Radios - Safety or Control of your riders?

[peloton]

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.

Voight?

Anyhow, did you watch P-N stage 4? Voeckler pulled his radio out with less than 40km to go, can you tell me how his DS was able to scream at him?

riight.

 

[Oldman]

Voight?

Anyhow, did you watch P-N stage 4? Voeckler pulled his radio out with less than 40km to go, can you tell me how his DS was able to scream at him?

riight.

If they want to be safer ban the sprints...99% of the serious injuries are happening there.

 

[Master50]

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.

The trouble for me is it is blindingly obvious that radios belong for reasons of safety and not from the riders perspective but from a caravan management perspective and safety of the riders in those interactions. In the movies they always get footage of the coach telling the riders a tidy bit of tactical information. It is a dramatic moment. Radios are most benin tools to enable team communication. One purpose is to relay tactical instructions. The notion that racing has become boring and that the introduction of rider to team car radio links is at best poorly supported by data that can't be explained in a dozen other ways or factors 10 variables and not just 1. Improved communications is suddenly a bad thing for teams. No you can't talk to your rider he needs to come back to the car again. 207 riders in the Giro for example The length of the peloton can be 200 meters now how does a DS talk to his team if they are 100 meters up the pack? Drive beside Com 1 and yell for Astana? Been there done that. It was not good. A rider on a climb gets a flat and he is in a group the chief com has passed. That rider won't get a wheel until his team car passes him. He used to be able to call and the car might get a chance to get there sooner. This rider misses the time cut and goes home early. Might affect his income? We don't care about his living do we? Radios are tools of professional cycling. We are asking them to accept a handicap based on a rather strong opinion that racing is boring because of radios.
I accept it is likely that radios have effected tactics but what about the effect of Doping on the capacity of riders to execute those chases which by the way only seem to effect sprint days. There are DS that are constantly telling the team what to do but nothing like some of the posts I have read in the forums. Even if ordered, riders are not robots and can remove the earpiece too. I think INGVE has made the best characterization of radio traffic early in the thread. It sounds like he has been in it because it sounds just like what I see every race.

 

[Master50]

Voight?

Anyhow, did you watch P-N stage 4? Voeckler pulled his radio out with less than 40km to go, can you tell me how his DS was able to scream at him?

riight.

A rider in a break often gets his ds yelling at him directly from alongside. If the group is smaller than about 15 riders then a DS can get permission to drive up to the rider. No need for the radio then is there? Weren't there just 4 in the break. I just read the story too? The DS is only 10 meters back with a car from each of the other teams in the break

 

[Oldman]

The trouble for me is it is blindingly obvious that radios belong for reasons of safety and not from the riders perspective but from a caravan management perspective and safety of the riders in those interactions. In the movies they always get footage of the coach telling the riders a tidy bit of tactical information. It is a dramatic moment. Radios are most benin tools to enable team communication. One purpose is to relay tactical instructions. The notion that racing has become boring and that the introduction of rider to team car radio links is at best poorly supported by data that can't be explained in a dozen other ways or factors 10 variables and not just 1. Improved communications is suddenly a bad thing for teams. No you can't talk to your rider he needs to come back to the car again. 207 riders in the Giro for example The length of the peloton can be 200 meters now how does a DS talk to his team if they are 100 meters up the pack? Drive beside Com 1 and yell for Astana? Been there done that. It was not good. A rider on a climb gets a flat and he is in a group the chief com has passed. That rider won't get a wheel until his team car passes him. He used to be able to call and the car might get a chance to get there sooner. This rider misses the time cut and goes home early. Might affect his income? We don't care about his living do we? Radios are tools of professional cycling. We are asking them to accept a handicap based on a rather strong opinion that racing is boring because of radios.
I accept it is likely that radios have effected tactics but what about the effect of Doping on the capacity of riders to execute those chases which by the way only seem to effect sprint days. There are DS that are constantly telling the team what to do but nothing like some of the posts I have read in the forums. Even if ordered, riders are not robots and can remove the earpiece too. I think INGVE has made the best characterization of radio traffic early in the thread. It sounds like he has been in it because it sounds just like what I see every race.

There have been great suggestions on safety but part of the sport is the riders deciding to implement a planned strategy. If someone needs to go back to the car to get a DS consulation that's less dangerous than getting bottles or food; a much more necessary part of racing than communication. The noise made about radios as essential is laughable and a pure diversion from the real problems at hand. The riders just picked this issue to try to assert themselves as a group vs. the UCI while the real issues are below the surface. That we're still discussing it is embarrassing...at least for me. I'll stop.

 

[ultimobici]

A rider in a break often gets his ds yelling at him directly from alongside. If the group is smaller than about 15 riders then a DS can get permission to drive up to the rider. No need for the radio then is there? Weren't there just 4 in the break. I just read the story too? The DS is only 10 meters back with a car from each of the other teams in the break

When a rider has to communicate in the open with his DS it removes the secrecy radios afford. That way a tactically less astute rider can't hide. Before radios were the norm there was a simple method of communicating a problem, be it mechanical or otherwise. Punctures were signalled by a hand up in the air, left for front & right for rear. Their effect on the result is part of racing as are crashes, hence the oft used excuse for not winning....."Had it not been for a flat on the run in, I would have been sprinting for the win".
The need for radios for safety concerns, the way that the riders have presented it, is a complete non-starter. To use them for tactical reasons, be they mishap management or directing the rider, is not fair on riders who have tactical nous or take the trouble to develop it. It is true that a rider can simply take his ear-piece out but after a while some DS's may not take kindly to that happening and act accordingly come contract renewal time. It's akin to an office worker putting their phone on divert for the last hour of their day, IMO!

 

[jens_attacks]

i welcome the decision of the riders to stay united and boycott tour of beijing.your voice should be heard!it's terrific great news,a peloton united even marc madiot and other french.
radios are the smallest problems,we all know what the real problem is: DESTROY UCI!PRO CYCLISTS ARE NOT CRACKHEADS!SOME FAT FUCCS SHOULDN'T BE ALLOWED TO LEAD UCI,LET EX RIDERS AT THE FRONT OF THE UCI AND LET RIDERS DECIDE ON ALL THE PROBLEMS INVOLVING THEM.goddamn do it like in all other important sports.the moment has arrived.

i know mr. vaughters reads this boards and probably he's following this thread too and also other pro riders.i already know his opinion and that he wants the best for pro cycling.well there you have it,this is the moment.peloton united,cycling fans hate uci from the guts.do it!bring the respect and the dignity back for pro riders!

i'm still sad and very disappointed that association of the riders did nothing in pelli's case,a huge injustice.we all know how pro cyclists feel about this,then why shut up?uci must disappear!rat mcquaid your time is gone!

 

[royalpig180]

i welcome the decision of the riders to stay united and boycott tour of beijing.your voice should be heard!it's terrific great news,a peloton united even marc madiot and other french.
radios are the smallest problems,we all know what the real problem is: DESTROY UCI!PRO CYCLISTS ARE NOT CRACKHEADS!SOME FAT FUCCS SHOULDN'T BE ALLOWED TO LEAD UCI,LET EX RIDERS AT THE FRONT OF THE UCI AND LET RIDERS DECIDE ON ALL THE PROBLEMS INVOLVING THEM.goddamn do it like in all other important sports.the moment has arrived.

i know mr. vaughters reads this boards and probably he's following this thread too and also other pro riders.i already know his opinion and that he wants the best for pro cycling.well there you have it,this is the moment.peloton united,cycling fans hate uci from the guts.do it!bring the respect and the dignity back for pro riders!

i'm still sad and very disappointed that association of the riders did nothing in pelli's case,a huge injustice.we all know how pro cyclists feel about this,then why shut up?uci must disappear!rat mcquaid your time is gone!

O.K., I'm glad that the riders can stand together to oppose the corruption of the UCI, but it seems to me they've chosen the wrong race. Yes, it is part of the UCI's "globalization plan" which some of the teams may oppose, but that's a completely separate issue! Choosing this race for the boycott drags another whole issue into the matter. Also, they would be allowed to use radios at this race, which makes this a rather ironic decision. Boycotting a major .HC race this year or the TDU first thing next year would have been a better choice IMO...

 

[jens_attacks]

boycotting a monument race,i'll never support that(and they respected that,they respected het volk).tour of pekin?who gives a fucc?boycott it!
if they don't get that pro cyclists are the centre of the pro cycling world,boycott the world championships too.

 

[Christian]

USA Cycling lifts radio ban in National Racing Calendar races!

"In the process, we considered all of the categories of the racing environment that are impacted by radios, including rider and spectator safety, caravan and peloton management and team/rider communication. Frankly, radios won on every count."

Read more: http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/7...onal-Racing-Calendar-races.aspx#ixzz1GNajgjt2

 

[Yeahright]

Great to see the US ignoring the braindead UCI ban. Wow a national federation that listens to the wishes of riders, teams and race organisers,,,fancy that.

At the end of the day thats what matters not the stupid pig headedness of a few old men. Hopefully more will follow suit and we can put this nonsense behind us.

 

[jens_attacks]

Great to see the US ignoring the braindead UCI ban. Wow a national federation that listens to the wishes of riders, teams and race organisers,,,fancy that.

At the end of the day thats what matters not the stupid pig headedness of a few old men. Hopefully more will follow suit and we can put this nonsense behind us.

+1.
great news.

 

[Anonymous]

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

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.

How about this scenario. One of the several riders who waited for him to bring him back to the peloton, GIVES ANDY THEIR WHEEL..

Frankly Jens is talking crap, his arguments are all very very thin. Does he really expect us to beleive that the entire team will sit with a stricken andy watching time tick away, waiting for the team car and lose the tour de france in the process.

 

[nowhereman]

Great to see the US ignoring the braindead UCI ban. Wow a national federation that listens to the wishes of riders, teams and race organisers,,,fancy that.

At the end of the day thats what matters not the stupid pig headedness of a few old men. Hopefully more will follow suit and we can put this nonsense behind us.

Absolutely Agreed!!!

 

[VeloFidelis]

The noise made about radios as essential is laughable and a pure diversion from the real problems at hand. The riders just picked this issue to try to assert themselves as a group vs. the UCI while the real issues are below the surface. That we're still discussing it is embarrassing...at least for me. I'll stop.

What's your favorite color?... No, I sorry that is incorrect. Who is your favorite Pro cyclist?... No actually, he isn't.

The qualifying characteristic of an opinion is that it can neither be right or wrong, it is a belief gathered through personal experience. If your wife said she doesn't feel safe parking her car in a particular neighborhood late at night, are you going to argue with her because you feel differently? Not if you have a brain in your head.

I read a lot of opinions here about the validity of a safety claim by riders from Forum members who have no personal exposure in this issue. If someone gets hurt or suffers a career ending situation due to a lack of information; it won't be you. If that information could have been provided, but the ability to do so was withheld for the perception of greater entertainment value, then anyone seeking to limit that communication is complicit.

The riders are not Gladiators. Their possibility of injury is an accepted fact of their occupation, eliminating technology that can reduce those odds is not. They have a collective voice and it should be considered. If they have to strike to make it heard, then I hope they will. The idea that racing will revert to some former glory once communication is limited is a far more ridiculous premise than the safety issue raised by riders. The UCI and the pro radio ban posters listing here have no tangible evidence of what the affects will be, only opinions.

As far as opinions go, I'm more inclined to listen to those developed through a closer personal experience with cycling. If Sean Kelly is on record as stating that the elimination of radios would most likely make racing more conservative in the foreseeable future, but no one really knows... well, forgive me if I give his opinion higher credibility than those wildly conspiratorial ones posted here.

I predict that the radio ban will not succeed. That is my opinion. The reasons for my opinion is a former close personal and professional experience with pro teams and their sponsors. Like it or not, they are responsible for bringing you professional cycling at the highest levels. They have significant financial interests tied to the sport in general, and this issue in particular. Since we pay nothing to participate as active fans of the sport, we don't have a seat at that table. The thought that the theoretical interests of a few vocal and dissatisfied fans, who will never stop watching cycling regardless of the outcome, should take precedent over their own is laughable to them. Add to that the fact that the global fan base for cycling is growing nicely, and they have even less reason to support change.

I can think of no other situation in professional sport where technology and communication with coaches, directors and team mates, that was previously available, has been limited or eliminated over the protests of the participants, for the sake of a perception of potential improvement in the quality of the viewing experience for fans. And I don't think that we are going to see one here.

 

[Dimtick]

The arguments for and against radios have been talked to death so I don't want to get back into that. I saw an interesting article that teh UCI is condidering "limited" radio use for rider safety which would seem to be a 1-way radio thats been discussed here. I also found it interesting that when Vaughters, who's been preaching safety safety safety, when asked about a limited radio use for safety backpedled and talking about "there are bigger issues involved......".

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/7...orm-of-radio-contact-to-safeguard-riders.aspx

 

[VeloFidelis]

I agree with you that this has been talked to death, and there is no shortage of opinion as to how this issue can be "simply" fixed by those of us who have no practical experience with what radio contact, or the lack of it means to actual racing and safety issues.

I do agree with Vaughters on his comments in the article you cited:

“I can't speak for all the teams on this, but I can't imagine a solution like this that would be pragmatic. There’s language issues, and also selectivity of info. It’s an idea thought up by those who aren't actually working in the field (as a rider, director, mechanic).”

I also agree with his comments that you see as back pedaling:

He said that there were bigger issues than the safety consideration. ‘Why are these decisions being made without vote from riders/teams?’ he asked. “And why are we trying to make cycling an individual sport, not a team sport?”

I can't think of any team sport in which communication from a coach / director is in any way limited. What a radio ban looks like to me, is an attempt to introduce limited chaos in a blind hope that it will result in better product for television, not necessarily higher quality racing.

 

[Mellow Velo]

So, if the ban isn't removed by May 1st, we now have the teams boycotting Beijing?

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/race-radios-aigcp-press-on-with-tour-of-beijing-boycott

Clearly, this is a safety issue..................................................one involving nobody wanting to test positive for Clencontadorol!

 

[BroDeal]

Vaughters finally admits what it is really about.

"By banning race radio, you introduce an element of randomness into the race."

Gotcha. Randomness. Unexpected winners. We would not want that. Racing is so much better when most of the wins go to just a few big teams. And why shouldn't they? The big teams paid the most money. They deserve those wins.

What a tool this guy has turned out to be.

 

[BroDeal]

USA Cycling lifts radio ban in National Racing Calendar races!

"In the process, we considered all of the categories of the racing environment that are impacted by radios, including rider and spectator safety, caravan and peloton management and team/rider communication. Frankly, radios won on every count."

Yup. Riders definitely need radios during crits and circuit races. Who knows what dangers might lie ahead on that same piece of road that the riders have been over forty times in the last hour. If the DSes are not able to tell their riders to turn left, they might run straight into the crowd and injure a hapless spectator, maybe even a child. Think of the children!

Does anyone know what year the pros turned into wimps? You cannot even have a short road stage followed by a time trial in a GT anymore. Hard men of cycling, my ass.

 

[tidean]

Radio's like helmets, they didn't want them, they were detrimental to performance & all sorts of other claptrap they said, what do you here about them now, yoo hoo --- Silence --- & they are all wearing them.
The reports I've heard about OH&S for safety is a good one & I believe in it wholeheartedly. Industry here in Aust has become much safer cos of good OH&S practice's, would you like to go & tell some woman & kids (or man & kids) that their loved one is not coming home anymore.

Tell you what give 'em one way radio's for safety reason's so they can get reports from the organizers about anything, also they can talk to the organizers about unsafe conditions.
I bet after a few races they will not be bothered to put there radio's on any more cos they are more hassle than they are worth. Give me unpredictable racing anytime.
Like one of the other posters wrote let them band together & ostracize dopers to help the sport.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

If it's truly about safety, then let's allow one-way radios from officials and course marshals to the riders, warning them every time there is a hazard. As soon as the riders start lobbying for just this, and accepting just this, then they are right, it's about safety.

But that's not what they really want. They want full communication with the team car and DS in order to further control the race, which makes them more comfortable. They are just using the guise of "safety" in order to try to get it.

 

[The Sheep]

Oscarito said it's safer without radios

 

[Dimtick]

I do think UCI should allow 2 way radios for stages where theres a high probability of a lot of accidents either due to road conditions, weather, etc.
Stages like the cobble stage of last years TDF need 2 way radios. Also Rain days like the 2 final stages of this years Paris-Neice.
On stages like that, let the teams have 2 way radios so they can protect their riders.

 

[ultimobici]

I do think UCI should allow 2 way radios for stages where theres a high probability of a lot of accidents either due to road conditions, weather, etc.
Stages like the cobble stage of last years TDF need 2 way radios. Also Rain days like the 2 final stages of this years Paris-Neice.
On stages like that, let the teams have 2 way radios so they can protect their riders.

From what?