Official thread: Should descents be a factor in GC/ are Tour's descents too dangerous

[Ragerod]

to put a finish line at the bottom of a technical descent. Name any race where there is a finish line at the bottom of a technical descent. That's for mountain biking.

The difference is that you must take especially crazy risks to reach the finish line without giving up time. It's not a choice if you want to win. It's too risky for the riders, and would result in fatalities/broken bones/blood at a much higher rate than we already see.

If you are a bad descender, you will not do well in many races including the Tour. You must be a good descender - and lucky - to win already. The question is: where do you draw the line?

Keep the finish lines 10K from the descents, and then the riders have more of a choice how to approach the descent.

It's not for mountain biking if it's on a well-surfaced road. I've seen two crashes on the descents in the past two days (Voekler didn't crash). If you are a bad descender then practice or go one step further and ride the descents before the race. It's a skill that anyone can learn and if they did they'd understand taking crazy risks is dangerous and not the fastest approach. It's the equivalent of a racing driver saying he pushed too hard in qualifying. In Contador's interview he said he didn't take any unnecessary risks yet was still the first of the main bunch to reach the bottom.

If you believe that these descents are too dangerous and the riders have to take unnecessary risks then we have to exclude descending altogether because the Schelcks aren't the ones that have to take risks on the descents. That honour is held by the Cavendish's that are forced to gain at least a couple of minutes on everyone just to stay in the race.

 

[spanky wanderlust]

sad people like andy schmuck should stay home if he's gonna cry about the decents...
do we hear any sprinters saying, OMG Galibier??? F*That, its too big.

c'mon. you know they say it. it's prolly all they will be talking about in the autobus.

 

[spanky wanderlust]

Oh, you mean when he made comments about the course before he rode it, not rationalizations after he lost time. Gotcha.

indeed.

 

[benpounder]

Oh, you mean when he made comments about the course before he rode it, not rationalizations after he lost time. Gotcha.

I'm making no excuses for Andy. But Alberto made his comments after he reconned Crostis. In my book he is just as much a *** as Schleck, but a hell of a lot better advocate for wimpish routes...

I ride uphill just so I can do the downhills...

 

[benpounder]

A point of clarification. I am still ticked off at UCI for dropping the Monte Crostis. It is in my estimation the hardest climb any grand tour will ever tackle, and I would love to see the best in the world attempt to tame it. Alberto Contador, while not the only voice, was IMO the most influencial in removing it from the parcourse. And that is a shame.

I can not draw the distinction between Alberto and Andy that so many here do. They are both afraid of descents that are problematic to their overall ambitions.

 

[benpounder]

And just to add a bit more fuel to the fire, it was a good thing that Alberto had Samuel Sanchez working for/with him into Pinerolo.

I would love to see either Sanchez or Voeckler on the top step come Sunday.

 

[Oldman]

It's not for mountain biking if it's on a well-surfaced road. I've seen two crashes on the descents in the past two days (Voekler didn't crash). If you are a bad descender then practice or go one step further and ride the descents before the race. It's a skill that anyone can learn and if they did they'd understand taking crazy risks is dangerous and not the fastest approach. It's the equivalent of a racing driver saying he pushed too hard in qualifying. In Contador's interview he said he didn't take any unnecessary risks yet was still the first of the main bunch to reach the bottom.

If you believe that these descents are too dangerous and the riders have to take unnecessary risks then we have to exclude descending altogether because the Schelcks aren't the ones that have to take risks on the descents. That honour is held by the Cavendish's that are forced to gain at least a couple of minutes on everyone just to stay in the race.

Or have one of the many support people ride a motorcycle on notorious sections with a camera for Chrissie sake! They can watch it in advance without riding it and get an idea where to be cool. The teams aren't using the bike with the refrigerated paniers so there's plenty of room for camera gear these days.

 

[B_Ugli]

Heres another poll:

If Andy Schleck was currently leading the TDF 2011 by 4 minutes would he be whinging about the descents?

NO

 

[AboutTimer]

Andy is the LeBron James of cycling, and Leo-Pard Shrek are the Miami Heat. Very easy to root against, and he keeps making it easier. But this whining behavior seems pretty endemic to me. Flecha had his little hissy fit after he got hit by the car, taking multiple swipes at the way Voekler was behaving in the break. Then there was all the griping about Cavendish grabbing on to cars on the climbs. These guys seem pretty hard on their bikes, but when they lose they get off and act like two year olds.

 

[Ryo Hazuki]

someone should mail the poll results to the schlecks