The Crostis Descent

[Ferminal]

Yeah, some of the best descenders are sprinters Rasmussen will still take risks to stay inside the time limit.

David Harmon on British Eurosport is questioning the logic of ending Paolo Savoldelli to see if the Crositis is ok to down on. Surely you would a **** descender to go down as well to see what they think, because Il Falco is going to find it easier then what a lot of people do.

I think it's good for two reasons:

1) He is only recently retired, so will be more in touch with the peloton, and will understand their concerns - I doubt he will go there as a puppet of Zomegnan to give the "green light".

2) You would expect him to push it, he should test it out at speeds only a few will challenge in the race.

It's not about being easy, it's about being safe. Maybe they could also send a less able descender to go down at slower speeds and see if they find it safe.

It's hard to know when to listen to the peloton's concerns and when to ignore them. If there was some sort of official representation of the riders who could look out for their safety it would be a lot easier. Many complained about the safety of riding over cobbles in a TdF didn't they. It's hard to know when they genuinely feel concerned for their safety or when they just don't want to go somewhere (and who would want to go up and down Crostis before Zoncolan). The only quotes that actually matter at this stage are those who have run it (Contador etc).

 

[Jamsque]

Wouldn't be the Giro without a rider protest.

 

[Bavarianrider]

Sorry, but i am sick ot today's riders, they are such a disgrace to the heroes of the old days. These guys must turn in their graves. If today's riders can't even control their bikes on gravel they should look for another job. But when you look at those human sekeletons, it's actually no wonder they can't.
If the track is worse then usually then adjust your speed, that's all. So go down the Crostis at 45 nstead of 80 and you're fine. But it seems they have not enough brian capacity to do so. 80% of those ****ers rides without helmet during training all the time. That's far more dangerous then going down the Crostis at a reasonable speed. They take any ****ing drug they can get, that's more dangerous then going dwon the Crostis.

But ok, why not make a speed limit on the Crostis, let's say 50km/h. Simply instal to secret points were the speed gets measured, and every rider who's above 50 gets ejected from te Giro. Would be a easy way to make the downhill safe, and have a good race up the Crostis nevertheless.

 

[thirteen]

<snip>
It's hard to know when to listen to the peloton's concerns and when to ignore them. If there was some sort of official representation of the riders who could look out for their safety it would be a lot easier. Many complained about the safety of riding over cobbles in a TdF didn't they. It's hard to know when they genuinely feel concerned for their safety or when they just don't want to go somewhere (and who would want to go up and down Crostis before Zoncolan). The only quotes that actually matter at this stage are those who have run it (Contador etc).

i agree.

i've been looking forward to this stage from the time it was announced but i'm not holding my breath for it happening now... but it's really hard to judge, having never been there.

from photos (minus the tilt) and videos, it doesn't look more dangerous than some TDF stages we've driven on in the past.

as you pointed out, the cobbles last year were a great example of what riders didn't want to do rather than safety concerns... and how about the stage Cancellara effectively neutralised after safety concerns were moot?

i'd rather the decision be made rationally rather than based on emotions of the moment and/or what teams might think could lessen their rider's chances...

 

[Parrulo]

i agree.

i've been looking forward to this stage from the time it was announced but i'm not holding my breath for it happening now... but it's really hard to judge, having never been there.

from photos (minus the tilt) and videos, it doesn't look more dangerous than some TDF stages we've driven on in the past.

as you pointed out, the cobbles last year were a great example of what riders didn't want to do rather than safety concerns... and how about the stage Cancellara effectively neutralised after safety concerns were moot?

i'd rather the decision be made rationally rather than based on emotions of the moment and/or what teams might think could lessen their rider's chances...

cancellara didn't neutralize the stage because he was concerned with safety issues he did because the schlecks fell and were losing time and he wanted the peloton to wait for them

 

[Ferminal]

cancellara didn't neutralize the stage because he was concerned with safety issues he did because the schlecks fell and were losing time and he wanted the peloton to wait for them

Which proves the point - that the lines between safety and self-interest are often blurred.

 

[Frosty]

Extending the time limit would make sense to me, its going to be ridden very hard at the front. Obviously you still would have the first 30 guys at the front descending at top speed. I was trying to think of a way of neutralising the descent but am not sure how that could work. However, say the standard time to descend from the top to a certain point is judged to be 20 minutes. You tell people that they will be starting from that point in, say, 24 minutes time, thereby maintaining the time gaps, etc, but without people having to take risks. Could be awkward if everyone is close together but i would have thought that it will get quite spaced out. Of course even this could make it awkward with some people backing off while others want to get to the bottom as quickly as possible to get drinks bottles, food etc.

Any sort of neutralisation is not going to be to some people's tastes and some people will scoff at this idea but IF the descent is as bad as people are suggesting then it could be a way of still getting the climb in?

 

[thirteen]

cancellara didn't neutralize the stage because he was concerned with safety issues he did because the schlecks fell and were losing time and he wanted the peloton to wait for them

Which proves the point - that the lines between safety and self-interest are often blurred.

which is exactly why i included that example.

 

[131313]

Sorry, but i am sick ot today's riders, they are such a disgrace to the heroes of the old days. These guys must turn in their graves. If today's riders can't even control their bikes on gravel they should look for another job. But when you look at those human sekeletons, it's actually no wonder they can't.
If the track is worse then usually then adjust your speed, that's all. So go down the Crostis at 45 nstead of 80 and you're fine. But it seems they have not enough brian capacity to do so. 80% of those ****ers rides without helmet during training all the time. That's far more dangerous then going down the Crostis at a reasonable speed. They take any ****ing drug they can get, that's more dangerous then going dwon the Crostis.

But ok, why not make a speed limit on the Crostis, let's say 50km/h. Simply instal to secret points were the speed gets measured, and every rider who's above 50 gets ejected from te Giro. Would be a easy way to make the downhill safe, and have a good race up the Crostis nevertheless.

you sound like you just don't like modern bike racing. You should probably just go rent some videos from the 'olden' days' and stick with that.

 

[la.margna]

why not either

1) neutralise the descent, so let the riders at the bottom start with the time differences from the top of the Crostis

2) create two semi-stages. first to the Crostis. Second from bottom of Crostis decent to Zoncolan. but not a too long pause inbetween!

why not? can somebody call Zomegnan please?

or

3) just be more careful when descending. is it written somewhere that you must rocket down and risk your life? is it written somewhere that you have to win a GT in time trials and/or climbs? why not once a strong descender with advantage? don't risk your life guys!

 

[DirtyWorks]

But Contador spoke of precipices, and I think it gives a pretty good idea of those. The guy has won five grand tours, and done other stage races with serious climbs, like Paris-Nice and the Dauphine, in inclement weather. For him to come out and say that he hopes it will snow so they don't have to ride it, or that maybe he'll have someone give him a mountain bike before the descent, or that even in the relative safety of a car, his hair still stood on end, is saying something.

It's saying he doesn't like the opportunity technical descents present to good bike handlers can use descents to get back on his wheel. He's not a good descender and he knows it.

I was going to start a 'white roads' thread, but this one is close enough. I'm all for the use of primitive road sectors in all road racing. It adds many elements to an event like equipment management, dumb luck, and bike handling.

I'd agree with anyone who has complaints about a rider getting stuck in the caravan on primitive roads though. This part needs work and I don't think the DS's in the cars would like my solution.

 

[DirtyWorks]

just be more careful when descending. is it written somewhere that you must rocket down and risk your life? is it written somewhere that you have to win a GT in time trials and/or climbs? why not once a strong descender with advantage? don't risk your life guys!

Forget all those other suggestions. The last one is best.

 

[VeloFidelis]

If anything good can be salvaged from the horrific recent events at the Giro, it might be a renewed understanding that the spectacle of professional cycling, which we all know and love is inherently dangerous, and that the riders the bear all the risk. If they find a collective voice that helps them minimize that risk, and take a more active part in determining the conditions under which they race, it will be a minor positive outcome.

For us fans it should serve as a reminder that we should not be so cavalier in dismissing the rider's concerns about safety on any issue as a political agenda. They deserve our respect and the right to be heard as a major stakeholder in professional cycling.

 

[DirtyWorks]

If anything good can be salvaged from the horrific recent events at the Giro, it might be a renewed understanding that the spectacle of professional cycling, which we all know and love is inherently dangerous, and that the riders the bear all the risk. If they find a collective voice that helps them MANAGE that risk, and take a more active part in determining the conditions under which they race, it will be a minor positive outcome.

Changed that for you. The use of manage instead of minimize is important. I read the implications of minimize to limit the use of roads that are technically challenging. I don't agree with this and feel it turns the sport into a boring power contest. The use of manage suggests that the organizer balances challenging roads with good information, good EMT response, good crowd control, etc.

 

[LugHugger]

If anything good can be salvaged from the horrific recent events at the Giro, it might be a renewed understanding that the spectacle of professional cycling, which we all know and love is inherently dangerous, and that the riders the bear all the risk. If they find a collective voice that helps them minimize that risk, and take a more active part in determining the conditions under which they race, it will be a minor positive outcome.

For us fans it should serve as a reminder that we should not be so cavalier in dismissing the rider's concerns about safety on any issue as a political agenda. They deserve our respect and the right to be heard as a major stakeholder in professional cycling.

Monday's descent was safely negotiated by nearly 200 riders and was no more dangerous than the majority of roads used by the professional tour. I'm not sure that the same can be said for the Crostis.

The riders bear individual responsibility for the way that they ride their bikes. And the race organiser has responsibility for their collective safety.

 

[Granville57]

I've posted this slideshow of Contador's recon of the stage before. I look at photo 6, and realize that it's on the ascent, and it's a curve that actually has a bit of guard rail (that wouldn't do much for a bike). But Contador spoke of precipices, and I think it gives a pretty good idea of those.
http://www.hln.be/hln/nl/7988/sport...rkent-vreselijke-Monte-Crostis-uit-Giro.dhtml

Thanks for that. This looks...ominous.

One of the things that makes a GT route interesting to me, is how realistic it is. That is, does it look like something I would enjoy riding. We all have our favorite training rides and favorite punishing rides.

I agree that many of these roads look like they'd be a blast to "explore" but the real concern for me is the addition of not only race speed (even if it's pulled back considerably) but of the caravan of vehicles.

I do not envy the guys on the motos during this stage. I wouldn't want to be in a team car either.

 

[LugHugger]

Thanks for that. This looks...ominous.

I agree that many of these roads look like they'd be a blast to "explore" but the real concern for me is the addition of not only race speed (even if it's pulled back considerably) but of the caravan of vehicles.

I do not envy the guys on the motos during this stage. I wouldn't want to be in a team car either.

this particular photo is clearly taken using a fish eye lens which exaggerates the perspective. i would not use this to judge 'precipices'.

 

[Granville57]

this particular photo is clearly taken using a fish eye lens which exaggerates the perspective. i would not use this to judge 'precipices'.

Oh I agree, there is distortion in the field effect, to be sure. But my main point is that the caravan will compound all the aspects of such a road. It could become quite treacherous when several vehicles are added.

Which brings up one more point:
The race organizers also have a responsibility to the press corps. It's not just the rider's safety that needs to be taken into consideration. I'm not saying I think the stage should be re-routed or cancelled though. I'm not taking sides because I haven't experienced it first-hand, and I'm not the one that has to contend with it either way.

As a fan, the potential for an exhilarating stage is undeniable. I just don't want to witness anything foolish.

 

[hrotha]

Is this really the Crostis?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yM2C5MOfnzs&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XO95SbT-C80&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L91b_xKPifs&feature=related

If it is, I say "hell no that's impossible".

 

[Dutchsmurf]

I think the riders will be able to get down there just fine. I'm more afraid of the motorcycles. They always tend to be really close to the cyclists during the Giro, often too close. If that happens on that descend...

 

[VeloFidelis]

Monday's descent was safely negotiated by nearly 200 riders and was no more dangerous than the majority of roads used by the professional tour. I'm not sure that the same can be said for the Crostis.

The riders bear individual responsibility for the way that they ride their bikes. And the race organiser has responsibility for their collective safety.

And if the riders feel that their collective safety is being put at risk, they have a responsibility to each other to act on that. Ours as fans, is to appreciate the considerable risks already being widely accepted as part of professional cycling by the riders, and not to trivialize concerns they raise, and consider beyond acceptable as less than legitimate, regardless of their nature.

 

[Barrus]

I think the riders will be able to get down there just fine. I'm more afraid of the motorcycles. They always tend to be really close to the cyclists during the Giro, often too close. If that happens on that descend...

To be quite honest, this year has been great with the motorcycles, at descents they remain at a reasonable distance and in general stay out of the way of the riders

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Is this really the Crostis?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yM2C5MOfnzs&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XO95SbT-C80&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L91b_xKPifs&feature=related

If it is, I say "hell no that's impossible".

Starting from Ravascletto, it can only really be Crostis or Zoncolán, and we can rule out Zoncolán. It looks like he climbs up the side they'll be descending.

From the looks of it, apart from a short stretch when he first goes to the off-road surface, most of the strade bianche stuff is perfectly passable and most of it is flat. There's only the bit where they first go on it, and then starting at about 3 minutes into part 2, that makes me think "oh christ". The big problem is the cars. They may have to leave the cars in Ovaro and follow the riders with bikes like on Kronplatz. Well, that and the inevitability of multiple punctures. Which could lead to a lot of riders standing by the side of the "road" waiting for support.

That video is seven months old, and you'd hope that Zomegnan's changes have seen various improvements since - but the road will have been impassable and practically inaccessible for much of that.

 

[UpTheRoad]

Is this really the Crostis?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yM2C5MOfnzs&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XO95SbT-C80&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L91b_xKPifs&feature=related

If it is, I say "hell no that's impossible".

That doesn't look more than 1.5 - 2 motorcycles wide for most of the way (first video), although there was a car on the road at one point. The pics from Contador's training ride/recon and some of the others that have surfaced appear to have wider roads.

If this is the road they will use, the crowds will have to be kept off the road.

I hope the organizers keep the route as planned. If this is, in fact, Monte Crostis, this will be an unbelievable climb/descent on an unbelievable stage

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

OMG! Monte Crostis!