Radios are gone?

Page 5 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Aug 13, 2009
12,855
0
0
Stradaracer said:
Could someone help explain the role of AIGCP and who exactly they represent. See: http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/aigcp-opposed-to-ucis-two-way-radio-ban. The article leads me to believe that AIGCP represents ALL members of the professional teams. By all members, am I to assume that AIGCP represents the professional cyclists view of retaining race radios? I thought that the CPA represented the cyclists. No?
The AIGCP represents the teams, not the riders. It is a very fractious group, routinely tossing members out and members leaving in a huff.

JV has been president for a few months now and it appears they are looking for a compromise.
 
Aug 13, 2009
12,855
0
0
VeloFidelis said:
I don't have to read my own posts to know that I rarely, if ever rant. I leave that for those deluded enough to think they are among the the more informed.

Outside of seat fairings and Spinacci bars, ground breaking technology in their own right, real technology does not step backwards. For every silly example like the Superman position that you can name, there are a dozen real advancements in technology that will never go away. I believe that 2 way communication with riders is one. In my opinion, it is here to stay. Whether it is good for racing or not is an opinion too, and by definition neither right or wrong.

I would be wary of using examples to support your argument that don't necessarily apply. U23 is not the Pro Tour. The money, the riders, the sponsors, the races, the egos, the scope, and the motivations are different. I have no idea how removing radios might affect the racing in the Pro Tour. I know what the rampant speculation is among the self considered more informed. But I wouldn't listen to anybody pompous enough to say that they know. I'm a big subscriber to the "Law of Unintended Consequences". If radios are banned we will all see together what changes come with it.

My opinion is again that they will not be, and I will try to touch on every previous post to support my opinion, and end your confusion. It's improving technology, like high speed internet. There's no going back. The sponsors want it, because the cost of a catastrophe that could have been avoided with communication is too high for them. The riders want it for the same reasons (individual testimonies aside) because that avoidable catastrophe could seriously derail a contract or a career. The team management wants it for all those same reasons.

It's about money and control. These things are quantifiable. Unfortunately opinions on whether the racing will be better are not. I just don't see the power and money at the top end of the sport, acquiescing to the conjecture of that well informed minority of fans, who absolutely know what's best.
Watching the French Cup races, and the U23 worlds, and every other race prior to 1991, and coming to the conclusion that the racing will be more entertaining is not "Rampant speculation" it is an educated observation. Speculation would be assuming that radios make racing more safe, when Pro's like Micheal Berry say it makes it more dangerous.

I am optimistic that over the next 3 years there will be a gradual reduction in their use. My guess is they will not be around 5 years from now.....who knows if the UCI will be around 5 years from now.
 
Apr 20, 2009
667
0
0
Race Radio said:
Watching the French Cup races, and the U23 worlds, and every other race prior to 1991, and coming to the conclusion that the racing will be more entertaining is not "Rampant speculation" it is an educated observation. Speculation would be assuming that radios make racing more safe, when Pro's like Micheal Berry say it makes it more dangerous.

I am optimistic that over the next 3 years there will be a gradual reduction in their use. My guess is they will not be around 5 years from now.....who knows if the UCI will be around 5 years from now.
Unfortunately... and grammatically speaking, you can't come to a conclusion about the affects of removing radios from the Pro Tour until it actually happens. Prior to that you can have all the well educated opinions you want to. But speculation is exactly what they are, as you have no facts in evidence... just that you think it would be better.

Michael Barry says they make racing more dangerous. Jens Voigt's says they make it safer... more well educated opinions and rampant speculation.

My points are these; We'll all find out together when radios are eliminated weather the racing is better, and not before. Until then we're all welcome to an opinion. And that; The money, meaning the people who write the checks that underwrite professional cycling are going to have the final say on whether radios stay or go, not the fans or the riders, or the UCI.

My bet is they will feel that their investments are better off with communication than without.
 
Jul 22, 2009
303
0
0
the UCI really goes too far in limiting technological development and advancement. too often it seems they want to lock cycling to the mid 70s- but why mid 70s ? why don't they just go ahead and lock it to the 1900s ? do away with the lycra and coolmax, everyone goes back to wool. oh and they didn't have television in the 1900s, so they really should ban that and the video cameras from the tour as well. we'll follow the tour on ticker tape.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
blaxland said:
interesting article race radio seems to me the riders dont care either way.........
well it seems those FOUR riders don't care... DZ's story is a ****er!

Good to revive this thread I think, ain't much racing to talk about, and Contador's contract woes are boring now.

In regard to radios, the only problem I have with the ban, and this is the only problem is....

During a frantic stage of the TDF (can't remember the stage), Andy Schleck flatted with about 5km to go (so 2km outside the 3km safe zone). Within ten seconds of the TV camera picking this up, Andy had big Jens Voight, plus a couple other Saxo riders Team-Time-Trialling him back up to the bunch, and therefore, he didn't lose any unneccessary time in the GC placings.

I would hate to see someone lose a GC for an ill-timed puncture (oh wait, we just saw that at the Vuelta). Getting a puncture that close to the finish, is not dangerous, but could be devasting to the overall classification. Obviously, without radios, the team riders would probably stick together in the final 5km, but even so it would be a terrible way to lose the tour if a rider can't jump on the radio in 2 seconds and say "I have a flat" and 2 seconds later the DS says "Everyone drop back, our leader flatted". That's a 4 second response to a flat tire in the final 5km, which could be crucial. The alternative is the leader yells to his teammates "I have a flat", the riders who heard him drop back, they wait for the team car, and then the DS finds out.. a lot slower, and a potential waste of precious GC seconds

I think a reasonable middle-ground suggestion (and I think it's been suggested already) is that ONE designated team captain gets a radio. This encourages teammates to ride together in the peleton but also allows the DS to provide suggestions and the captain to relay these to his team. Personally, I'd hate to have a DS yelling in my ear all day, so I wouldn't be putting my hand up for the captain role...
 
Aug 13, 2009
12,855
0
0
Mountain Goat said:
well it seems those FOUR riders don't care... DZ's story is a ****er!

Good to revive this thread I think, ain't much racing to talk about, and Contador's contract woes are boring now.

In regard to radios, the only problem I have with the ban, and this is the only problem is....

During a frantic stage of the TDF (can't remember the stage), Andy Schleck flatted with about 5km to go (so 2km outside the 3km safe zone). Within ten seconds of the TV camera picking this up, Andy had big Jens Voight, plus a couple other Saxo riders Team-Time-Trialling him back up to the bunch, and therefore, he didn't lose any unneccessary time in the GC placings.

I would hate to see someone lose a GC for an ill-timed puncture (oh wait, we just saw that at the Vuelta). Getting a puncture that close to the finish, is not dangerous, but could be devasting to the overall classification. Obviously, without radios, the team riders would probably stick together in the final 5km, but even so it would be a terrible way to lose the tour if a rider can't jump on the radio in 2 seconds and say "I have a flat" and 2 seconds later the DS says "Everyone drop back, our leader flatted". That's a 4 second response to a flat tire in the final 5km, which could be crucial. The alternative is the leader yells to his teammates "I have a flat", the riders who heard him drop back, they wait for the team car, and then the DS finds out.. a lot slower, and a potential waste of precious GC seconds

I think a reasonable middle-ground suggestion (and I think it's been suggested already) is that ONE designated team captain gets a radio. This encourages teammates to ride together in the peleton but also allows the DS to provide suggestions and the captain to relay these to his team. Personally, I'd hate to have a DS yelling in my ear all day, so I wouldn't be putting my hand up for the captain role...
Actually this would still be covered by Race Radio's.

There are a couple of race commissar's that are usually on a moto and in the first car behind the peloton. Each team car has a race radio in it and these commissar's broadcast race information to the teams. The race radios are different from the Team radios the riders use.

When a break forms they tell the teams (In English and French) Which numbers are in the break and give time updates. When the break is caught they tell the DS' that the break has been caught. When there is a crash, puncture, or a rider raises his had for service this info, with race numbers is relayed. It has been this way for decades.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Race Radio said:
Actually this would still be covered by Race Radio's.

There are a couple of race commissar's that are usually on a moto and in the first car behind the peloton. Each team car has a race radio in it and these commissar's broadcast race information to the teams. The race radios are different from the Team radios the riders use.

When a break forms they tell the teams (In English and French) Which numbers are in the break and give time updates. When the break is caught they tell the DS' that the break has been caught. When there is a crash, puncture, or a rider raises his had for service this info, with race numbers is relayed. It has been this way for decades.
Well as long as this doesn't create the unneccessay time loss I spoke of, then that's perfect.

I think the point I tried to make was more to do with the timing of the response. I think with radios, the response would be quicker.

Also, when you say the underline part, are you saying they tell the team manager, or the riders? If it is the DS, then my issue of a rider dropping back without teammates still holds. If it is the riders, how do they know to drop back if they don't have radios?

In all honesty, I actually think having no radios would be better for the riders, but this is not based on any kind of evidence. I think the teams would be encouraged to ride close together and it brings a bit more of a team element back into the racing. Interesting to see what the UCI does, but I have a feeling radios are here to stay, regardless of the fan's perspective on the issue
 
Apr 20, 2009
667
0
0
Mountain Goat said:
In all honesty, I actually think having no radios would be better for the riders, but this is not based on any kind of evidence. I think the teams would be encouraged to ride close together and it brings a bit more of a team element back into the racing. Interesting to see what the UCI does, but I have a feeling radios are here to stay, regardless of the fan's perspective on the issue


Kudos for your well considered comments and understanding that the emotional side of this issue will most likely not win out over the political. 16 0f 20 teams at the TDF officially protested the radio ban. Whether, and how accurately that represents the sentiment of all riders on those teams is unfortunately immaterial. Where sponsors interests are concerned, communication is an advantage they will not willingly give up. I agree with you that radios are here to stay.
 
Gee333 said:
From a Cyclingnews article from 2002(?) about pros and cons of race radios:
(http://autobus.cyclingnews.com/features/?id=toradioornottoradio)

Interesting read on LA and his radio in 2001, I believe in the Alpes...
Speaking of Lance, one particular instance of a dodgy race radio never stopped LA from using his grey matter, as demonstrated by his game of poker during stage 10 of last year's TDF that finished at L'Alpe d'Huez:

LA's radio never worked the whole day, and so "the plan [to bluff] was born on the road, since we know that they [the other teams] are all watching on TV anyway - so we decided to bluff" said Armstrong after his coup de poker.

Now hands up how many LA fans thought their man was in trouble before the Alpe - higher please. And FYI - Team Telekom's radios were working just fine, which goes to show that at the end of the day, the war is still fought out on the road, not in the confines of the team car.


When Miguel Indurain's critics labelled his success in the Tour de France as boring, it wasn't due to the race radio. It was his ability as a freak cyclist. The variation in natural ability, preparation, weather conditions, ability to recover, luck and human nature will continue to produce exciting, unpredictable and sometimes spontaneous bike racing. Just don't let the young-uns get hold of these walkie-talkies too early in their cycling career."
Yup, ban the radios for the TdeF I say. Let the riders with intelligence as well as strength prevail. I suspect that LA has much better grey matter than one particular Spanish rider. Whether he'll have the legs to do the job after such a long and successful career, is another matter: but I guarantee he won't be left behind after a pile up (or if the team bus leaves early). Bring it on!
 
Offtheback said:
Yup, ban the radios for the TdeF I say. Let the riders with intelligence as well as strength prevail. I suspect that LA has much better grey matter than one particular Spanish rider. Whether he'll have the legs to do the job after such a long and successful career, is another matter: but I guarantee he won't be left behind after a pile up (or if the team bus leaves early). Bring it on!
It's already been brought. You're a few months too late.
 
May 6, 2009
8,524
1
0
Race Radio said:
As I expected the UCI is going for the gradual enforcement much like they did with Helmets. I expect this will take a few years before it they are 100% gone.

2010 season: ban for Men Elite and Women Elite Class 2 events of the UCI international calendar,
events of the national calendar as well as the UCI World Championships
Best way to do it IMO. I remember Bouygues Telecom last year raced a French Cup race, and they had 4 riders in the top 10, including winning the race.
 
Apr 20, 2009
667
0
0
craig1985 said:
Best way to do it IMO. I remember Bouygues Telecom last year raced a French Cup race, and they had 4 riders in the top 10, including winning the race.


And you don't think that had anything to do with being the most talented, and best prepared riders in the field?
 
Sep 27, 2009
117
0
0
VeloFidelis said:
Unfortunately... and grammatically speaking, you can't come to a conclusion about the affects of removing radios from the Pro Tour until it actually happens. Prior to that you can have all the well educated opinions you want to. But speculation is exactly what they are, as you have no facts in evidence... just that you think it would be better.

Michael Barry says they make racing more dangerous. Jens Voigt's says they make it safer... more well educated opinions and rampant speculation.

My points are these; We'll all find out together when radios are eliminated weather the racing is better, and not before. Until then we're all welcome to an opinion. And that; The money, meaning the people who write the checks that underwrite professional cycling are going to have the final say on whether radios stay or go, not the fans or the riders, or the UCI.

My bet is they will feel that their investments are better off with communication than without.
I agree that we won't know the effect until it happens.

Question is how obstinate are we going to be in ignoring the problem caused by the absence of radios when it becomes clear? We have the ban-radio people claiming that riders will need to use their intelligence yet so far the arguments have been somewhat nostalgic, sentimental, and backward thinking. There hasn't been a solid argument to ban them.

Ironic that 2009 was one of the best years in terms of international race participation. Let's knock the legs out from under that by banning radios and give the clear advantage to home teams.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY