Races Should Be Much Harder

[stainlessguy1]

Better equiptment vs. longer or tougher stages .

There are some really good posts on this topic .
I would like to add that it is quite reasonable to consider that calculating the difference gained by the use of lighter , more aerodynamic bikes and wheels which have given the peloton faster average speeds over slightly shorter distances in the pro races , to the lengthening of the race comparatively in each race .

If the days of the steel frame bikes raced the same race as it was ment to be , then by comparison our advance in technology should be considered .

Other Points to consider are :

We have more advanced training techniques .
We have more advanced nuitrition awareness
We have computer generated and wind tunnel tested engineering available to use in all aspects of competition .
We have race radios used to totally be aware of where everyone is during the race .( including time trials , )
WE have the highest technology ever engineered in racing bikes and clothing and shoes and helmets etc . ( to date )
WE have the best fed , best rested , best educated ,best trained , strongest athletes of all time ( or do we ? )

The average Kph have increased because of this , the courses are covered faster than ever before .
It would stand to reason that the race distance can therefore be increased in length to accomodate the new technology and still be challenging to both the rider and fans that crave the action .
The actual race distance does not have to be increased thru the roof and go from one extreem to the other . But rather a calculation based on the event type and gains made by new technology .
We will never see lengths of the pre 70's that the riders rode on equiptment that was , lets just say antique for the sake of arguement , because of media and other influences . However , we have computers to find a happy medium , which can be calculated to give the ideology of the race back to bike racing , and acceptable time slots to advertisers and the media .

I think between all the knowledge that is available today , the cycling associations can make this work to reflect the modern day racer , both pro and elite amateur .

 

[mulletCobra]

Let's just give them Mopeds. Cavendish will still win every race 'cause of more aero then the other aeros.

 

[mulletCobra]

And to everyone who wants a hard moped race, They'll have to push them up the mountains. Will be just as long as a normal stage race. UCI Mopeds top out at 50kph

 

[popolo]

..And the entire world loved it--and Zomegnan knows that a hard & challenging race increases its prestige--- Basso can be proud to say he's won probably the hardest Giro in the last 2 decades--can anybody else claim to have won "the hardest TDF", when the parcous barely calls for 4 MTF the most? the Giro has 8 this year alone & legs are going to hurt big time.

I also agree entirely with some serious revisions on "some" classics.

The '86 Tour was a killer.

 

[BroDeal]

Except it wasn't actually tt-friendly by any standards. An extended prologue, a fairly short TTT, and a moderate length but hilly ITT. And seven mountain stages, including 3 MTFs; that's more mountains than 2010, 2008, 2007... and then I got fed up of checking. Look up 1993 if you want to see a tt-friendly Tour de France. You can say the climbs were too far from the end on some stages in 09, but if the climbers had started those stages with a 2 or 3 minute deficit on a Wiggins or Martin maybe they would have had to actually get on with things.

Oh, come on. The 2009 course was a complete joke. Prudhomme tried to engineer a down to the wire finish where it would all come down to Ventoux. The Pyrenees were virtually chopped out of the course, leaving one moderate climb of significance that resulted in a whopping two kilometers of action. The Alps consisted of a similar moderate climb and the Grand Bornand stage, which ended with a descent. And the big showdown was a flattish stage with one huge climb at the end which was so windy that no one could attack. In addition the top two places had already been decided, and and the only question was who would come in third.

For an inexplicable reason, Prudhomme threw in a long TTT that eliminated everyone who was not on one of three teams. The eliminated contenders had your three minute deficit. They could not attack because the course did not offer any opportunities to gain enough time.

The 2009 route was a complete failure. The 2010 course was not much better. Comparing the mountains of the 2007 course to 2009 is risible. We have had a bunch of these soft course in all sorts of races in recent years. Recently we saw a limp edition of Paris-Nice and the Catalunya route has be refashioned for grannys.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

7 mountain stages?

Arcalis: not a very difficult stage, finished with a very gradual climb, one of the worst MTFs the Tour can possibly visit.
Stage 8: no HC climbs, a long flat stretch to the finish
Stage 9: two big climbs then 60-70km flat to the finish. If Óscar Freire is finishing 3rd in your mountain stage WITHOUT being in the breakaway you don't have a proper mountain stage.
Stage 13?: Not really a mountain stage, more a transitional stage with the Platzerwasel thrown in, but not close enough to the finish to make a difference
Stage 15: Not really an especially difficult stage, before an MTF on a pretty unchallenging climb
Stage 16: Descent finish from two very gradual climbs, hard to make true separation count
Stage 17: Descent finish from two decent climbs after several other climbs. Probably the only properly challenging stage of the race.
Stage 20: almost totally flat before Ventoux.

It was all engineered for a) a Ventoux showdown, hence not wanting to break time up too much before then, and b) Lance being in contention, hence the first time a TTT was included since his retirement, and no really tough MTFs until the final weekend - remember when the route was announced we had no idea what Lance's ability on returning would be.

In the 2008 Tour you got:
Super-Besse: not an especially tough stage but an MTF
Aspin: not a super-tough stage but easily as tough as the Pyrenean climbs of the 2009 Tour; plus Aspin close enough to the finish to make attacking worthwhile
Hautacam: Tourmalet + difficult MTF = better than almost any stage in 2009 (barring Le Grand Bornand) for mountain challenge
Prato Nervoso: Not a particularly tough stage, with a lot of flat before the final climb, but Agnel near the start easily makes it as tough as the Verbier stage.
Jausiers - similar to the Bourg-St-Maurice stage in 2009
L'Alpe d'Huez - far, far harder and better than the corresponding 2009 stage.

Right, so that's 6 stages. But if we're counting stages 8 and 13 in '09 as mountain stages, we really should consider the Aurillac stage one too.

So in '08 we got 7 mountain stages, but we got at least two that are tougher than in '09, and we got the same number of MTFs, but those MTFs were on much tougher, more selective mountains.

 

[Timmy-loves-Rabo]

Except it wasn't actually tt-friendly by any standards. An extended prologue, a fairly short TTT, and a moderate length but hilly ITT. And seven mountain stages, including 3 MTFs; that's more mountains than 2010, 2008, 2007... and then I got fed up of checking. Look up 1993 if you want to see a tt-friendly Tour de France. You can say the climbs were too far from the end on some stages in 09, but if the climbers had started those stages with a 2 or 3 minute deficit on a Wiggins or Martin maybe they would have had to actually get on with things.

.

except it was.

Quality > Quantity
The climbs at 09' were low gradients, thus we saw massive groups coming in together. Steep climbs, and longer stages would ensure this doesn't happen-irregardless of the tt situation. You miss the point, Martin and Wiggo would still be attempting to 'just hang on' in the mountains and then win by taking all the time back in a tt. Imagine how much time they could take in 100km. If you like see riders simply hang on-anti attack and win in that style good for you, but I prefer to see the riders going for it get rewarded.

 

[BroDeal]

I propose a new standard to rate stage race routes which shall be known as "The Wigans Rule." In short: If Wigans finishes within spitting distance of the podium in a stage race then the route was totally useless.

 

[Dedelou]

[/QUOTE]
Fignon's comments were directed at the classics, though, and his comments were misguided.

[/QUOTE]

I think that taking in considerations the transformations Laurent was mentionning his conclusions about the current courses have some merrit. That does not mean racing is easy. Racing bikes is always hard. But I think Laurent is right : Those races should be changed into something more in keeping with the capacities of the today's riders. They could be longers , the hills closely spaced, no radio , of course. .

 

[ultimobici]

Ahh, the good old days of F-W:

http://www.the-sports.org/cycling-f...lts-men-s2-c0-b0-g22-t1363-u34-m46644-v1.html

20 years ago, it looks like a field sprint up the Mur.

Only problem with your example is that it wasn't anything of the sort. Argentin attacked 80km out on the descent of the Mur. What the finishing order shows is the result of a desperate chase to claw him back that failed. He even had time in hand to remount after a crash and still win by enough time that there was "No one else in the picture". When you look down the finishers it's plain that it was no sprint finish.

 

[Boeing]

All the good old days when we rode bikes on our continent in our continent alone and rode with out Gatorade and Yohoo. We had to ride with more skill because we didnt have the helmet technology back then. we used horn rimmed sunglasses and wore head bands and ponytails to keep out mullets from our eyes. and men were men and women didnt ride......we had climb using friction shifters...then the Yanks came to town with Oakley and aero bars and Japan with this index shifting and ruined our culture

 

[usedtobefast]

All the good old days when we rode bikes on our continent in our continent alone and rode with out Gatorade and Yohoo. We had to ride with more skill because we didnt have the helmet technology back then. we used horn rimmed sunglasses and wore head bands and ponytails to keep out mullets from our eyes. and men were men and women didnt ride......we had climb using friction shifters...then the Yanks came to town with Oakley and aero bars and Japan with this index shifting and ruined our culture

LOL!!!
ok more characters ROTFLMAO...
is that enough?

 

[flicker]

All the good old days when we rode bikes on our continent in our continent alone and rode with out Gatorade and Yohoo. We had to ride with more skill because we didnt have the helmet technology back then. we used horn rimmed sunglasses and wore head bands and ponytails to keep out mullets from our eyes. and men were men and women didnt ride......we had climb using friction shifters...then the Yanks came to town with Oakley and aero bars and Japan with this index shifting and ruined our culture

Thats OK mate I will send you one of me old bikes and a hairnet helmet. You will have to clean up the old campi though.