- Jun 16, 2009
- 3,035
- 0
- 0
Frosty said:
Given that he was nearly hit by a camera motorbike and a car in that accident and there was a helicopter overhead, I don't think there was any positive contribution by a rider radio...
VeloFidelis said:
What this argument conveniently overlooks is that many of us DO race and without any radios. We know that you CAN race without them. We also know that we have to think for ourselves and try and read and interpret the ebb and flow and changing equilibrium of a bike race. There is no nostalgia. Just a desire to avoid the sterility of modern stage racing. After all, the sport exists for cycling nerds like us, not the other way around. We are the people and we will be heard!
- Mar 8, 2010
- 3,263
- 1
- 0
Don't mess with Jens. Even Chuck Norris wouldn't do that.
Ok, Jens has his own talking style. Don't mind.
He also wanted throw Ullrich onto the pyre when asked what to do with the Fuentes-riders, or ride without brakes for one day.
"I have a huge family and want as much safety as possible while earning food and having fun(=pain)."
Thats all he wanted to say and can be translated by help from Voigt-German, German-Voigt, then translated to Englisch by me.
Besides that, I am really really tired of that funky discussions.
That is a clear case of 50-50 and can be discussed till end of days with no result.
Ok, Jens has his own talking style. Don't mind.
He also wanted throw Ullrich onto the pyre when asked what to do with the Fuentes-riders, or ride without brakes for one day.
"I have a huge family and want as much safety as possible while earning food and having fun(=pain)."
Thats all he wanted to say and can be translated by help from Voigt-German, German-Voigt, then translated to Englisch by me.
Besides that, I am really really tired of that funky discussions.
That is a clear case of 50-50 and can be discussed till end of days with no result.
- Dec 30, 2010
- 391
- 0
- 0
- Apr 20, 2009
- 667
- 0
- 9,980
LugHugger said:What this argument conveniently overlooks is that many of us DO race and without any radios. We know that you CAN race without them. We also know that we have to think for ourselves and try and read and interpret the ebb and flow and changing equilibrium of a bike race. There is no nostalgia. Just a desire to avoid the sterility of modern stage racing. After all, the sport exists for cycling nerds like us, not the other way around. We are the people and we will be heard!
What your points conveniently overlook is that this is not about you who race, or we who used to. So please spare me the ebb and flo sermon. I could make the argument that brakes that actually work, and the ability to shift gears while standing on a climb are unfair advantages that we never had, and have changed racing more than radios, but you would have to have been there to understand that.
It is about pros at the highest level of the sport, all of whom used to race without radios, but now do. They are firm in their resolve to not do with out and also maintain, that we/you/they cannot go back in time. The thought that anyone knows what racing will devolve to with the removal of radios is propagating the worst type of nostalgia. That which says, "I know better", but really we only think we do... It's called hubris.
But hey... since cycling only exists for nerds like us, which will be new news to teams and sponsors, and since in your opinion, it has become sterile... maybe you should demand your money back.
VeloFidelis said:
VF, thanks for the reply. It's my belief, call it hubris or nostalgia if you like, that the teams and riders safety claims are a smoke screen to protect themselves from the randomness of racing. The larger teams have too much invested in the sport to allow that - investment coming from sponsors who demand exposure in return for their dollar. I'm not persuaded by any other argument.
Roland Rat said:Stupid argument. Bikes are tools of the trade. Radios (in their current form) are outside assistance. Why can people not see the distinction?
Of course it is a stupid argument. Remember all the TT bikes that were banned? Oh, but the bikes are tools of the trade. Yes.
- Jun 22, 2009
- 10,644
- 2
- 0
- Mar 31, 2010
- 18,136
- 5
- 0
Arnout said:
exatcly. voigt is the bgigest actor and fraud in the current peloton and he is now slowly exposing himself for who he is. can't believe that guy has any fans. he's worse then ivan basso in asskissing as well
- Mar 8, 2010
- 3,263
- 1
- 0
VeloFidelis said:
I'm not really sure the resolve is there with the riders. Did you read Cedric Vasseur's reaction?
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/former-cpa-president-vasseur-reacts-to-radio-ban
Also, the lecture on hubris is an interesting one, especially with respect to riders and rules dealing with safety. Remember the protests against helmets? Did the riders know better then?
This article in Cycle Sport says it better.
http://www.cyclesportmag.com/news-and-comment/cs-comment-do-radios-make-racing-boring/
md2020 said:
Bah! What does Cedric know? He's only the rider's elected representative. And what does Lionel Birnie know? He's never been in the back of a team car at a GT. Oh, hang on.....
- Apr 20, 2009
- 667
- 0
- 9,980
So... the former head of the CPA, Cedric Vasseur's opinion regarding radios is being lionized, while Jens Voigt's opinion and character are being vilified... Hmmm... go figure. It's an interesting exercise to watch a solid performer and generally well respected pro transformed into a whining pussy here in the blogosphere for speaking his mind, while a lack of a real opinion by Vasseur is held up as a definitive statement on the subject.
I get that Vasseur thinks rider protests are not the answer, but he doesn't really express an opinion on the ban. What he does clarify is that the UCI has not considered rider input in their decision... this could probably be a large part of the problem. Nobody likes arbitrary decisions imposed on their workplace without having a voice in the matter, and somehow that seems appropriate to me.
But by far the most poignant revelation from the Vasseur article is something that I came to understand through personal experience a long time ago, which is that professional athletes in general, and pro cyclist in particular, are not exactly the sharpest tools in the shed. Intellectual development is not a prerequisite for success in cycling. A genetic advantage for processing oxygen, a high pain threshold, and dose of self absorbed OCD will generally do the trick. When only 23% of the Pro's can be bothered to respond to a survey on a radio ban, then it is tough to make a case for their active involvement in the politics of their sport. But that does not mean that when it becomes real for them at the starting line, and they are told to lose the radios, that their voice on the matter should not be considered.
We can debate "safety" until the cows come home. I love the vehement opinions, based on personal experience about "back in the day" or " I race without them", from people who have no more idea about what riding a GT or a Classic is like, than you or I do... but damn if they don't know exactly how to fix what they THINK is wrong with cycling.
One opinion that I can respect is that of Sean Kelly in the CycleSport article previously referenced. This is from that article:
Kelly made some very interesting points when we talked about the issue of race radios before the An Post team launch earlier this week. His contention was that, in the short term at least, racing may become even more negative and controlled without radios because teams will not want things to get out of control. And that is a very valid point. But perhaps, sooner or later, that culture would change. The odd unpredictable event would soon shake things up. Riders may be persuaded to think creatively knowing they have a better chance of success.
While I am not making the argument that racing will not change for the better, and possibly "become more interesting", I am not persuaded by the majority of posters here, who know this as an absolute truth, but do little to make a compelling argument. I believe that far more has changed in cycling since the pre-radio days that has affected the sport and the racing. And that simply removing radios will not magically transport us all back in time when cycling was "better". If Sean Kelly doesn't know what the results of a radio ban would be on the quality of racing, I don't know how so many of you can be sure that you do.
My contention is that the riders, teams, and sponsors have the most at stake in this issue and that they have every right to be heard. If politics is any kind of indicator as to how this we eventually play out... the interests that control the money, will have it their way. I predict that radios are here to stay.
I get that Vasseur thinks rider protests are not the answer, but he doesn't really express an opinion on the ban. What he does clarify is that the UCI has not considered rider input in their decision... this could probably be a large part of the problem. Nobody likes arbitrary decisions imposed on their workplace without having a voice in the matter, and somehow that seems appropriate to me.
But by far the most poignant revelation from the Vasseur article is something that I came to understand through personal experience a long time ago, which is that professional athletes in general, and pro cyclist in particular, are not exactly the sharpest tools in the shed. Intellectual development is not a prerequisite for success in cycling. A genetic advantage for processing oxygen, a high pain threshold, and dose of self absorbed OCD will generally do the trick. When only 23% of the Pro's can be bothered to respond to a survey on a radio ban, then it is tough to make a case for their active involvement in the politics of their sport. But that does not mean that when it becomes real for them at the starting line, and they are told to lose the radios, that their voice on the matter should not be considered.
We can debate "safety" until the cows come home. I love the vehement opinions, based on personal experience about "back in the day" or " I race without them", from people who have no more idea about what riding a GT or a Classic is like, than you or I do... but damn if they don't know exactly how to fix what they THINK is wrong with cycling.
One opinion that I can respect is that of Sean Kelly in the CycleSport article previously referenced. This is from that article:
Kelly made some very interesting points when we talked about the issue of race radios before the An Post team launch earlier this week. His contention was that, in the short term at least, racing may become even more negative and controlled without radios because teams will not want things to get out of control. And that is a very valid point. But perhaps, sooner or later, that culture would change. The odd unpredictable event would soon shake things up. Riders may be persuaded to think creatively knowing they have a better chance of success.
While I am not making the argument that racing will not change for the better, and possibly "become more interesting", I am not persuaded by the majority of posters here, who know this as an absolute truth, but do little to make a compelling argument. I believe that far more has changed in cycling since the pre-radio days that has affected the sport and the racing. And that simply removing radios will not magically transport us all back in time when cycling was "better". If Sean Kelly doesn't know what the results of a radio ban would be on the quality of racing, I don't know how so many of you can be sure that you do.
My contention is that the riders, teams, and sponsors have the most at stake in this issue and that they have every right to be heard. If politics is any kind of indicator as to how this we eventually play out... the interests that control the money, will have it their way. I predict that radios are here to stay.
I'm not so sure that we can accuse Jens of speaking his mind. More likely seems to me that he's regurgitating what Brian Nygaard has told the team is the company line.
We've heard about the rider's responses to the question of whether radio's should be included. As you say, like many sports, the athlete's are not the brightest light's on the Christmas tree. They're going to have a tough time persuading people to take their concerns seriously if they continue to demonstrate the apathy when asked the question. Refusing to race seems a little childish to me.
It seems to me that the blogosphere - the saddo fans who can be bothered to spend a disproportionate amount of time discussing radios on forums like this - is reporting back to the sport that the days of compelling racing seem to be few and far between. The consensus is that we would like that to change. One idea that we support is to reduce or ban instant DS interaction with the entire team to diminish the efficacy of team tactics. Better courses would also help as demonstrated at the Giro this year (though it was the weather that made stage 7 truly epic) and including cobbles at the first week of the Tour last year.
Cycling seems to be hearing this message - without the fans, there are fewer teams and less money to go around the sport. If they want to make a rod for their own backs, let them go ahead.
We've heard about the rider's responses to the question of whether radio's should be included. As you say, like many sports, the athlete's are not the brightest light's on the Christmas tree. They're going to have a tough time persuading people to take their concerns seriously if they continue to demonstrate the apathy when asked the question. Refusing to race seems a little childish to me.
It seems to me that the blogosphere - the saddo fans who can be bothered to spend a disproportionate amount of time discussing radios on forums like this - is reporting back to the sport that the days of compelling racing seem to be few and far between. The consensus is that we would like that to change. One idea that we support is to reduce or ban instant DS interaction with the entire team to diminish the efficacy of team tactics. Better courses would also help as demonstrated at the Giro this year (though it was the weather that made stage 7 truly epic) and including cobbles at the first week of the Tour last year.
Cycling seems to be hearing this message - without the fans, there are fewer teams and less money to go around the sport. If they want to make a rod for their own backs, let them go ahead.
- Apr 20, 2009
- 667
- 0
- 9,980
I find the resistance to "DS interaction" to be a fascinating component of this argument. I am struggling to think of any other team sport in which the coach or director is not involved in constant and consistent interaction with his athletes. Can you come up with one?
- Oct 29, 2009
- 2,578
- 0
- 0
VeloFidelis said:
Make a list of (team) sports where players have radios in their ears. Now make one where players don't have that, and only get feedback from the sideline, or none at all.
Which, do you think, is the shorter one?
Francois the Postman said:
Agreed in principle. In most team sports, prep for the event is spent analysing the opposition strengths and weakness and identifying opportunities and threats. The team is prepared and sent on to the field of play. After this point, unless we are talking US sports where there is break every two minutes so that some corporate media sponsor can have their two cents worth, the battle is between the team captains on the field with limited interaction with the sporting directors. Unless the captain is able to understand the tactical nuances, his team will suffer. It's actually very simple sporting analogy.
A list of some sports that coaches are unable to instruct their teams at the push of a button and which a field captain is instrumental:
Soccer
Rugby union
Rugby league
Australian football
Cricket
Field hockey
Sailing
That's many more than one. Is there another team sport in constant play that relies on an off field sporting director to instruct a team how to make and react to real time events?
- Apr 20, 2009
- 667
- 0
- 9,980
Francois the Postman said:
Agreed... but exactly where is the sideline in cycling? Obviously that's a matter of perspective. Just to keep it reasonable and contextual let's confine the list to competitive racing on wheeled vehicles... list away.
- Apr 20, 2009
- 667
- 0
- 9,980
LugHugger said:
An interesting list... I will admit that cricket is like a foreign language to me so I will exclude it from any argument. However with the exception of sailing which I have a good deal of experience, the others on the list are all played on a similarly sized pitch, and they have both captains on the field, and coaches on the sideline with the ability to communicate with, and substitute players, which directly affects tactics on the field. At no time are any members of either team off the field and out of sight, while still engaged in the competition. The captain is in full command with constant interaction, and no aspect of tactical nuance is being hidden by time and distance. Communication is unrestricted within the entire team.
In sailing, a crew has a captain. He has absolute control, typically from his place at the wheel or tiller. He may have no control of many elements of the competition, but he is required to assess and command. He may have no other physical duties remotely similar to the rest of the crew, but he is responsible for their every action and interaction within the team.
It is difficult to compare sports directly since the environments in which they take place range from the most scrupulously controlled (most on your list) to the completely uncontrollable and constantly variable like sailing, and to some degree cycling. Weather is uncontrollable, and route conditions can be a huge variable. None of the sports on your list require any team members to soldier on blindly with no concept of score, or their standing as a team involved that competition. Why then, when the technology exists should professional cyclist be asked to do so. I believe this is the heart of the riders, team management, and sponsors resistance. I am inclined to agree with them.
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
Tour de Suisse 2025 - Men's (June 15- June 22)- Started by Tricycle Rider
- Replies: 1K
-
Giro d'Italia Giro d'Italia 2025 stage 20: Verrès – Sestrière, 205 km- Started by Samu Cuenca
- Replies: 1K
-
Teams & Riders The Remco Evenepoel is the next Eddy Merckx thread- Started by DNP-Old
- Replies: 31K
-
Teams & Riders Tadej Pogačar discussion thread- Started by Lequack
- Replies: 32K
-
Teams & Riders The Great Big Cycling Transfers, Extensions, and Rumours Thread- Started by RedheadDane
- Replies: 12K
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram