-
The Cycling News forum is still looking to add volunteer moderators with. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to
In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.
Thanks!
I say never unless it is something the rider can not control, like a dog or the car from 2011 TdF.
I think the forum software doesn't allow this poll to be meaningful, there should be a yes/no option on each of the question.
Imo the first answer is a "yes", although waiting just means not attacking, but that's natural anyway in that scenario.
Imo the first answer is a "yes", although waiting just means not attacking, but that's natural anyway in that scenario.
Very good tactics from Sky not to relinquish the yellow jersey. That way no one can attack Froome if/when he gets a mechanical. I'm surprised people thought they might give it away.
Riders must wait when the race commissaries tell them to.
Otherwise it's up to them. They want to wait, fine. They want to race, fine.
Otherwise it's up to them. They want to wait, fine. They want to race, fine.
When Messi or Ronaldo takes on a defender and the defender slips giving them a free path towards goal - they don't stop, turn around, help the defender up and re-dribble again. OR DO THEY ???
This Tour de Farce and the socalled "respect" must end - Aru won a billion points in my book and he should do it again and again and again.
This Tour de Farce and the socalled "respect" must end - Aru won a billion points in my book and he should do it again and again and again.
Never indeed. I almost went for the first option but then I realized: hey, wtf, everybody should be free to race at any point.
But it's already too late folks. People born in the last two decades when hearing the words "Tour the France" the first thing that comes to their minds is something like a happy bicycling festival, three weeks of joy and fun with the publicity caravan as ultimate eyecatcher.
The rare images of a rider completely devastated and covered in blood are only useful to create even more stupid publicity and hype.
But it's already too late folks. People born in the last two decades when hearing the words "Tour the France" the first thing that comes to their minds is something like a happy bicycling festival, three weeks of joy and fun with the publicity caravan as ultimate eyecatcher.
The rare images of a rider completely devastated and covered in blood are only useful to create even more stupid publicity and hype.
Aru's attack was done in the spur of the moment and he immediately regretted it. Smarter would have been to just ride a steady pace and pretend that he hadn't noticed anything.
This is a tricky subject.
Cycling has a long tradition of having gentlemen riders, who had honor, courtesy for each other, and respect for the race.
So the idea to wait for the leader when something happens out of his control, is a very old one and based on this tradition.
On the other hand, there are many sports where a mechanical failure is actually the best time to attack, for example: all motorsports.
The only time when they can't attack is when the yellow flag is out (jury's decision).
Mechanicals and crashes are part of the race, and should be treated as such.
When a racecar driver has a mechanical or a crash, he isn't angry that the others didn't wait, and it's fair game for everyone.
Many times, the overall champion is the one who had the least problems, not the strongest or the fastest.
The difference from motorsports to cycling, is that in the former, they are always on the attack.
In cycling I think we need a change in mentality, shifting the anger from the opponents who attacked, to the mechanical or the crash itself.
The ability to accept this is going to take a while to sink in, but I believe it'll be good for the sport in the long term.
Mechanics and bike builders need to be even more relevant to the success of the teams.
With that being said, I actually think there's a time when the bunch can wait for a rider who had a problem, far from the point where decisions are made, probably before the last 50km, and not on a climb or cobble, not pursuing a chase, etc.
This might simply be called "fair play", like what happens in soccer when a player is injured and the other team throws the ball out.
That team will get the ball back on the side throw.
But this only happens if they're not attacking, if they are, the injured player will have to wait for the play to finish or for the referee to stop the game.
TL;DR - My answer is "Whole pack together at a non-critical point" just because of fair play, not any unwritten rule.
Cycling has a long tradition of having gentlemen riders, who had honor, courtesy for each other, and respect for the race.
So the idea to wait for the leader when something happens out of his control, is a very old one and based on this tradition.
On the other hand, there are many sports where a mechanical failure is actually the best time to attack, for example: all motorsports.
The only time when they can't attack is when the yellow flag is out (jury's decision).
Mechanicals and crashes are part of the race, and should be treated as such.
When a racecar driver has a mechanical or a crash, he isn't angry that the others didn't wait, and it's fair game for everyone.
Many times, the overall champion is the one who had the least problems, not the strongest or the fastest.
The difference from motorsports to cycling, is that in the former, they are always on the attack.
In cycling I think we need a change in mentality, shifting the anger from the opponents who attacked, to the mechanical or the crash itself.
The ability to accept this is going to take a while to sink in, but I believe it'll be good for the sport in the long term.
Mechanics and bike builders need to be even more relevant to the success of the teams.
With that being said, I actually think there's a time when the bunch can wait for a rider who had a problem, far from the point where decisions are made, probably before the last 50km, and not on a climb or cobble, not pursuing a chase, etc.
This might simply be called "fair play", like what happens in soccer when a player is injured and the other team throws the ball out.
That team will get the ball back on the side throw.
But this only happens if they're not attacking, if they are, the injured player will have to wait for the play to finish or for the referee to stop the game.
TL;DR - My answer is "Whole pack together at a non-critical point" just because of fair play, not any unwritten rule.
Re:
Does it really?
Cycling has a long history of people trying to take every advantage possible
latino said:
Does it really?
Cycling has a long history of people trying to take every advantage possible
Re: Re:
Yes it does, in earlier years, not current years.
That's why we still have these unwritten rules today.
Eagle said:
Yes it does, in earlier years, not current years.
That's why we still have these unwritten rules today.
Poll is very confusing.
The short answer is, in my opinion: When common sense/convention/tradition says you should wait
The short answer is, in my opinion: When common sense/convention/tradition says you should wait
I don't give a *** who is the leader.
Any rules need to apply to all riders, not favour one rider over another.
This is like saying that the person in tennis who has the highest seed should be allowed an extra serve (3 instead of 2) whenever they play a lower seed.
Either rules apply to everyone or they apply to no one.
Any rules need to apply to all riders, not favour one rider over another.
This is like saying that the person in tennis who has the highest seed should be allowed an extra serve (3 instead of 2) whenever they play a lower seed.
Either rules apply to everyone or they apply to no one.
Re:
How can it not be when people have been saying since before anyone knew who Froome was, that riders should attack more, and now the 1 time it happens to Froome, suddenly this person jumps on them and says "you only say that because its froome"
I mean, this is trolling.rick james said:
How can it not be when people have been saying since before anyone knew who Froome was, that riders should attack more, and now the 1 time it happens to Froome, suddenly this person jumps on them and says "you only say that because its froome"
I want to see relentless competition at all levels of the sport.
They ought to wait when the benefits, now and in the future, exceed the costs, now and in the future. Waiting isn't about the rules of the sport but about its norms. The benefits of not waiting are obvious, the costs depend on what norms the peloton and its most important members believe in and enforce.
Being a hypocrite about these norms and trying to twist them to your advantage is just another tactic and it's a good one. If you can get your opponents to wait for you, but you don't wait for them yourself yet manage to convince the peloton and the public that the situations warrant a different response, then more power to you.
They ought to wait when the benefits, now and in the future, exceed the costs, now and in the future. Waiting isn't about the rules of the sport but about its norms. The benefits of not waiting are obvious, the costs depend on what norms the peloton and its most important members believe in and enforce.
Being a hypocrite about these norms and trying to twist them to your advantage is just another tactic and it's a good one. If you can get your opponents to wait for you, but you don't wait for them yourself yet manage to convince the peloton and the public that the situations warrant a different response, then more power to you.
It's a tradition with sosioeconomic background, coming from behavioral interactions of 'gentlemans', but like the weather, things are more mixed these days. Shark pool you know, swim steady, steadyyy, wait.... :twisted:
No option if every single competitor is with disc brakes except this Maillot Jaune who is with rim brake..then what?
No option if every single competitor is with disc brakes except this Maillot Jaune who is with rim brake..then what?
Simple: when there's no real disadvantage to you in waiting.
Aru's attack was at, what 5km from the top of the last HC climb on a big mountain stage - in other words, exactly in the range where climbers should be attacking. And he's supposed to not attack because some other guy puts their hand up, like calling a timeout in a basketball game or something? So if a leader is exposed at a critical point he can just put his hand up and go back to the car for as long as necessary to defuse the situation? A team with a reductionist approach to race tactics might perhaps spot that and start taking advantage of it maybe?
In the Giro, it might be fine for Nibali to want to wait for Dumoulin, because Nibs is going to make his move on the descent much later. But Zakarin needs to attack uphill and he needs a reasonable amount of time so of course he needs to go early: a good place might be the start of the final climb, but he can't do that because someone else has a problem totally unrelated to him? That just makes things a farce.
Aru's attack was at, what 5km from the top of the last HC climb on a big mountain stage - in other words, exactly in the range where climbers should be attacking. And he's supposed to not attack because some other guy puts their hand up, like calling a timeout in a basketball game or something? So if a leader is exposed at a critical point he can just put his hand up and go back to the car for as long as necessary to defuse the situation? A team with a reductionist approach to race tactics might perhaps spot that and start taking advantage of it maybe?
In the Giro, it might be fine for Nibali to want to wait for Dumoulin, because Nibs is going to make his move on the descent much later. But Zakarin needs to attack uphill and he needs a reasonable amount of time so of course he needs to go early: a good place might be the start of the final climb, but he can't do that because someone else has a problem totally unrelated to him? That just makes things a farce.
The Hitch said:
So 30 guys are left in the middle of a mountain stage and the 25th place rider on GC flats and the group should wait? Disagree. Waiting should be a rare thing, not used for insignificant placings.
Erm, he's saying that, because the scenario you just described would be ridiculous and unthinkable, they shouldn't wait for anybody at all.
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
World Championships 2024: Men's Road Race (September 29)- Started by Devil's Elbow
- Replies: 2K
-
Teams & Riders The Remco Evenepoel is the next Eddy Merckx thread- Started by DNP-Old
- Replies: 28K
-
Women’s RR - World Championships 2024 (September 28)- Started by Samu Cuenca
- Replies: 322
-
Teams & Riders The Great Big Cycling Transfers, Extensions, and Rumours Thread- Started by RedheadDane
- Replies: 10K
-
Teams & Riders Tadej Pogačar discussion thread- Started by Lequack
- Replies: 21K
-
World Championships 2024 - Men’s TT, September 22- Started by Berniece
- Replies: 424
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram