Team Time trials in Grand Tours

[auscyclefan94]

Team Time trials in Grand Tours...what are your opinions? In or out?

 

[Progsprach]

The problem with TTTs in GTs is (IMO) that short TTT don't really show everything a TTT is about (endurance, tactics) in the way longer ones do, but long ones weigh too heavily on the GC. My idea would be to rescale the times, e.g. if a 50km TTT is included the times only count half in the GC. That would be something I'd like to see tried and if it works one could even think about making some unconventional TTTs which require new tactics (e.g have a hill in different places) and rescaling would guarantee reasonable gaps.

 

[TheBean]

I think there is a place in the GT's for a TTT.

The promotion of gear for the bike and equipment manufacturers is good for the industry. The industry largely funds the sport, so it is therefore good for the sport, in general.

For the other sponsors, they get action photos and video of their team with no other teams' sponsors in the image. That is good for the sponsors, who also fun the sport. E.g. good for the sponsors = good for the sport.

For the fans, the TTT is visually stunning and I - for one - enjoy watching the TTT a great deal. Good for the fans - good for the sport.

This year, the short TTT follows a complicated transfer from an island to mainland France. That trip will be unusual for the Tour. Any rider who suffers from seasickness (admittedly an unlikely event) might have a difficult time. A 15 mile effort is almost as good as a rest day when it comes to recovery and/or rehabilitation of the many riders injured in the crashes during the early stages. Good for the riders = good for the sport.

By having a short TTT, the riders with the strongest teams willl gain a time advantage on their rivals while strong GC riders with weaker teams will not lose so much time that their GC hopes are completely dashed (that was an argument against the longer TTT's of past years).

Having the TTT early in a GT helps to reduce the chance that a team has lost many riders due to injury, abandoning, or missing a time cut.

Cycling is a team sport and there is nothing like a TTT to showcase a team working together without any outside influence from other riders.

I think the Tour organizers have done a masterful job planning our the first three stages - with the obvious exception of making sure the team's buses can all fit under the finish-line banner scaffolding. That was more than a little bit embarassing.

I also think they picked the right day for the TTT, an appropriate distance, and a great city to have as a host, given the cycling tradition of Nice.

The first week of several, if not all, of the past decade's Tours have been real yawners at times. Not this year, though. IMO, the TTT is going to be a great addition to the first week and I'm looking forward to watching!

 

[Tigerion]

This year, the short TTT follows a complicated transfer from an island to mainland France. That trip will be unusual for the Tour. Any rider who suffers from seasickness (admittedly an unlikely event) might have a difficult time.

Pretty sure the riders were all being flown out together so the transfer isn't as bad and they are all pretty much in the same 'boat'

I don't mind the TTT but prefer that it is a shorter distance to have a lower affect on GC. Having a Tony Martin and Fabian Cancellara shouldn't give Andy Schleck a large lead in GC based on time trial performance. The the ability to lose some time means that a team needs to think very carefully before bring a team of mountain doms with the intend to have a full team attack up a HC

 

[ElChingon]

Egh... don't really care for them as part of the overall race, can be a pre-Race team show off stage for marketing but as a a factor in the race.

If they ran them at the same time mano-a-mano then you'd have a very interesting stage, but as they are now, egh. Logistics, proximity of teams, TT bars and handling, all factors but I bet you would love to watch Same deal, 5th rider over the line marks the team time, drafting is OK (of other teams), sweepers on a team are legal (to discourage too much wheel sucking) but when 5 riders are left it makes it hard to sweep and get a good time.

 

[vrusimov]

The problem with TTTs in GTs is (IMO) that short TTT don't really show everything a TTT is about (endurance, tactics) in the way longer ones do, but long ones weigh too heavily on the GC. My idea would be to rescale the times, e.g. if a 50km TTT is included the times only count half in the GC. That would be something I'd like to see tried and if it works one could even think about making some unconventional TTTs which require new tactics (e.g have a hill in different places) and rescaling would guarantee reasonable gaps.

This has been done before in the Armstrong era Tours. The gripe by many riders was the fact that huge time losses due to their often times weaker teams would handicap them unfairly. It worked more or less but it certainly took some of the excitement out of the event. This compromise of shorter distance (15 miles) will serve to limit damages to the GC guys in much the same way. Personally, I have always thought that time trials have become less prominent since 89-91, when you had Dinard-Rennes, Vittel-Epinal and Argentan-Alencon. I think that after Luxembourg in 92, the distances would never again eclipse 40 miles.

 

[wwabbit]

I definitely like the idea of a long team time trial with the resultant time gaps being halved.
Would also like to have the team time trial being the first stage of the race.

 

[Afrank]

Nothing wrong with TTT in GT's. Just as long as their not so long that the more TT focused teams can put minutes into the teams weaker at the TT, go ahead and put them in. Or if they are long, make them more hilly.

 

[TheBean]

Pretty sure the riders were all being flown out together so the transfer isn't as bad and they are all pretty much in the same 'boat'

I just heard that on the commentary and said D'OH as I realized the foolishness of my comment. Good catch.

 

[dgodave]

Yes, but they should not contribute to the General Classification

So.... what would be the point of that?

 

[Dazed and Confused]

TTTs are part of cycling, its just another discipline. Looks pretty good on the telly too, if these are getting produced right with solid timing information.

Preferable they should be in the 15 - 20km range to avoid large disproportional GC gaps.

 

[Leadbelly]

I like them. They make a good spectacle for us watching at home.

Don't think there's any need to have one in every GT though. Just checked, and the Vuelta will have one this year too. So that makes three of out three for this year, which does seem a bit of overkill.

They should have one TTT-free GT per year (if not two) and they should keep it varied. Some short, some long, some flat, some lumpy etc. I thought the Giro TTT this year was quite a good one - varied terrain and quite technical to give different teams a chance.

[got a feeling of deja vu writing this - I'm sure I've written something like this before ]

 

[LaFlorecita]

Should not contribute to GC

Poor carrots

 

[del1962]

Would be better to replace TTT with longer individual ones, how awesome would a 100k individual time trial be on a route similar to first itt in Giro, that would sort the GC out properly.

 

[LaFlorecita]

Would be better to replace TTT with longer individual ones, how awesome would a 100k individual time trial be on a route similar to first itt in Giro, that would sort the GC out properly.

yea that would be a great idea

 

[jens_attacks]

there should be but only longer than 50-60 kms. those ones from today are a disgrace and should not happen at all.

 

[Netserk]

TTTs belong to the track.

 

[SetonHallPirate]

Should not contribute to GC

Poor carrots

Yes, poor Team Azenarioa!

(I'm going to keep using that for a while, see if anybody picks up on it...)

 

[RedheadDane]

I like them! But they shouldn't play too big a role in the GC.
Also; not every year...

 

[Bavarianrider]

TTT should be at least 60km

 

[cycladianpirate]

This is a bit of a hobby-horse of mine, but if you were to reintroduce bonifications (and substantial ones at that), then the TTT would be perfectly acceptable (even at a greater distance).

Let teams decide how and where they want to pick up time - do you select mountain goats to help your leader in the hilly stages, or big engines to pick up time in the TTT, or a bit of both? It would make stage racing more balanced IMHO.

As things stand, a 50km TTT could mean over 2 mins advantage which, in today's climate, is an unwieldy advantage.

 

[Bavarianrider]

At least next yearr there'll be a 40km TTT. A step in the right direction.

 

[Gugashwill]

Yes, there should be.
And the course for it should be designed to show its all beauty and complexity.
Some very long stretches (in crosswinds if it's possible) some medium sharp to sharp turns, winding sections and rolling ones.
Also it should be long enough to demand precise calculations in sense of riders' ability, order and length of their turns depending from terrain.
There's, off course, that problem about time differences between the teams, and it's not easy to be solved. A hard solution wold be - you're World Tour teams, the best in business, you know what's waiting for you - make appropriate teams.
A soft and more fair solution would be limiting time differences as it was done some time ago (2004, 2005 I think). Similar to time bonuses on the finish.

 

[Dekker_Tifosi]

yes but longer.. perfect gt would be 5 mt top finishes, 3 mt stages with downhill finishes, 2 30km itts, 1 hilly, 1 flat, 1 50km TTT, and rest flat stages

 

[Eyeballs Out]

Personally, I find them tedious to watch. The final result is interesting but once you've seen one team riding in formation you've seen them all. On TV it's difficult to see who is doing what within the team because the coverage naturally jumps around from team to team

Some form of relay race would be more fun to watch in my opinion