Radio Revolt

Page 3 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Mar 10, 2009
1,318
0
0
luddites

The early days of the world wide web were much more exciting than today...

Remember dial-up? Remember when you had to know your facts, when you had to think on your **** when engaging in those rough and tumble proto-forums? Before the days of Wikipedia, Youtube, Flickr, and searchable databases such as cyclingnews?

For all you complainging about race radio, how about you go back to dail-up for all forum activities from now till the end of the TdF. If you post photos, or link or videos, you have to do so without any assistance from outside websites. When arguing points, you have to rely upon hardcopys of any previous race.

In other words, you have to think and do for yourself. And were I analogous to the ASO, I would force you to do so.

Sound like a good idea?

Any takers amongst those of you railing against team radio...
 
Jul 3, 2009
62
0
0
VeloFidelis said:
I think you're right though. We're the fans Damn it!! We should be able to tell them what to do. Especially with what it costs to go see a race... oh wait a minute... that's NASCAR.
Although this isn't an issue that will make or break the sport, there is a reality of yes, we are the fans. They are providing entertainment for the fans. No fans, no sponsors. No sponsors, no pros. Not enough fans care about (or even know about?) this issue, so from an economic standpoint it's a non-issue.

But at least those of us that do care can argue about it here! :cool:
 
Mar 10, 2009
286
0
0
I'll add another other sports analogy to this. In the 4 major sports in America, the players have a union. The MLBPA, NFLPA, NHLPA, and the NBAPA...some sports have stronger unions than others. Baseball and the NBA have strong unions, they basically run their sport. Football and hockey are the weaker unions and the owners have alot more power then the players. I don't believe the racers have a union to protect from things they do not agree with, so their only recourse is in-race protests.

For example in baseball when the league wanted to implement steroid testing, the players union made the leage "pre-test" to see how many players failed. There was a certain % of faliures that had to be met, before testing was allowed. Thankfully 103 players turned up positive and there is now testing in MLB. Racers have no such power as this, slowing down or not racing is about it.

...and yes in baseball during an inning a manager has alot of input on player positioning based on what batter it up, what the %'s of where the batter hits the ball, if they are a pull hitter, the infield shifts...alot of things go on during an innings with hand signals....take that feature away, such as taking the radios away, and the game is downgraded alot.
 
benpounder said:
The early days of the world wide web were much more exciting than today...

Remember dial-up? Remember when you had to know your facts, when you had to think on your **** when engaging in those rough and tumble proto-forums? Before the days of Wikipedia, Youtube, Flickr, and searchable databases such as cyclingnews?

For all you complainging about race radio, how about you go back to dail-up for all forum activities from now till the end of the TdF. If you post photos, or link or videos, you have to do so without any assistance from outside websites. When arguing points, you have to rely upon hardcopys of any previous race.

In other words, you have to think and do for yourself. And were I analogous to the ASO, I would force you to do so.

Sound like a good idea?

Any takers amongst those of you railing against team radio
...
If this were a contest of cycling knowledge, then of course it would be a good idea.... a great idea... the only sporting idea.
.
 
Mar 14, 2009
27
0
0
This entire discussion is so lame.

Just because some old fart racers were successful “back in the day” before radios doesn’t mean radios ruin racing. Based on that school of thought we should eliminate those pesky flat tires by going back to solid rubber tires on wood rims. That would make the racing much better too.

Come to think of it – 30 years ago we didn’t have PCs or Internet forums. Soooooo - all you anti technology types should just “Log Off” and mail a letter to someone who cares.
 
Apr 24, 2009
206
0
0
LugHugger said:
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?
And to keep his friends off the lawn.

And to stop playing that gosh-darn music so loud!
 
I'm a little surprised that the argument of excitement has been pushed aside other than cursory thoughts.

What I mean to say is the main reason for the idea of eliminating radio is because racing has become boring. No one on GC attacks anymore until the very end of mountain stages, and those that do before that, and on flat stages are usually caught within 1km of the finish.

Today's Stage was boring too, aside from the predictable sprint. But was it because of the lack of radio was irrelevant? Or because the riders didn't stage aggressive breaks or went too slow, or because this one test isn't enough, and we'd need several stages of it (or the entire Tour?). Or was it another factor?

Maybe to some racing that has outcomes like the aforementioned aren't boring, and somehow more exciting than in the past?

And if many of us still feel as though the race is dull, and eliminating radios is not a solution, then what is?

And for those that think technology shouldn't be stopped, would you mind if teams used technology to intercept other teams radio chatter? Or intercept other riders GPS, HRM or FTP transmissions as well? What about allowing fairings? Eliminating weight minimums? Or is that cheating? Why? Doping is technological advancement in the medical sciences, is it not? And it appears to be pretty much equally open to everyone. But we all agree that's cheating, don't we?
 
May 26, 2009
377
0
0
VeloFidelis said:
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!"
Yeah, they sure showed the ASO what's what yesterday... a fruitless meeting that didn't achieve a unanimous position, and the day played out as a non-event for GC & sprinters finish just as anybody would have predicted for that stage.

I'm sure the ASO is petrified ;-)

Or should I have read your post with the sarcasm detector on? Sorry, my mistake if so.
 
Mar 10, 2009
1,318
0
0
Alpe d'Huez said:
And for those that think technology shouldn't be stopped, would you mind if teams used technology to intercept other teams radio chatter? Or intercept other riders GPS, HRM or FTP transmissions as well? What about allowing fairings? Eliminating weight minimums? Or is that cheating? Why? Doping is technological advancement in the medical sciences, is it not? And it appears to be pretty much equally open to everyone. But we all agree that's cheating, don't we?
The acronym PED, is inaccurate. I prefer Performance Enhancing Methods and Technology (PEMT). After all, the Pro Pelaton has benefited from many advances outside of drugs. Team radio is just a minor part. And I think it is naive to think that eliminating team radio alone will return us to nostalgic memories of our youthful days.
 
Mar 11, 2009
1,927
2
0
I think we would all agree that today's attempt at a no radio race was a failure. Not because the race was or wasn't exciting or because the same thing happened that would have happened anyway but because the majority of teams didn't want it to succeed.

Why? Because many of the riders want the security of team radios and most of the team directors want to keep a sense (an illusion) of control over how events unfold.

My own view takes account of the following:

1. I don't find GT racing boring. It's a three week cycle fest - I like the way it unfolds and for me it doesn't have to be exciting every day.

2. The parcours is the biggest factor in whether a stage has the potential to be decisive or not (at least in GC terms) - so putting the Tourmalet 70km from the finish equates to a certain type of race - the one we saw.

3. I don't think it's radios that prevent riders from thinking on their own or attacking (Contador and Armstrong have both ignored team orders now and in the past) - it's got more to do with Team's being more calculating and efforts being more focussed on specific objectives

4. The riders want radios - to be honest that's the real clincher for me

5. I am always suspicious of any decisons made in reference to 'the good old days' generally people have slightly warped memories of the halcien days of yore. "We were all mates in the blitz!" Yeah right! IMHO the are no good old days just old days! Turning back the clock doesn't work.

Not sure if I am making total sense here but my point is I don't think messing with radios is the answer.

To make it more exciting...

How about handicapping riders with lead weights - the faster you go the more weight you have to carry in the Alps? Thats a joke by the way - please do not dignify it with a response! ;)
 
May 5, 2009
125
0
0
Alpe d'Huez said:
And for those that think technology shouldn't be stopped, would you mind if teams used technology to intercept other teams radio chatter? Or intercept other riders GPS, HRM or FTP transmissions as well? What about allowing fairings? Eliminating weight minimums? Or is that cheating? Why? Doping is technological advancement in the medical sciences, is it not? And it appears to be pretty much equally open to everyone. But we all agree that's cheating, don't we?
Cheating is cheating. We're talking about being able to coach your team, simple as that. Of course intercepting signals is cheating. Look, you can't do it in baseball, you can't intercept chatter in football, but coaches in all major team sports can talk to their players at any time to discuss strategy. Soccer was brought up as a counter argument. Any time a player wants, they can go over to the coach to discuss tactics.
 
May 11, 2009
248
0
0
I was really disappointed in the riders today, particularly if the story told by the "source at Liquigas" was true and the riders had decided beforehand to never commence full on racing. The riders at the very least should have given the experiment a chance and actually raced the stage, deliberately neutralizing like they apparently did today was downright unprofessional.

I hope they leave the planned radio ban in place for Friday's stage. The course for Friday is much more interesting and will be a better test of the radio ban experiment if the riders have the professionalism to actually race the course this time.
 
The next step will be for the DSs to simply use joysticks in the team cars to manuever their riders at will, like a video game. While the safety issue is just a pathetic alibi.

It's sheer corporate megalomania on the part of the DSs and some riders, especially those who love the corporate structure. Tecnology and progress are good only when they produce real benifits, otherwise they are tools of the corporate world which have just denaturized us.

The corporate world is killing all forms of culture and human free will and has taken all the romance out of things like pro cycling, where a degree of rider independence used to exist to interpret and critically assess all the varied race situations before the radios. This made for "styllish" and "soave" racing with some bold and even reckless moves, which the constant real time data provided by the radios has just killed.

Riders have become like corporate automatons controlled form the team cars, which is disspirited and often just boring to watch.

And yesterday's protest by the riders and DSs to demonstrate how radios do not make racing more interesting by simply not, as they did, racing without them was pathetic. For once the UCI was up to some good. But the corporate teams just shot it down by not playing the experiment game. Another opportunity to make the sport better, by simply returning to a time when riders actually had to think for themselves has been branded as "old school" nostalgia, by the very folks who haven't a clue as to what really made the sport epic and aesthetically pleasing to watch. This is in direct contrast to the sterile and insipid corporate show we have been presented with over the last ten years or so.
 
No counter comments or solutions yet to my question as to whether racing is more predicatble and boring than in the past, and if it is, what is the solution if eliminating race radios is off the table?

As to the riders and their "strike" I think one thing is being sorely lost by them. It's the Tour that makes the riders, not the other way around.
 
Jun 16, 2009
19,657
1
0
Not having the radios is like saying that a soccer team can't talk to their coach at half time. Why stop the evolving of technology like other sports are. Riders still have to do the riding. I don't even notice if the riders are using ear pieces when they attack or they start riding on the front. As a viewer it doesn't bother me at all.
 
auscyclefan94 said:
Not having the radios is like saying that a soccer team can't talk to their coach at half time. Why stop the evolving of technology like other sports are. Riders still have to do the riding. I don't even notice if the riders are using ear pieces when they attack or they start riding on the front. As a viewer it doesn't bother me at all.
So we just cave into the corporate world because it exists.

Look technology isn't simply better, and the radios have made for less spontaneous racing. That's the truth. Whereas the sporting case you mentioned between cycling and soccer is irrelevant because it's like comparing apples to oranges. If soccer players were radio wired then it would be the same. A rider going physically back to the team care or talking to a rider who had, as they used to do, is much more like the soccer team talking to the coach at half time.
 
Alpe d'Huez said:
No counter comments or solutions yet to my question as to whether racing is more predicatble and boring than in the past, and if it is, what is the solution if eliminating race radios is off the table?
Well I think my post above let's you know that I think the racing of today with the radios is less romantic and therefore more sterile than what we used to get. Consequently I'd like to see the teams do away with them.
 
Jun 16, 2009
19,657
1
0
rhubroma said:
So we just cave into the corporate world because it exists.

Look technology isn't simply better, and the radios have made for less spontaneous racing. That's the truth. Whereas the sporting case you mentioned between cycling and soccer is irrelevant because it's like comparing apples to oranges. If soccer players were radio wired then it would be the same. A rider going physically back to the team care or talking to a rider who had, is much more like the soccer team talking ot the coach at half time.
I still don't see wat is so bad about the radios. Not trying to have a go at you but that is a very old fashioned point of view. You could say that coaches give their players their tatics and they are out their to complete them. If a cyclist(s) completes the tatics the ds tells then they have completed the instructions. Soccer players and cyclists are controlled mostly by their ds but the leaders of the team also need to show leadership to postion their team etc.. The riders or players still have to use their heads but the instruxtions of tatics are given out b coaches. Cycling is the same as any sport except they get their messages through a radio. Other sports get their instruction from a runner (man who runs out, giving instructions on the field. NO big deal if they have them...
 
Mar 18, 2009
14,634
3
0
auscyclefan94 said:
Not having the radios is like saying that a soccer team can't talk to their coach at half time. Why stop the evolving of technology like other sports are. Riders still have to do the riding. I don't even notice if the riders are using ear pieces when they attack or they start riding on the front. As a viewer it doesn't bother me at all.
I agree. We should not hold back technology, especially in soccer. Every player should an earpiece with an individual radio channel. There should also be one member of the coaching staff for each player watching from the stands and giving instructions to the player he is assigned to watch.
 
Mar 19, 2009
941
0
0
Well, I made it to work without my earpiece today. I didn't die! I decided when to go and when to stop. Wow, that was difficult.

Tosseurs!
 
Jun 16, 2009
19,657
1
0
Animal said:
Well, I made it to work without my earpiece today. I didn't die! I decided when to go and when to stop. Wow, that was difficult.

Tosseurs!
Your probably over 50... joke
 
Jun 16, 2009
759
0
0
Opening up whole new forms of cheating

My big problem with this debate is the huge data heads on Garmin units and some of the cycle computers with power metres. How are the organisers going to enforce a radio ban when riders have 3G enabled devices strapped to their headstems? Earpiece no, instructions via text mesage yes?

I'd love to see racing without support cars and DS's all together (oh that's right, it's called cross country, and I get to see that for free)
 
benpounder said:
The acronym PED, is inaccurate. I prefer Performance Enhancing Methods and Technology (PEMT). After all, the Pro Pelaton has benefited from many advances outside of drugs. Team radio is just a minor part. And I think it is naive to think that eliminating team radio alone will return us to nostalgic memories of our youthful days.
As is the word "pelaton".;)
Performance Enhancing Methods and Technology (PEMT). Why not just drop the "enchancing"?:eek:
You call the acronym PED inaccurate, but, then ommit or disguise drugs from yours.
Sounds like a case of the denials to me.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY