I remember Stephen Roche arguing this back in 87.Andre.J said:I propose to cut the field down to avoid so many accidents. I think 9 riders per team is ridiculous; (it's not a baseball game); let's have 7 riders per team and only 20 teams. That would make a total of 140 riders instead of 198.
Just my 2 Euros
Andre
More teams with less riders means more cars and logistic demands. Race organisers have said many times they don't like the idea.Libertine Seguros said:If they cut the number of riders down, they'll just invite more teams, because there are more than 22 worthy teams out there.
There are so many crashes because so many people are nervous - unlike at other races, everybody at this race is using it as a peak. Everybody wants to showcase themselves at this race, and so everybody's on edge.
So, then keep the same number of teams, just reduce the number on the team. That will reduce the logistics by a lot.icefire said:More teams with less riders means more cars and logistic demands. Race organisers have said many times they don't like the idea.
no it wil reduce the numbers of riders per team by 1 or 2 (8 riders per team seems a better number than 7 - still allows a TTT where a team loses a member early due to an accident or whatnot without meaning they are at an instant disadvantage); the logistics (i.e. the number of cars etc) would stay virtually identical - they don't have 1 car per rider! Even reducing the team to 7 would hardly have an impact on the logistics, as again, each team doesn't have 7/8 cars. Also, with 7, you run the risk of more accidents simply due to increase workloads and exhaustion due to each domestique having to work 30%+ more in each stage - although less control for the sprint teams which could help more rbeaks stay away I suppose.Marva32 said:So, then keep the same number of teams, just reduce the number on the team. That will reduce the logistics by a lot.
I was thinking of logistics like hotels, printing costs and other things like thatScottyMuser said:no it wil reduce the numbers of riders per team by 1 or 2 (8 riders per team seems a better number than 7 - still allows a TTT where a team loses a member early due to an accident or whatnot without meaning they are at an instant disadvantage); the logistics (i.e. the number of cars etc) would stay virtually identical - they don't have 1 car per rider! Even reducing the team to 7 would hardly have an impact on the logistics, as again, each team doesn't have 7/8 cars. Also, with 7, you run the risk of more accidents simply due to increase workloads and exhaustion due to each domestique having to work 30%+ more in each stage - although less control for the sprint teams which could help more rbeaks stay away I suppose.
I remember the comment and Stevie pocketing (still) his share of the booty. I don't hear his son complaining either. The major change as several have noted is the amount of media motorcycles, dignatary vehicles, helicopters and sheer fans willing to mug for the camera. It's not much different than increased media exposure and the relation to NBA guys going for showtime dunks-they go together. There is added tension but you could cut the field in half and they'd still be twitchy.rhubroma said:I remember Stephen Roche arguing this back in 87.
The organizers are thinking too much with their pockets and not the safety of the riders (was his conclusion then).
The fans would then be crashing...into their pillows. What a snorefest that would be.wirral said:First week on the autoroutes, anyone?