Radios - Safety or Control of your riders?

[VeloFidelis]

Why is it that posters here can be so comfortable watching the working conditions for pro cyclists downgraded from their existing state, when most of them would not tolerate a similar imposition on their own profession or work place? The riders have every right to push back, and I hope they do.

The UCI has imposed this ban without the input of the riders because of an unfounded impression of a speculative result. I would not be willing to put my safety and career in jeopardy because of an idea of what might happen. Especially when the desired result is inspired by the possibility of a better product for television. I know that many here think the impetus for this is some dubious improvement in the quality of racing for the real fans, but the reality is that chaos makes for great TV. That's where the money is, and since our price of admission as fans is non existent, stop deluding yourselves that this is about an altruistic interest in the quality of racing.

As to the safety issue; it is real! The riders put a lot on the line. We can't do what they do. We don't have the talent, and we don't have the balls. Needlessly increasing their risk in the hope of expanded television coverage is bullsh!t!! As to maintaining some control in the race; that is a safety issue as well. Safety is not limited to personal injury. What about the safety of my job, income, sponsorship, contract? These are real safety issues to the riders, sponsors, and team management. Just like they are for you in whatever your occupation is. My guess is that you are not going to let anyone f*#k with that, if you have anything to say about it. Professional cyclist should not have to either.

 

[Mellow Velo]

An open letter from McQuaid, in which he gives the rational behind the decision, a few home truths and exposes Bruyneel's empire building scam:
http://www.uci.ch/Modules/ENews/ENe...es/UCI/UCI5/layout.asp?MenuId=MTYxNw&LangId=1

 

[ultimobici]

An open letter from McQuaid, in which he gives the rational behind the decision, a few home truths and exposes Bruyneel's empire building scam:
http://www.uci.ch/Modules/ENews/ENe...es/UCI/UCI5/layout.asp?MenuId=MTYxNw&LangId=1

I never thought that I'd agree so completely with Pat McQuaid!

 

[pedaling squares]

Patty's been reading the CN Forum.

But unfortunately, on this point, the riders too often tend to forget their role and their responsibilities: there are bigger problems in our sport which need your attention. I have never heard your riders association CPA nor teams association AIGCP showing similar indignation, mobilisation or militancy at the doping scandals which befall our sport. When it comes to raise the contribution to the fight against doping from the prize money, it is a flat refusal. This is where you should be addressing your open letters.

I can’t stop myself noting, with some disappointment, that you haven’t hesitated in joining your directeurs sportifs in a fight that has become their own before it has become yours. I say this is their own because UCI fully believes that this is not a fight about radios but rather a fight for power and control.

Quite a good letter in my opinion.

 

[Suedehead]

An open letter from McQuaid, in which he gives the rational behind the decision, a few home truths and exposes Bruyneel's empire building scam:
http://www.uci.ch/Modules/ENews/ENe...es/UCI/UCI5/layout.asp?MenuId=MTYxNw&LangId=1

I agree on most points as well.

Come back and talk job security without television, works well in the german pro-peloton?

 

[JPM London]

I never thought that I'd agree so completely with Pat McQuaid!

Me either... I'm shocked and have to lie down! However, I did remind myself that this is the same McQuaid that attacks anyone who attacks LA, so his rant on dopers and fighting it is a bit hollow.

 

[avanti]

I never thought that I'd agree so completely with Pat McQuaid!

A also agree to some extent and he makes a good point about coach-rider interaction. However he has not watched too much american football or basketball - matches take forever because of all the coach-player interaction.

 

[Dimtick]

From what?

there's been a lot of talk about having 1 way radios where race officials can make announcements about road conditions, round abouts, etc that would address the majority of safety concerns of the riders.
The exception is when I think about a stage like the cobble stage of last years TDF. I don't think a 1 way radio would work for those conditions. Think about what happened. On that stage there was chaos. The peleton was shattered. Riders and team cars were all mixed together. There were riders going down and flattening out all over the place and the dust made visibility very poor. For that stage I don't think a 1 way radio would work because there was just to much chaos for the race officials to be able to follow. For stages like that and for stages with bad weather conditions, where there is a high probability of rider crashes and potential injuries, I think they should be allowed 2 way radios.

For the most part my opinion is to go with a 1 way radio solution.

 

[BroDeal]

A also agree to some extent and he makes a good point about coach-rider interaction. However he has not watched too much american football or basketball - matches take forever because of all the coach-player interaction.

This is why I stopped watching basketball. The last five minutes of game play seems like it takes twenty minutes.

The letter does clear up the puzzling question of why the teams are making a huge fuss about a such minor issue, right down to making ridiculous exaggerations. It is the opening gambit in a move to set up a new cycling league. The riders will be safe to dope to their hearts' content, JV will get his exclusive club that will allow him to cash out with a public offering for Slipstream, and the whole enchilada will be run by one of the most dishonest men in cycling, Johan Bruyneel. You thought McQuaid and Verbruggen were corrupt? Hold on to your wallets. You ain't seen nuthin' yet.

 

[Angliru]

Oscarito said it's safer without radios

Further reason for me to be a Freire fan. I recall somewhere that Gilbert is also for the ban. I'm willing to bet that Vino would be too.

 

[Angliru]

Why is it that posters here can be so comfortable watching the working conditions for pro cyclists downgraded from their existing state, when most of them would not tolerate a similar imposition on their own profession or work place? The riders have every right to push back, and I hope they do.

The UCI has imposed this ban without the input of the riders because of an unfounded impression of a speculative result. I would not be willing to put my safety and career in jeopardy because of an idea of what might happen. Especially when the desired result is inspired by the possibility of a better product for television. I know that many here think the impetus for this is some dubious improvement in the quality of racing for the real fans, but the reality is that chaos makes for great TV. That's where the money is, and since our price of admission as fans is non existent, stop deluding yourselves that this is about an altruistic interest in the quality of racing.

As to the safety issue; it is real! The riders put a lot on the line. We can't do what they do. We don't have the talent, and we don't have the balls. Needlessly increasing their risk in the hope of expanded television coverage is bullsh!t!! As to maintaining some control in the race; that is a safety issue as well. Safety is not limited to personal injury. What about the safety of my job, income, sponsorship, contract? These are real safety issues to the riders, sponsors, and team management. Just like they are for you in whatever your occupation is. My guess is that you are not going to let anyone f*#k with that, if you have anything to say about it. Professional cyclist should not have to either.

What would you say to the riders that were brave enough to voice their opposition to race radio's (between riders and their team car)? You seem to be taking this quite personal based on the tone of your posts. Would you be accepting of a partial ban or are you simply against any change from the status quo?

You wouldn't happen to be a manager or ds for an elite team would you?

 

[mwbyrd]

So this is all about Television??? Television rights? Hmmml....who is getting the revenue from the Television contracts? This is all new territory.

I for one didn't really like letter. It seems like a cop out. I'm waiting to see what Vassuer states in regards to the letter and his representation in this radio matter.

And if McQuaid has examples from riders, why didn't he include some excerpts from those letters? And to bring doping into the argument about radios is kind of strange.

And interesting that he takes a generic quote from JB and turns it into a theory that he is creating a whole new cycling league...

 

[LugHugger]

Why is it that posters here can be so comfortable watching the working conditions for pro cyclists downgraded from their existing state, when most of them would not tolerate a similar imposition on their own profession or work place? The riders have every right to push back, and I hope they do.

The UCI has imposed this ban without the input of the riders because of an unfounded impression of a speculative result. I would not be willing to put my safety and career in jeopardy because of an idea of what might happen. Especially when the desired result is inspired by the possibility of a better product for television. I know that many here think the impetus for this is some dubious improvement in the quality of racing for the real fans, but the reality is that chaos makes for great TV. That's where the money is, and since our price of admission as fans is non existent, stop deluding yourselves that this is about an altruistic interest in the quality of racing.

As to the safety issue; it is real! The riders put a lot on the line. We can't do what they do. We don't have the talent, and we don't have the balls. Needlessly increasing their risk in the hope of expanded television coverage is bullsh!t!! As to maintaining some control in the race; that is a safety issue as well. Safety is not limited to personal injury. What about the safety of my job, income, sponsorship, contract? These are real safety issues to the riders, sponsors, and team management. Just like they are for you in whatever your occupation is. My guess is that you are not going to let anyone f*#k with that, if you have anything to say about it. Professional cyclist should not have to either.

The safety aspect is a smoke screen. Cycling pre-Motorola was no more dangerous than it is today. To present team and rider contracts as a safety issue is desperate and risible.

 

[VeloFidelis]

What would you say to the riders that were brave enough to voice their opposition to race radio's (between riders and their team car)? You seem to be taking this quite personal based on the tone of your posts. Would you be accepting of a partial ban or are you simply against any change from the status quo?

You wouldn't happen to be a manager or ds for an elite team would you?

Sorry to disappoint, but I currently have no connections to professional cycling of any kind. However not too long ago my business dealings did put me in contact with a few well known teams. Those associations earned me a few guest rides in a team car in some Grand Tours. While my experience was fairly pedestrian, it was enough to understand that the levels sophistication, communication, and control that the average person posting on this forum seems to believe exists between the riders and the team car is pretty far off the mark.

This is a bike race, not a video game. There are over 150 riders, 18 to 20 teams, two team cars for each, moving through the countryside and in and out of small villages with a dozen TV motos, medical support, official race vehicles, mostly on roads too narrow to have a painted center line. If you think anyone really has actual control of this situation, then you are at best naive. Directional chaos is the best description I would give it, and not because control has been lost, but because there are too many variables in play at any given time to effectively direct it... just point it and get out of the way.

My problem with the radio ban is that it is widely portrayed as a simple solution to a complex problem that no one is sure it will fix, and while we are all waiting to find out, the party most directly and negatively affected is the riders. The ones out there taking all the risks. You know... those risks that can turn into disaster... the kind of disaster that the casual television fans tune in for, and the 11:00 News loves to lead with. I can see no reason why the high level of personal risk that these guys have already signed up for should be needlessly increased based on speculation.

As I said the problem is complex. There are a dozen or more languages spoken in the peloton. A one size fits all, one way radio system doesn't work for everybody. And Pat McQuaid could not be more wrong in his assessment of communication in other team sports. Coaches are in constant control from the sidelines with verbal and visual commands. Name another team sport where team members are separated at any given time by miles. Why are they trying to take the coaching aspect out of cycling? Instead of banning radios they should exploit them.

The single most widely used and influential piece of technology in every team car is live television. If you are watching it live, then so is every person, in every team car, in the race. It guides every decision and communication to the riders. Why not open every teams radio communications to the television broadcasters and other teams. If all communication was transparent it would add a tremendous element of nuance for the TV fan, and allow any team to react to strategic move, if they were able.

Knowledge is power, and most likely high drama... just the kind that television loves. The riders now have no safety issues and are getting good information. The sponsors are happy that their investment is not operating in an information vacuum. The fans get a new level of involvement that only TV can provide. (Winning!) And everyone sees that the DS has a lot less control over the situation than they thought.

I know this idea has already been proposed. I can't understand why all concerned parties are not seeing it as a potentially real solution.

 

[VeloFidelis]

The safety aspect is a smoke screen. Cycling pre-Motorola was no more dangerous than it is today. To present team and rider contracts as a safety issue is desperate and risible.

Desperate... hmmm... how's that? I don't think it is as laughable as pretending to understand the levels of risk that riders routinely expose themselves to, and then dismissing them all together, like you've been there or done that. It's a pretty one dimensional argument to make the safety issue only about losing some skin or a few teeth on the pavement. I am sure that your personal safety concerns include stable employment, a regular pay check, and the best interests of your employer. I know mine do.

 

[veganrob]

An open letter from McQuaid, in which he gives the rational behind the decision, a few home truths and exposes Bruyneel's empire building scam:
http://www.uci.ch/Modules/ENews/ENe...es/UCI/UCI5/layout.asp?MenuId=MTYxNw&LangId=1

Makes total sense and I agree with him. Wow. Also loved how he calls out Jens. And right, for every DS that is disappointed his supposedly better rider lost, there is another delighted team.
A sport of intelligence, sporting ability and chance. How true.

 

[LugHugger]

Desperate... hmmm... how's that? I don't think it is as laughable as pretending to understand the levels of risk that riders routinely expose themselves to, and then dismissing them all together, like you've been there or done that. It's a pretty one dimensional argument to make the safety issue only about losing some skin or a few teeth on the pavement. I am sure that your personal safety concerns include stable employment, a regular pay check, and the best interests of your employer. I know mine do.

It's not me making this argument, it's the riders. So far, I have yet to read a rider contend that their job will be at risk because of a radio ban.

 

[ultimobici]

It's not me making this argument, it's the riders. So far, I have yet to read a rider contend that their job will be at risk because of a radio ban.

Jens Voght said as much in his open letter, commenting on sponsors being unhappy that they lost...

 

[LugHugger]

Jens Voght said as much in his open letter, commenting on sponsors being unhappy that they lost...

Which makes little or no sense, does it? There are a hundred reasons for not winning a race. If winning or losing is the sole criteria for sponsoring a Pro team then I could name half a dozen sponsors whose teams have not won a GT or Classic for 5 years who are still involved in the sport. It's a specious argument which is easily countered.

 

[ultimobici]

Which makes little or no sense, does it? There are a hundred reasons for not winning a race. If winning or losing is the sole criteria for sponsoring a Pro team then I could name half a dozen sponsors whose teams have not won a GT or Classic for 5 years who are still involved in the sport. It's a specious argument which is easily countered.

Wasn't agreeing with Voght, rather pointing out that there have been riders questioning their job security as well as their safety.

I think that the riders' argument is undermined by a couple of facts. There have been no crashes that have caused the kind of horrific outcomes they fear, before or after radios, yet there have been countless deaths & enforced retirements due to doping.

Casartelli would still be dead with or without an earpiece, Kivilev similarly would still be dead. On the other hand, would Pantani, Zanetti & numerous young dutch amateurs still be with us if the pros had been as outspoken about doping? One can only wonder.

 

[rickibobbi]

doping unity uber alles

my take on this is most pro level racers, unfortunately based on personal experience, (and those who are pros know that I'm right) are almost too stupid to breath on their own, (witness Andy Schleck's cross shifting miscues, not once, but at least twice in last year's TDF) so I really don't care what most of them "think" about almost anything. All the pros do "know" one thing, however, they have to produce results either individually or in support of individuals. Racing is a ridiculously hard sport and at the professional level its always been about the advertising, since its inception. Riders have essentially been expendable pawns, its still, more or less the same for the great majority of pros in the peloton, so from a purely practical point of view, if radios help popularity then use them, similarly with doping, and of course, vice versa. Cycling at the pro level is about entertainment, frankly, almost no different than pro wrestling or baseball, thus within reason, almost anything goes with regard to such issues. By the way, also in reference to "too stupid to breath" the lack of unity and outrage on doping is more than passing strange........(regardless of one's personal stand on this)

 

[Dewulf]

I never thought that I'd agree so completely with Pat McQuaid!

agreed, lol, now i got a question for all you folk...what would you say if i told you that more than 11 hours ago i wrote a post on VN in response to the Pat McQuaid open letter, and it's still not up there, even though newer posts are?

Also factor in now that pretty much 100% of the comments on that page are pro-radio, and that an article specific staff auditing process had been setup (ie. your post got checked and ok'd before it could go up), plus the fact that i was fair, balanced, but still popping some anti-ban balloons (using the Michael Barry piece on their own site no less)....and it looks to me like private interests are swaying what people can or cannot say on VN (not the first time i've seen them checking posts before publishing them either).

Of course now i know someone's gonna smack my head and say "well didn't all those piccies of Lance and the boys on the front page tell you anything??"
And fair enuf, but i'm still surprised - it's an article that will be seen by what, a few thousand people, mostly in the states, and they're actually taking the trouble to censor it?! Tell me what you think....

 

[VeloFidelis]

It's not me making this argument, it's the riders. So far, I have yet to read a rider contend that their job will be at risk because of a radio ban.

And these points completely escape your considerable powers of deduction and reasoning?

 

[Granville57]

agreed, lol, now i got a question for all you folk...what would you say if i told you that more than 11 hours ago i wrote a post on VN in response to the Pat McQuaid open letter, and it's still not up there, even though newer posts are?

I've posted quite a bit over there and I've noticed a few things. A few weeks ago I attacked McQuaid and blasted the idea of holding the World Championships in Oman...and my post never materialized. But I don't think that they're all that sophisticated in their running of that system.

Sometimes posts with links in them will be delayed until a moderator approves them but I've seen different results with this too. A year or so ago, it was normal for posts with links to go through a delay of anywhere from 20 minutes to a few hours. I've often found that if the link is to another VN article, the post will sometimes go through immediately. But about six months ago I noticed that if a post got delayed at all, it would often never appear. Sometimes completely benign posts of mine have been "lost in moderation." I've experienced some weird glitchy things in that system that lead me to believe that they just don't have a lot of resources to control that stuff too much.

Link-free posts will generally have a much better chance of showing up immediately.

 

[Granville57]

This is a bike race, not a video game. There are over 150 riders, 18 to 20 teams, two team cars for each, moving through the countryside and in and out of small villages with a dozen TV motos, medical support, official race vehicles, mostly on roads too narrow to have a painted center line.

That entire post was superb. Thanks for that.

Bill Strickland painted quite the picture of life inside a team car, in his Tour de Lance book. Total insanity. It really redefines "multi-tasking."


Btw, did anyone else catch the Milan-San Remo post-race, in-studio conversation with Magnus Bäckstedt on Eurosport? His take was to give each team one radio only. One road captain for each team gets wired up and that's it. I realize this is not a new idea, and there are many issues that this stirs up of course—what about a split in the field? what happens if that rider goes down?—but if a guy with Magnus' experience think it's a good solution then I wonder how both parties involved would feel about it?