Radios - Safety or Control of your riders?

[cyclingPRpro]

boy... I tell ya. that opening stage of Paris-Nice sure was boring with radios right? oh. wait. what? Jens Voigt attacked with 40k to go? and the HTC couldn't put their typical little plan into effect and control the front of the race? Like usual? High Road tactics have made pro racing far more boring than any DS speaking into a radio.

 

[Francois the Postman]

boy... I tell ya. that opening stage of Paris-Nice sure was boring with radios right? oh. wait. what? Jens Voigt attacked with 40k to go? and the HTC couldn't put their typical little plan into effect and control the front of the race? Like usual? High Road tactics have made pro racing far more boring than any DS speaking into a radio.

There are better arguments than pointing out one windy instance where the mass-sprint was missed by 2.5 yards, by riders who aren't all at their peak yet, or by teams who didn't arrive with their a-game, as the sealing case to prove a point.

You can then equally argue that we finally have teams like Vacansoleil included, who seem to have a DS who couldn't care less about the usual controlling play-safe strategies by the big boys, and just expects his team to go for it, even when it doesn't make total sense.

Which would again be an argument to reduce the impact of all things that enhance "controlling strategies" by any means possible. On the basis of one ride and result.

"Normally" the margin at 20k to go, even at 10k, would be small enough to get them back with ease. It was a cracking ride by the trio to stave of the field, with much head-shaking as a result. Sure, it happened "with radios". But it was also an utterly atypical ride.

Chalking that up to a "radio day" is something you do when you try to make points, even when they are "s.t." flimsy.

It is far more likely that today would be seen as a confirmation of "the merits of the new approach" (from the sprinter teams' pov). A confirmation that you really really don't want to catch a long escape back with 30k to go, as reeling in tired legs with 140km in their bones is much easier, by the look of things, than chasing much fresher legs with only 30k left.

There will be great radio days, and boring no-radio days. What the impact is we will know over time. Not on the basis of 1 race, not even on the basis of a few races without.

I wouldn't even put it beyond some DSs to create "stage-managed" impressions of "what happens when you don't have race radios", if they indeed see their stakes as very high.

 

[Roland Rat]

Absolutely bored of this now. And utterly bored of the pro's tweeting to make points about radios. From now on I'm unfollowing any pro who tweets along the lines of "We had aliens land on the road today. We were almost killed. Now, if we had radios..."

If only they put half of this effort into complaining about doping. Oh yeah, sorry, doping isn't a "safety issue". As Ricco will testify.

 

[Granville57]

http://velonews.competitor.com/2011/03/news/saxos-bjarne-riis-blasts-uci-over-radio-ban_162553

Did anyone notice John Wilcockson's remarks in the "Comments" to that article?

Just the facts: Thirty years ago (1981 Tour), there were 15 teams and 150 riders, 10 of whom were victory contenders; 20 years ago (before radios), the 1991 Tour had 22 teams and 198 riders (SAME as today), with 15 major contenders. As for safety, the 1991 (without radios) Tour had 156 finishers; the 2009 (with radios) had 156 finishers. Just the facts.

 

[LugHugger]

boy... I tell ya. that opening stage of Paris-Nice sure was boring with radios right? oh. wait. what? Jens Voigt attacked with 40k to go? and the HTC couldn't put their typical little plan into effect and control the front of the race? Like usual? Road tactics have made pro racing far more boring than any DS speaking into a radio.

Actually Motorola (funny that)/USPS/Discovery made pro racing more boring. Speak to Mike Barry. HTC have perfected the tactic using race radio to it's nth degree to suit their needs. Try again.

 

[peloton]

A good read:

http://bicycling.com/blogs/boulderreport/2011/03/07/relent-on-radios/

 

[76tradesman]

With the overwhelming responses being that safety in not at issue, it would be nice if the riders are reading this and understand that their fans are not buying this rhetoric. The teams have become well oiled machines and things do run smoothly, but it comes at the cost of exciting racing.

Jens Voigt stated previously that he would prefer lots of boring racing as long as it was safe. Agreed -- while racing is dangerous in and of itself, there should be a level of safety in the sport to protect the riders. However, most people seem to agree that the radios don't make the racing safer. Should all races just be made into exhibitions -- basically commercials for all the sponsors shiny bikes?

I would disagree with the comment about making wheel changes smoother and not letting a mechanical impact a race. I think mechanicals should be part of the racing. It makes for more exciting racing. Also, these teams often get a lot of sponsorship dollars from equipment manufacturers, so the quality of the products should be part of the racing.

 

[Boeing]

I need a little help here too: what exactly is the logic behind the proposed ban anyway?

It's not like TV rights are dictating rules in this sport

It isnt going to make the race more watchable or marketable

 

[Angliru]

I'm of the belief that if there is a DS out there that is game to compromise on the issue of race radio's he is likely fearful of a collective backlash from the rest of his fellow "joystick controllers" against him and his team in the races. Any chance of one of his riders getting away in a break will be eliminated by order of the DS's to their riders--"Chase them down! Don't give them an inch!"
The rhetoric from Voigt, directed at journalists was simply sad and pathetic.
His being on one of the "superteams", it's likely they have a fear of the potential "chaos" that will ensue should there be no race radio's. The unsuspecting rider winning a race/stage that was destined to the chosen few. Oh they can't have that.

I lost a huge amount of respect for Voigt after his public plea but then after watching yesterday's stage of Paris-Nice on Versus, where every other word was "Jens this" and "Jens that", one can't help but begin to grow weary of this obsession with this one rider.

 

[WillyWoet]

Voigt's perspective

I think Jens Voigt, as one of the grand old men in the peloton, over the years has totally lost the tv viewer/fans's perspective on cycling. For Voigt cycling is purely a job, a 9-5 activity and something that has nothing to do with nobody but the riders. I think Voigt has to realize that without exciting racing, lots of fans ect. he would be out of a job.

That being said, the UCI again has gone about this all wrong. All studies of policy making and policy implementing shows that an inclusive decision process where all parties are heard, holds a much higher legitimacy among the actors affected by the final effects/outcome. To this end, the UCI just seem like amateurs.

 

[Angliru]

I think Jens Voigt, as one of the grand old men in the peloton, over the years has totally lost the tv viewer/fans's perspective on cycling. For Voigt cycling is purely a job, a 9-5 activity and something that has nothing to do with nobody but the riders. I think Voigt has to realize that without exciting racing, lots of fans ect. he would be out of a job.

That being said, the UCI again has gone about this all wrong. All studies of policy making and policy implementing shows that an inclusive decision process where all parties are heard, holds a much higher legitimacy among the actors affected by the final effects/outcome. To this end, the UCI just seem like amateurs.

Voigt, as one of the media's darlings, along with Andy and Fabian, believe their own hype. They have a sense of importance imparted upon them by some of the media that may be deserved in Cancellara's case, not so much in Andy's, and probably not really overly deserved in Voigt's, definitely not comparable to the media attention that he gets. The team has become the Miami Heat of cycling for me, the team I love to hate! As such, like you say they've lost touch with what entertaining racing is. They're under the illusion that it's them winning as much as possible or controlling the outcome by the power of their personalities, or in Andy's case, lack there of.

 

[Granville57]

I would disagree with the comment about making wheel changes smoother and not letting a mechanical impact a race. I think mechanicals should be part of the racing. It makes for more exciting racing. Also, these teams often get a lot of sponsorship dollars from equipment manufacturers, so the quality of the products should be part of the racing.

Agreed. Think about how much time and effort goes into a pit crew's perfection of their skills in auto racing. Gear selection and a good team of mechanics is part of the deal for cycling. Luck or misfortune may come into play in a race but that's part of the environment. To state the obvious: the road is not a velodrome. Things happen (not to suggest for one second that the track doesn't have its own inherent dangers).

Re: Jens.
The most ridiculous point he tried to make in his latest missive was this:

Can anybody please explain me how we're going to attract sponsors if we develop our sport back into the stone age? An anecdote: two years ago Andy Schleck punctured 5km before the finish line. Luckily, we had radios and warned Bjarne Riis, who could bring Andy a new wheel in no time. Moreover, the team waited for Andy and we managed to get him back into the peloton, save his white jersey and his second place in the GC. Everybody was happy: Andy, the team, Bjarne and also the sponsor. Now let me tell you the same story, but now without the radio. Andy punctures, only one rider sees it, it's noisy because of all the spectators, the other team riders move on, Andy raises his arm for the official sign of a puncture, other team notice that Andy is not there, they start riding faster and faster. Once Andy has a new wheel, there's only one rider there to bring him back. Andy loses his white jersey and the second place, finishes 9th overall, Bjarne is unhappy and so is our sponsors. In the end the sponsor might even pull back and it's the end of the team. Thanks to the radio ban. Of course, this is exaggerated, but I just want to get my point across.

It's not only exaggerated, it's absurd! The implication here is that Leopard-Schleck (I know he's referring to Saxo in the above) somehow deserves to win more than another sponsored team.

Hey Jens, how about this scenario:
Andy punctures and it's too damn bad. Perhaps events unfold in such a way that a Footon-Servetto rider gets an unexpected stage win, jersey or other significant gain. Their sponsor is now thrilled with the result and strengthens their resolve to continue sponsoring a pro team. Plus, we as fans, get increased viewing time of the most-awesome Footon-Servetto kit!

See that, Jens? It works both ways. You and Andy don't deserve anything.

 

[Cobblestoned]

It's not only exaggerated, it's absurd! The implication here is that Leopard-Schleck (I know he's referring to Saxo in the above) somehow deserves to win more than another sponsored team.

Hey Jens, how about this scenario:
Andy punctures and it's too damn bad. Perhaps events unfold in such a way that a Footon-Servetto rider gets an unexpected stage win, jersey or other significant gain. Their sponsor is now thrilled with the result and strengthens their resolve to continue sponsoring a pro team. Plus, we as fans, get increased viewing time of the most-awesome Footon-Servetto kit!

See that, Jens? It works both ways. You and Andy don't deserve anything.

What ?
This is the implication you see ? lol
Or do you just want to see that implication ?
How is it even possible to see that implication ?

btw, you should change your postingstyle when you leave the clinic.
This place here, most fans and especially cycling don't need any more hate.

At least you waived to wishing them something bad.

 

[Granville57]

What ?
This is the implication you see ? lol
Or do you just want to see that implication ?
How is it even possible to see that implication ?

btw, you should change your postingstyle when you leave the clinic.
This place here, most fans and especially cycling don't need any more hate.

At least you waived to wishing them something bad.

I don't exactly understand your last sentence, but to the rest...

What I meant was, Jens is suggesting a situation where lack of radios could've meant a loss for his team. That fails to take into account the fact that the same scenario would then turn into a positive situation for another team. That's what I see in his post. That's what I meant.

Also, I didn't realize I needed some sort of forum-passport to be stamped properly when moving between different sub-forums.

 

[Master50]

I think Jens Voigt, as one of the grand old men in the peloton, over the years has totally lost the tv viewer/fans's perspective on cycling. For Voigt cycling is purely a job, a 9-5 activity and something that has nothing to do with nobody but the riders. I think Voigt has to realize that without exciting racing, lots of fans ect. he would be out of a job.

That being said, the UCI again has gone about this all wrong. All studies of policy making and policy implementing shows that an inclusive decision process where all parties are heard, holds a much higher legitimacy among the actors affected by the final effects/outcome. To this end, the UCI just seem like amateurs.

Willy the last thing you said made me laugh as I was thinking this is exactly what the US government fails to do frequently. I was thinking of prohibition at that moment. Give them what is good for them not what they want.

 

[antifred]

crap crap crap, why not RCRF, RCRF RCRF

Did you see the last 3km on Sunday? So many heads bent over the mic. This is not racing folks. It's radio controlled cars. Jens? What a load of crap. AS should have been f'ed with the flat. PEDs and radios? My sport is out of touch with pure racing, human performance, and human endeavor. I wonder how some of the spoiled pros would fare racing clean and radio free. Coin it.. RCRF

RCRF RCRF RCRF arf arf arf, spolied pros. Do you hear us dogs barking?

 

[BroDeal]

A good read:

http://bicycling.com/blogs/boulderreport/2011/03/07/relent-on-radios/

That was not a good read. His reason for keeping radios boils down to, "We cannot ban radios because we have already allowed them to be used." Motorsport is filled with technologies that have been outlawed. It is filled with rules banning stuff for the sole reason of improving the racing. This Pandora's Box argument is bogus.

In a small group approaching the finish, a rider cannot even make a surprise attack from the back without the other riders' DSes yelling into their radios as soon as he gets out of the saddle.

With cameras zoomed into the riders, the DSes have a better view of how the riders are suffering than those in the group.

Just listening to these fools during an ITT is a joke. They are coached through every turn and undulation in the road. I really want to hear Voight's explanation of why radios are needed during an ITT.

 

[kiwirider]

Couple of observations I've made on the topic:
- watch the movie "Overcoming". It's an inside look at CSC during the 2004 race season. Check out the scenes from inside the team car - interesting for the media and resources that Riis (as you'd expect, the film focuses a lot on him ...) has at his finger tips, and the way that he uses them. He is definitely using the radios to "remote control" his riders - don't recall any scenes where he sends safety messages up the road ...
- similar story with "Hell on Wheels" - which focuses on T-Mobile. Again, radios used to control the riders ...
- a friend of mine is good buddies with a rider on one of the pro tour teams. We were all talking one day about heart rate monitors and why our pro buddy doesn't use them in races. His reason was "What am I going to do when the DS comes on the radio and tells us that a break has gone up the road and we need to chase? Do you think I'm going to turn around to him and say "sorry boss, I'm already at max HR, the others will have to do it themselves ...?". Again, the message is that the DS is watching what's happening up front and is controlling the team via the radio.
- the argument about Horillo's accident ... correct me if I'm wrong, but the radio that made the difference there was the (neutral/common) race channel? The reason that I say that, is that the argument is put that the team car used the radio to call in the medevac. Medevac - and all emergency type functions - are on the race channel, not the same as the channel used to talk between riders and cars. So, that part of the "here's a safety example" argument seems spurious to me ... And there are always plenty of vehicles on race channel spread throughout the riders if the peleton gets split up (eg., as happens in the mountains), so surely it's easy enough to flag someone who has race channel if needs be?
- Hushovd's latest comparison to Formula 1 amuses me ... He has picked what has to be the most boring form of motorsport as a case for how good radios are. Good one Thor - you get exactly the point that most of us are making ... Radios and remote control riders have taken the excitement out of the sport!

OK, soap box going away ...shuffling off to the corner ... getting on with the day job ... at least until I can find a live stream of the end of the stage at Paris-Nice ...

 

[Master50]

I see this thread is shifting from attacking the message to attacking the messenger. It is a typical strategy that if the message cannot be discredited you then move to discredit the messenger.
Jens Voit is a credible messenger with a strong opinion on radios. He is invested in the outcome and it effects him and his livelihood. %98 of the posters in this forum have never seen the inside of a pro peloton or caravan and honestly have no experience to refute his message. I would be surprised if any more than 20 to 30% of the forumites were even bike racing fans before radios came into cycling either. I am just non-plussed.

 

[Francois the Postman]

I see this thread is shifting from attacking the message to attacking the messenger. It is a typical strategy that if the message cannot be discredited you then move to discredit the messenger.
Jens Voit is a credible messenger with a strong opinion on radios. He is invested in the outcome and it effects him and his livelihood. %98 of the posters in this forum have never seen the inside of a pro peloton or caravan and honestly have no experience to refute his message. I would be surprised if any more than 20 to 30% of the forumites were even bike racing fans before radios came into cycling either. I am just non-plussed.

I read the opening two lines, then the penultimate one. So by your own logic, your stance is bust. You insinuate that a large proportion has little direct experience, whereas most of us can see daily how radios are used over and over in situations that have nothing to do with safety. Others have been around long enough to have seen the 80s. Others have direct racing experience too.

I hardly see this big shift in tone in this thread that you see btw. Even the vast majority of people who mention Jens are still arguing their case.

"Argument from authority" (Jens is an authority and therefore right) is also a strategy to kill real debate. Plenty of people have argued why the points he raised are not a strong or as exclusive, or conclusive, as he presents them. And any particular reason why we should go wholesale with Jens's authority, and not with Oscar's, for instance, who has an opposite pov?

It would be a nice experiment to secretly record the radio communications on a given day, especially days that really matter, and I would love to see the percentage of messages that are safety, functional, and that are concern race strategy. I bet now that safety messages are way down the bottom of that race.

Again, the most vocal DSs are not volunteering to give up their radios, to make sure their riders can still benefit from having a neutral safety radio option. They don't want to lose the ability to talk to their riders, the grandstanding is about to keep the status quo. This ain't about safety, and the sticking point is all about race planning and intervention from the race car, no matter how they dress it up.

 

[76tradesman]

I see this thread is shifting from attacking the message to attacking the messenger. It is a typical strategy that if the message cannot be discredited you then move to discredit the messenger.
Jens Voit is a credible messenger with a strong opinion on radios. He is invested in the outcome and it effects him and his livelihood. %98 of the posters in this forum have never seen the inside of a pro peloton or caravan and honestly have no experience to refute his message. I would be surprised if any more than 20 to 30% of the forumites were even bike racing fans before radios came into cycling either. I am just non-plussed.

I've been following the thread as well and haven't really felt like the thread has become personal any more than referencing the statements that riders have made. And yes, most of us haven't been professional riders. However, I'm sure that many of these posters have raced at some level and have a feel for what a pack of 100+ riders is like. With that knowledge, and just some common sense, many of us can come to the conclusion that this isn't about safety and it's about controlling the race. I've posted before and will again, how do riders survive training rides? Do they have people that drive ahead of them and give them constant updates on an hazards ahead?

Let's think about the 2 recent riders that have come out with strong statements in favor of radios. First, Thor is a sprinter that has a vested interest in breakaways being caught 5k from the finish so it can line up to a bunch sprint. This is the type of racing that radio opponents are trying to eliminate. Second, Jens is from one of the top teams that benefits greatly from the race being highly controlled. If you can control each move and limit any impact to race with mechanicals and crashes, then you can increase the chances that the strongest team can control the race. From that perspective, of course the strongest teams want to shine and reap the benefits from their hard work and investment. And they can't be blamed for that. Unfortunately, this again has led to dull racing.

If we simply want the strongest team and the strongest rider to win every race, maybe they should all just go into a lab, get the VO2 and Power Outputs complied and we can simply declare all the race winners. Maybe we could get Pixar to computer animate the actual races too. Then, everyone can stay at the beach and no one will ever be in any danger of a crash or horrifying 3 minutes on the side of the road with a flat.

 

[pedaling squares]

Hushovd's argument is inconsistent.

“There was an ambulance coming in the opposite direction during Strade Bianche last weekend. We need to be told about things like that. It may also be useful to get information on roadworks and dark tunnels.

Hushovd rejected the suggestion that one-way communications should be allowed.

He provides some excellent rationale in support of one-way radios, then rejects the suggestion that they be adopted.

 

[Ryaguas]

If we simply want the strongest team and the strongest rider to win every race, maybe they should all just go into a lab, get the VO2 and Power Outputs complied and we can simply declare all the race winners. Maybe we could get Pixar to computer animate the actual races too. Then, everyone can stay at the beach and no one will ever be in any danger of a crash or horrifying 3 minutes on the side of the road with a flat.

Namely... just play PCM and update it every year with the VO2Max and Power outputs of every rider

 

[ultimobici]

I see this thread is shifting from attacking the message to attacking the messenger. It is a typical strategy that if the message cannot be discredited you then move to discredit the messenger.
Jens Voit is a credible messenger with a strong opinion on radios. He is invested in the outcome and it effects him and his livelihood. %98 of the posters in this forum have never seen the inside of a pro peloton or caravan and honestly have no experience to refute his message. I would be surprised if any more than 20 to 30% of the forumites were even bike racing fans before radios came into cycling either. I am just non-plussed.

I rread and reread Voght's letter and cannot for the life of me agree with him at all.

Radios, as they are now and as riders/teams want them to stay, are not necessary for safety of the participants and fans. If they were it would be as pain as day. If riders etc are concerned about safety why have none of them suggested an open channel for all riders to receive the same information? Language issues are a non starter too as one only needs to understand a few cycling specific words. Ask any rider about caduta, crevaison, chute, pericolo, arrivo, arrivee etc and they will know.

The reason is blindingly obvious and the radio advocates are insulting our intelligence if they think we haven't already seen through it.

 

[BroDeal]

The sad thing is that someone like Voight, with his strength and experience, would benefit from loss of radios. Instead he has to contend with riders with ten less years in their legs being told what to do by DSes with ten years more experience.