "

So let's say that the most important lap, is still the last one.

Theoretically it can be that the first placed team after two races doesn't finish in the top 10 in the last lap, but the second placed team wins both races and earns 30 bonus seconds.

Than they're even..so what than?

There's also written in the explanation that it will be likely a mass sprint on TT bikes :lol:

The way I understood it is that by "winning a race" they mean having the most points, not crossing the line first (but maybe I am wrong).
It is also unclear whether the TT teams will be allowed to draft other teams, etc. If this is the case, then yes, one can expect a big peloton of TT bikes forming pretty soon.

Yes, that's what I first thought as well, but it doesn't make any sense that the team that wins a race (like get the most points in the race, and therefor only getting 1 final point, so starting early in the TT) also getting a time bonus..

 

[Squire]

There's not much sense in the point calculation, but I think I got it

In the first stage (Climb) there are 11 laps and in every lap there are points to earn (the 10 - 8.1 - 6.6 etc).
In the second stage (Sprint) there are 7 laps, but in only 3 there are points to earn, lap 2, 5 and 8.

With the addition that the sum of the points finally results in placing points (1 for 1st, 2 for 2nd, etc) for both races.

So far that's clear. The team with the most points starts as first, followed 30 seconds later by the third 25 seconds later, 20 seconds for 4th, 15 seconds for 5th place and lower.

So far still clear, but than.. " Teams can also earn bonus seconds for finishing in the top 10 of the first two races, 15 for first place and then 12, 10, 8, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2 and 1 for 10th place. "

So let's say that the most important lap, is still the last one.

Theoretically it can be that the first placed team after two races doesn't finish in the top 10 in the last lap, but the second placed team wins both races and earns 30 bonus seconds.

Than they're even..so what than?

There's also written in the explanation that it will be likely a mass sprint on TT bikes :lol:

The way I understood it is that by "winning a race" they mean having the most points, not crossing the line first (but maybe I am wrong).
It is also unclear whether the TT teams will be allowed to draft other teams, etc. If this is the case, then yes, one can expect a big peloton of TT bikes forming pretty soon.

Jesus Christ, I can hear bones cracking already!

 

[nedhill]

Re: Re:

I'm curious about this but I'm not going to contribute to some Velon gimmick. I'll pass, gonna watch Boucles de la Mayenne on L'Equipe TV and probably the Dauphiné on Sunday.

What exactly has Velon done that's so terrible?

This circus isn't exactly how I want our sport to go in the future. It's the kind of standardized racing I don't like, a bit like the idea a few years ago of defining 5 days for new races, with x days for mtf's, y days for sprint stages and z days for time trials.

And if I understand correctly, this is going to give UCI points? How, if it's a team event?

The objective is to change the model of the sport to get rid of the archaic, free-to-view point-to-point racing and replace it with closed circuits where they can sell tickets and popcorn and set up festival toilets. It's like Vaughters' franchise idea, to close the door behind his own team which grew the way that would no longer be possible under the system he was proposing. Homogenizing the calendar, be it by the format as per the previous suggestion, or through creating a series of events such as this (they planned to expand to 10 if it's a success) that will take several riders from a large number of major teams away from a number of other races which lose out as a result, will enable them then to create a Formula 1 style system where they can then sell the format to the highest bidder. Every single rider and team who lines up in this goes down in my estimation.

Notwithstanding that the branding is perhaps the most nails-on-a-chalkboard painful to read stuff I've heard in years. "Hammer Sportzone Limburg"? Jens_Attacks said it best in their iconic three word post: "f*** off Velon".

This is the professional road racing forum, not the BS three ring circus sideshow forum. Mods, please move this.

I guess it would be expected that many readers would resist change. Cycling has a financial problem, all the races can't continue in the way they have to day, so this is a good test how some (not all) could be different. I am sure they will find tweaks they want to make.

I would also suggest is stead of complaining come up with additional ideas.

 

[jaylew]

Re: Re:

I'm curious about this but I'm not going to contribute to some Velon gimmick. I'll pass, gonna watch Boucles de la Mayenne on L'Equipe TV and probably the Dauphiné on Sunday.

What exactly has Velon done that's so terrible?

This circus isn't exactly how I want our sport to go in the future. It's the kind of standardized racing I don't like, a bit like the idea a few years ago of defining 5 days for new races, with x days for mtf's, y days for sprint stages and z days for time trials.

And if I understand correctly, this is going to give UCI points? How, if it's a team event?

The objective is to change the model of the sport to get rid of the archaic, free-to-view point-to-point racing and replace it with closed circuits where they can sell tickets and popcorn and set up festival toilets. It's like Vaughters' franchise idea, to close the door behind his own team which grew the way that would no longer be possible under the system he was proposing. Homogenizing the calendar, be it by the format as per the previous suggestion, or through creating a series of events such as this (they planned to expand to 10 if it's a success) that will take several riders from a large number of major teams away from a number of other races which lose out as a result, will enable them then to create a Formula 1 style system where they can then sell the format to the highest bidder. Every single rider and team who lines up in this goes down in my estimation.

Notwithstanding that the branding is perhaps the most nails-on-a-chalkboard painful to read stuff I've heard in years. "Hammer Sportzone Limburg"? Jens_Attacks said it best in their iconic three word post: "f*** off Velon".

This is the professional road racing forum, not the BS three ring circus sideshow forum. Mods, please move this.

I guess it would be expected that many readers would resist change. Cycling has a financial problem, all the races can't continue in the way they have to day, so this is a good test how some (not all) could be different. I am sure they will find tweaks they want to make.

I would also suggest is stead of complaining come up with additional ideas.

It's just human nature. Anyway, I'll definitely check it out and give it a chance. I don't expect I'll be a big fan but I try not to be close-minded about new things so I'll give it a fair shake.

Is this going to be the race thread or should we make one?

 

[Kazistuta]

It is also unclear whether the TT teams will be allowed to draft other teams, etc. If this is the case, then yes, one can expect a big peloton of TT bikes forming pretty soon.

Actually it's stated pretty clearly in the rules:
"Hammer chase: (.....)
All teams must stay in their own formation – no drafting other teams"

How it's gonna work IRL is difficult to see, though.

 

[SafeBet]

Re:

I find it a disturbing exercise to read how some people get insecure about some new things that will most likely* not have any significant influence on their lives.

*- If this new Hammer series will turn out to be the reason for eventual collapse of the traditional cycling I will come here back and appologise.

If traditional cycling collapses following some innovations it was bound to collapse anyway.

 

[King Boonen]

It's crossfit for cycling and we all know crossfit is for ar****les...