• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Poll on when to wait for the leader in a GT

Page 4 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.

Select each case where you think the contenders ought to wait if the leader in a GT has to stop

  • Top contenders still together at an important point (e.g. 2017 Froome mechanical on Mont du Chat) bu

    Votes: 25 21.2%
  • Whole pack together but at a critical point (e.g. chasing a break in last 10km of a flat stage)

    Votes: 6 5.1%
  • Whole pack together at a non-critical point (e.g. no real chase is on)

    Votes: 61 51.7%
  • Dumoulin bathroom break in 2017 Giro (this also fits the definition of the bullet above)

    Votes: 14 11.9%
  • Top contenders still together early on last climb of MTF (e.g. 10km to go)

    Votes: 20 16.9%
  • A selection among contenders has occurred (some top 10 favorites left behind, not like the Mont du C

    Votes: 4 3.4%
  • Selection among contenders has occurred on MTF but still around 10K to go (e.g. 2003 Armstrong crash

    Votes: 9 7.6%
  • 1 km to go on MTF

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Never

    Votes: 58 49.2%

  • Total voters
    118
Sep 12, 2016
441
0
0
Visit site
None of the options in the poll cover my stance on this.
For me there are two situations:
1. Rider(s) attack > Contenders respond > contender gets a mechanical > Don't wait
2. Rider gets a mechanical > contenders notice that > Wait

Bottom line: if the attack was already on, then don't wait. If the mechanical is the trigger for the attack: you should've waited.
 
Re: Re:

Singer01 said:
hrotha said:
Singer01 said:
For all those saying 'never wait' what if your team mate takes out the competitor? Surely it's at least gauche and at most highly suspicious to attack at that point?
That's a super specific scenario that has happened approximately zero times since I've been following this sport.
In all the races since you've been watching cycling the race leader has never been taken out by someone? Utter shite.
Never taken out at a point where attacking made sense by a teammate of someone who then attacked.

But ok: if it wasn't intentional, it won't be classy, but it should be fine.
 
Re:

wouterkaas said:
None of the options in the poll cover my stance on this.
For me there are two situations:
1. Rider(s) attack > Contenders respond > contender gets a mechanical > Don't wait
2. Rider gets a mechanical > contenders notice that > Wait

Bottom line: if the attack was already on, then don't wait. If the mechanical is the trigger for the attack: you should've waited.

What if the attacker has the mechanical while the other riders are still working up the gumption to follow him, like Andy in 2010?

Edit: Bertie was disqualified for that. (pun)
 
What a bulls... this "waiting staff" for the race leader.
According to this logic, next time when Sagan, GVA gets a puncture or mechanical or crash in RVV he should call a timeout and everybody should stop.
Nonsence. Atack atack atack! "No mercy"

And it is one day race. These guys are preparing whole season for those races that can be decided in seconds. GT riders (leaders ) have still plenty stages to get the lost time back.

That's why one day racing is much better. No stupid unwritten "gentleman" rules.
 
I would say only when a relevant CG rider becomes the victim of an "outside force", such as a motorbike being an idiot, or a spectator being an idiot, stuff like that... that's the only kind of solidarity that feels genuine and not just opportunistic.
 

TRENDING THREADS