too many riders

Jun 16, 2009
461
0
0
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
 
I have no problems reducing the size of each team in order to make it harder for the sprinter teams to control the race. However, I don't think that subtracting riders will definitely make the race safer. The accidents that were shown on TV today didn't really look like the number of riders made a huge difference. They instead appeared to be caused by carelessness on the half of the different riders with the exception of the one in which the motorbike took down a Saxo Bank rider. The problem is that all the riders are going so hard and want to be at the front and it looks like nerves take over at times especially during the first week.
 
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.
 
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
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).
 
Sep 21, 2009
2,978
0
0
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.
More teams with less riders means more cars and logistic demands. Race organisers have said many times they don't like the idea.
 
Jul 14, 2009
270
0
9,030
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.
So, then keep the same number of teams, just reduce the number on the team. That will reduce the logistics by a lot.
 
Jan 6, 2010
194
0
0
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.
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.
 
Jul 14, 2009
270
0
9,030
ScottyMuser 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 was thinking of logistics like hotels, printing costs and other things like that
 
Aug 28, 2010
398
0
0
We could do that.

Or - riders could stop half wheeling behind people, and actually hold a straight line which could help things. I understand the argument of "pros are excellent bike handlers because they ride so many miles", but how many of those miles are done in a bunch outside of racing, and if you don't work on bike handling skills, you'll be a danger in the bunch.

When I was watching the coverage the other night, they had a camera mounted on one of the riders bikes, showing a view from inside the bunch. There's guys half wheeling (as in, rather than sitting directly behind a rider, they have part of their front wheel overlapping the rear wheel of the guy in front), weaving from side to side and generally making things unsafe in the bunch. Calls through the bunch about dangers on the road seem to be few to non-existant. I saw Thor Hushovd call out a sign in the middle of the road, and only at the last second were riders moving, and no one was relaying the calls.

Sure, this is a race, but safety should be foremost in a riders mind so they can get to the finish and actually contest for the win.

Additionally, more riders (well, the current count of 198) means that there's more people displaying their sponsors on TV. That's what counts these days. Running a team is quite possibly getting to be very expensive, especially with the cost of fuel and food, so the more air time a sponsor gets, the more inclined they are to keep putting money into cycling. Remember - professional sports are only classed as professional because of the money.
 
Mar 10, 2009
6,158
1
0
Nine is good, its not the amount of riders but the aggressiveness and what is at stake that's the problem. If the prizes were a coupon for a free loaf of bread there would be less accidents, up the ante and well you have le Tour and the issues associated with it. Most riders make a whole career out of one stage win as well, heck a day in Yellow good as gold.

I do think if the GC boys and their assigned domestiques would just lay off at the intermediate sprints they'd of avoided a lot of the crash follies. Its not like the sprinters will be a threat to them in GC anyway or their associated lead out guys. If some stage seeker or yellow jersey seeker sneaks off well he'll pay the price down the road anyway, much like a breakaway rider that gets away.
 
With riders getting sick and having falls or just being out of form and not completing the race, I would not be reducing the field size. Maybe the organisers in their attempts to take the race to the four corners of France have to look more carefully at the roads they are using. Some of them are just too narrow but then again the teams know that before the stage starts. To me this is just a typical first week in the TDF. No better or worse than usual re crashes and bad luck which is just part of racing bikes.
 
Aug 4, 2009
1,056
0
0
Rolling along narrow roads talking will always cause accidents speed it up and stop the talking string the feild out in a single line and all will well.
Put the hammer down
 
Jan 27, 2011
3,399
0
0
Less f'ing motorbikes with brilliant people from the press on the back, look at the police motorbikes nobody notices them. They arent bothering any riders and they just drive on, but then those tools with a camera feel the need to take a picture of whatever you do while not caring about your safety.. Personally I wouldnt mind if there wouldve been 2 motors with cameras in the whole tour.
 
Apr 28, 2009
1,205
0
0
Let's make the first 2-3 stages even more dangerous with more falls and broken bones, and we'll suddenly have 25-30 riders less from stage 4 onwards, without leaving anyone at home.
 
Jun 19, 2009
5,220
0
0
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).
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.
 
I think they should have wider roads. I think the teams are neccesary unless if we want to go back to individuals. To be a team i think there needs to be 9 riders minimum. In WC there should be more than 9 for the best team.
 
Jul 5, 2010
943
0
0
Put a serious mountain at the start of the Tour so half of the contenders know there is no point in staying at the front anymore. That should solve more than reducing the numbers or riders. It doesn't really matter if 60 out of 198 want to be in the first 30 positions or 60 out of 140.
 
they just need to make sure that the flatter stages that are going to have a huge bunch are on a bit wider roads.

Narrow roads, high winds and a huge peleton is always going to mean pretty nervous riders and lots of crashes.

Narrow roads in the mountains isnt a huge issue.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS