Radio Revolt

[VeloFidelis]

Congratulations to the to the Teams and Riders of the 2009 Tour de France, for standing up like men and using their collective power and solidarity in refusing to have the conditions of their work environment unduly compromised by the arbitrary and nostalgic rational of the UCI. I particularly appreciate that they have made their point in a unified action that is unmistakable in it's message: "Don't F@ck with Us!"

They are the ones who make the competition what it will be... they are the competitors. They are the ones working theirs asses off and risking life and limb to provide a spectacle for us fans to enjoy. It was good of them to remind us of that. If they perceive this technology to be an asset to them in their workplace then they should have the benefit of using it.

No one is asking any of us to give up internet access and cell phones in favor of type writers and rotary dial phones because of some idiotic idea that it will magically return the work place back to some unrealistic and preconceived notion of a better time. It is not our place to apply subjective interpretation as to what will make racing more entertaining.

Thank you gentlemen of the Peloton for reminding us all that the rule of unintended consequences works both ways. And congratulation for finding the balls to deliver the message in unison.

 

[Bala Verde]

I was wondering about the acclaimed strike.

But do you or anyone else believe the stage would have looked differently with radios? It's the day after the rest day, some riders say the legs need to refind their rythm; 5 men who feel lucky and happen to end up in the 'lucky'/'permitted' break away; Teams with sprinters smelled victory from a mile away, when they checked the final kms.

What would have been different from them controlling the pace of the peloton, in order to launch their sprinters in the final K?

 

[Animal]

Bunch of wan-kers

 

[caddisfly]

...perhaps we have discovered the real reason for pace of the modern day peloton....it is not steroids, it is not blood doping, it is not EPO...it is the danged radios and a DS yelling in your ear! ;-)

GLeM will have to rethink his "wattage" theory and team FDQ will now be accusing LA of being positive for radio waves. ;-)

 

[Coach Hawk]

If they perceive this technology to be an asset to them in their workplace then they should have the benefit of using it.

Amen! That's why they'll soon be racing motorcycles, because that's a technology that can help them go faster.

For more thoughts, see the other thread on radios: http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=2063

 

[VeloFidelis]

What would have been different from them controlling the pace of the peloton, in order to launch their sprinters in the final K?

Exactly the point! So why remove radios? From the Pro's perspective; They want to limit my communication, and compromise my safety in an effort to make the racing something different? We're not going to give it to them. Bravo!

 

[Animal]

Tossers!

Thousands of people race bikes around the world with no radios.

Do they all die?

The pros raced without radios for decades, and now they got so used to it in about 10 years that they can't do without?

wan'k.

 

[LugHugger]

Congratulations to the to the Teams and Riders of the 2009 Tour de France, for standing up like men and using their collective power and solidarity in refusing to have the conditions of their work environment unduly compromised by the arbitrary and nostalgic rational of the UCI. I particularly appreciate that they have made their point in a unified action that is unmistakable in it's message: "Don't F@ck with Us!"

They are the ones who make the competition what it will be... they are the competitors. They are the ones working theirs asses off and risking life and limb to provide a spectacle for us fans to enjoy. It was good of them to remind us of that. If they perceive this technology to be an asset to them in their workplace then they should have the benefit of using it.

No one is asking any of us to give up internet access and cell phones in favor of type writers and rotary dial phones because of some idiotic idea that it will magically return the work place back to some unrealistic and preconceived notion of a better time. It is not our place to apply subjective interpretation as to what will make racing more entertaining.

Thank you gentlemen of the Peloton for reminding us all that the rule of unintended consequences works both ways. And congratulation for finding the balls to deliver the message in unison.

Interesting perspective. Completely off, but interesting. Another take might be that without the DS' sending them off on wild goose chases the riders rode tempo since it was obvious that nothing was going to stay away and the sprint was inevitable. Another perspective might be that since the riders needed to use their eyes, they rode at a safe pace to negotiate the street furniture. Another long term perspective might be that lower speeds results in lower wattage requirements and perhaps a little less use of PEDs. How's that for arbitrary and nostalgic?

 

[Anonymous]

Bunch of wan-kers

The vast majority of riders have ridden pro with radios since day one.

To ask them to do what the previous generation did, in one day, is to ask the ridiculous.

Radios, helmets, carbon wheels, etc. They're all here to stay.

If you want a bit of yesteryear, try curling. They never change anything.

 

[Animal]

Curling's boring. I love riding my bike to much to be so bored.

How do I manage without an earpiece. Day after day, week after week. For the past 15 years?

Oh my god! I can't ride tomorrow!

 

[Mellow Velo]

In the past, we have defined riders in catagories, such as grimpeur, rouler and puncheur.
Today, a new catagory was formed. That of the tosseur.

 

[VeloFidelis]

Interesting perspective. Completely off, but interesting. Another take might be that without the DS' sending them off on wild goose chases the riders rode tempo since it was obvious that nothing was going to stay away and the sprint was inevitable. Another perspective might be that since the riders needed to use their eyes, they rode at a safe pace to negotiate the street furniture. Another long term perspective might be that lower speeds results in lower wattage requirements and perhaps a little less use of PEDs. How's that for arbitrary and nostalgic?

I'd say more arbitrary than nostalgic, but your point is interesting as well. So again, using of your theory; if this is the natural consequence when you remove radio contact, why do it?

 

[Amsterhammer]

Sorry, but I really think the 'safety' argument is pure bull.

There are two kinds of communication - the Tour or jury 'radio', and the direct communication between DS's and their assistant leaders with the riders directly. Safety could be assured by expanding the official network and giving all riders access to all "official" information with regard to road, weather, cows, trains, whatever.....just not to the constant instructions from their teams, which many riders have sadly become so used to that they are apparently unable to think for themselves.

Now, I don't know this for a fact and I haven't done any checking.....but this afternoon on Dutch tv I learned that the entire under 23 circuit (at least in Europe?) does not use ear-pieces. Can anyone confirm that there are an unusual number of safety-related incidents among young riders because they have no radio input? According to what I heard, this is not the case. This entire issue is a power struggle between the ASO and the DS's. Neither side has a monopoly on what's 'right' and both sides have made mistakes. The next radio-free day will probably be canceled as a result of today's 'demonstration'.

 

[VeloFidelis]

Curling's boring. I love riding my bike to much to be so bored.

How do I manage without an earpiece. Day after day, week after week. For the past 15 years?

Oh my god! I can't ride tomorrow!

Dude! What's the difference? If you did wear an ear piece there wouldn't be anyone on the other end talking to you anyway. You're not that good.

 

[VeloFidelis]

Sorry, but I really think the 'safety' argument is pure bull.

It doesn't matter what argument you want to use. The riders want radios! Their opinion is more important on this issue than yours, mine, or the UCI's

 

[Anonymous]

Sorry, but I really think the 'safety' argument is pure bull.

There are two kinds of communication - the Tour or jury 'radio', and the direct communication between DS's and their assistant leaders with the riders directly. Safety could be assured by expanding the official network and giving all riders access to all "official" information with regard to road, weather, cows, trains, whatever.....just not to the constant instructions from their teams, which many riders have sadly become so used to that they are apparently unable to think for themselves.

Now, I don't know this for a fact and I haven't done any checking.....but this afternoon on Dutch tv I learned that the entire under 23 circuit (at least in Europe?) does not use ear-pieces. Can anyone confirm that there are an unusual number of safety-related incidents among young riders because they have no radio input? According to what I heard, this is not the case. This entire issue is a power struggle between the ASO and the DS's. Neither side has a monopoly on what's 'right' and both sides have made mistakes. The next radio-free day will probably be canceled as a result of today's 'demonstration'.

On what basis do you state the bolded?

Can an F-16 pilot think for themselves? How about a fireman? They both have constant contact via radio.

 

[Coach Hawk]

I don't get why a fundamental change to the nature of the sport (riders have to understand the race and act vs. DS understands the race and tells them what to do) has to be about nostalgia. It has to do with the what makes bike racing bike racing.

It seems like everyone like using other sports for analogy, so let's go to baseball. Put radios in the athletes ears for SAFETY--no more outfield collisions because the coach can call from the dugout who gets the ball. In fact, with todays computers (ref. tennis's Shot Spot) you could set it up such that the instance the ball leaves the bat the coach says "left field, 3 feet inside the baseline at the edge of the warning track". The athlete doesn't have to hardly see the ball at all--run to where the coach tells you and stick your glove out. If the ball is in play he doesn't have to look at the runners or evaluate the situation--coach says throw to 3rd, so he comes up throwing to 3rd. Sounds like fun, huh?

Like I said before, in a nutshell it comes down to who does the thinking in a race--the riders or the DS. Personally, I prefer to see the riders have to think for themselves.

 

[Anonymous]

I don't get why a fundamental change to the nature of the sport (riders have to understand the race and act vs. DS understands the race and tells them what to do) has to be about nostalgia. It has to do with the what makes bike racing bike racing.

It seems like everyone like using other sports for analogy, so let's go to baseball. Put radios in the athletes ears for SAFETY--no more outfield collisions because the coach can call from the dugout who gets the ball. In fact, with todays computers (ref. tennis's Shot Spot) you could set it up such that the instance the ball leaves the bat the coach says "left field, 3 feet inside the baseline at the edge of the warning track". The athlete doesn't have to hardly see the ball at all--run to where the coach tells you and stick your glove out. If the ball is in play he doesn't have to look at the runners or evaluate the situation--coach says throw to 3rd, so he comes up throwing to 3rd. Sounds like fun, huh?

Like I said before, in a nutshell it comes down to who does the thinking in a race--the riders or the DS. Personally, I prefer to see the riders have to think for themselves.

If your baseball analogy is apt, then I assume you haven't watched pro cycling in the last decade, correct?

If you have, why?

 

[LugHugger]

I'd say more arbitrary than nostalgic, but your point is interesting as well. So again, using of your theory; if this is the natural consequence when you remove radio contact, why do it?

If, by removing two way radio but not race radio, the result is lower speeds with no impact on rider safety and, long term, less inclination to indulge in PED's then I would take this as a positive change. Those are the reasons why.

Now, I'm not so naive to believe that removing two way radio will get rid of PED's but the lower outputs might reduce their use.

Thanks for listening

 

[LugHugger]

On what basis do you state the bolded?

Can an F-16 pilot think for themselves? How about a fireman? They both have constant contact via radio.

On the basis that Stephen Roche confirmed that he scolded his son, Nicholas, this morning for being a 'sheep' for complaining that radios had been removed. Stephen told Nicholas to get near the front and watch the race unfold.

Good enough?

 

[lostintime]

ASO and UCI had to know this was a possible outcome. . . but they went ahead with it anyways.

I've said all along, the TDF is no lace for experiments like this, you do it in other Pro Tour stages races earlier in the year.

Now that's it's over and done for today . . . . I'll just say it made for leisurely viewing. Not a bad thing . . not really good either . . . it was what it was. If viewers are so offended by what happened . . . . go ahead and cry, Try to get over it by tomorrow though . . . the race goes on.

 

[Anonymous]

On the basis that Stephen Roche confirmed that he scolded his son, Nicholas, this morning for being a 'sheep' for complaining that radios had been removed. Stephen told Nicholas to get near the front and watch the race unfold.

Good enough?

No.

You claimed that riders can't think for themselves.

An ex-pro scolding his son is not proof of that.

Want to try again?

 

[Coach Hawk]

If your baseball analogy is apt, then I assume you haven't watched pro cycling in the last decade, correct?

If you have, why?

In the analogy, the player would still have to stick out their glove and catch it, as well as make the throw. Certainly not all of the sporting elements would be lost, but in my mind some of the "soul" would be.

And that's my take on the radios--they steal some of the soul of racing.

 

[Anonymous]

In the analogy, the player would still have to stick out their glove and catch it, as well as make the throw. Certainly not all of the sporting elements would be lost, but in my mind some of the "soul" would be.

And that's my take on the radios--they steal some of the soul of racing.

What percentage of this "soul" do you feel that radios steal from cycling?

If there were no radios, would cycling have as much soul as Parliament ?

 

[Coach Hawk]

What percentage of this "soul" do you feel that radios steal from cycling?

If there were no radios, would cycling have as much soul as Parliament ?

23%.

Don't quite understand the question--if it takes away any, then shouldn't it be open for discussion? Otherwise, let's just dump all of the rider's power numbers into an algorithm and hand out the jersey's and forget about the actual racing.