Tour de France teams increased to 26!?

[sida-mot]

I'm not totally convinced that smaller teams means more interesting racing. Cyclists might play it safer since there just isn't any room to gamble with some guys.

More teams would also mean more cars and having a flat would have a larger impact than it currently have.

That being said I think the number nine was meant to allow teams to compete for several jerseys but it seems like the teams get more and more specialized and more or less come there with one objective. Which is a shame.

 

[ImmaculateKadence]

I'd love to see them decrease the number of riders per team, but not less than seven; it does seem like the perfect number for a team. I wonder then how decreasing the number of riders would affect the TTT. I know they aren't doing one at next year's Tour, but in future years. If the TTT is based on the fifth rider to cross the line, would they change that to the fourth rider, or even the third? How would it affect pulls, etc? What about teams with riders dropping off? It would put their time in serious jeopardy if there were a crash close to the back and three guys went down.

 

[Anonymous]

I'd love to see them decrease the number of riders per team, but not less than seven; it does seem like the perfect number for a team. I wonder then how decreasing the number of riders would affect the TTT. I know they aren't doing one at next year's Tour, but in future years. If the TTT is based on the fifth rider to cross the line, would they change that to the fourth rider, or even the third? How would it affect pulls, etc? What about teams with riders dropping off? It would put their time in serious jeopardy if there were a crash close to the back and three guys went down.

or do it as it should be.. TTT early and base it on the time of the last guy across the line.. none of this lark that garmin had where they drove their own riders off the back..

you should only be as strong as youre weakest link..

 

[Mellow Velo]

or do it as it should be.. TTT early and base it on the time of the last guy across the line.. none of this lark that garmin had where they drove their own riders off the back..

you should only be as strong as youre weakest link..

Favourites might as well draw straws to see who wins the Tour.
The element of good fortune would become ridiculously important.

 

[Anonymous]

Favourites might as well draw straws to see who wins the Tour.
The element of good fortune would become ridiculously important.

well no, the team just have to stick together and work together properly and support each other..

its not a team time trial, its a best five riders on your team time trial

 

[al_pacino]

well no, the team just have to stick together and work together properly and support each other..

its not a team time trial, its a best five riders on your team time trial

And someone falls and breaks their collar bone(or worse) and can't finish, what rule has to be made to get around this?

 

[Anonymous]

And someone falls and breaks their collar bone(or worse) and can't finish, what rule has to be made to get around this?

get up off the ground and stop moaning.. this is a mans sport... should have been more careful... collarbone didnt stop tyler hamilton..

nobody dnf the ttt this year as far as i know..

 

[Boeing]

Gonna be a problem for astana when they can't get off the back of the peloton

dude I spit beer on the keyboard

 

[Boeing]

Maybe from an industry sales perspective they have to fit in BMC because the the bikes need t sell in europe and hincape clothing is expanding. BOth with big money behind them

 

[Anonymous]

I think if the number of riders increase, then the ASO needs to adopt a 5km safe zone on bunch finishes. That is, GC time is neutralised when the peleton reaches the 5km zone, so that here is not 234 (26*9) riders trying to negotiate the final turn before a 500m sprint.

Even 180 riders negotiating the final bend is crazy enough, and a GC contender need not lose time because some muppet can't hold their line around a corner

With th 5km safe zone, time would be neutralised, and then the GC guys can drop out of the bunch, while the sprinters/leadout trains can contest the sprint. Note this idea is very different to the 3km puncture/crash zone. I'm saying that once the peleton reaches 5km to go, on a sprinter's stage, then the GC time is neutralised, and they can just roll to the finish

Everyone will disagree, but it's just a thought about the safety of 234 riders going around one corner at once...

 

[Anonymous]

I think if the number of riders increase, then the ASO needs to adopt a 5km safe zone on bunch finishes. That is, GC time is neutralised when the peleton reaches the 5km zone, so that here is not 234 (26*9) riders trying to negotiate the final turn before a 500m sprint.

Even 180 riders negotiating the final bend is crazy enough, and a GC contender need not lose time because some muppet can't hold their line around a corner

With th 5km safe zone, time would be neutralised, and then the GC guys can drop out of the bunch, while the sprinters/leadout trains can contest the sprint. Note this idea is very different to the 3km puncture/crash zone. I'm saying that once the peleton reaches 5km to go, on a sprinter's stage, then the GC time is neutralised, and they can just roll to the finish

Everyone will disagree, but it's just a thought about the safety of 234 riders going around one corner at once...

disagree big time.. it ruins it in the first week for people like EbH, Haussler etc who have the ability to do a 3k charge to pick up those handful of seconds they need, maybe for yellow...

I also think "protecting the GC guys" is bs.. they are cyclists, if they cant handle it, go play golf.. bad weather on cobbled finishes etc fine, but nah...

if its 26 teams , it will not be nine riders per team..

 

[L29205]

I also think "protecting the GC guys" is bs.. they are cyclists, if they cant handle it, go play golf.. bad weather on cobbled finishes etc fine, but nah...
.

+1
No one protects the sprinters in the mountains. I understand the rule but disagree. You need to make sure you are in the right place at the right time. It was part of the game. It needs to come back. Also, I would love to have more teams with less members but I would also suggest going to a completely neutral support. All teams give bikes, wheels, ect. to a support team and then the support is in charge of everyting.

 

[ImmaculateKadence]

or do it as it should be.. TTT early and base it on the time of the last guy across the line.. none of this lark that garmin had where they drove their own riders off the back..

you should only be as strong as youre weakest link..

Agreed.

I also think "protecting the GC guys" is bs.. they are cyclists, if they cant handle it, go play golf.. bad weather on cobbled finishes etc fine, but nah...

...and again

 

[Anonymous]

Note that my little 5km rule was only applicable IF AND ONLY IF there are 234 riders (26x9), and I completely understand why people disagreed with me. But it was said on the basis on the condition of 26 teams, 9 riders, which I personally think is way to many.

I'll also add that I would prefer 8 riders per team. In which case 25 teams, 8 riders each = 200 riders, is perfect.

 

[L29205]

I'll also add that I would prefer 8 riders per team. In which case 25 teams, 8 riders each = 200 riders, is perfect.

+1
Agreed, enough said

 

[Francois the Postman]

Ever since big money was able to buy all joy out of races, and the Tour in particular, by assembling ridiculously strong and controlling teams, I had hoped to see the team sizes reduced to 8 (or 7 - I can dream), mainly to knock some of this on the head. Buying your rivals into your service made the Tour bit by bit the least entertaining of the 3, IMO

If this year Vacansoleil can't make the cut because teams from must-have GT contenders plus the French also-ran teams fill all the available slots, then there is something wrong with the set-up. These folk were stellar last season and deserve a Tour for their tour de force efforts. I think even Skil added something to the Tour, and I remember how they were thanked by the Tour organisers for going for it when bigger teams decided to have their prom-queen protests.

Previously I wanted a reduction to 8 for reasons that were solely based on top team considerations. This year I think is the first time I am hoping to see it, to make space for all the teams I'd like to see race. (I can't see them taking 26 teams of 9 on the road).

That's actually quite a nice development, come to think of it.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

I agree with the others that we don't need a 5k rule. Many top GC racers learned to survive field sprints unscathed, it's part of the sport.

22 teams will be the max. 2 is totally unrealistic. 9 riders . Don't fix something that isn't broken.

In my opinion, it's almost broke, and could use a tune-up. This is why I recommend things like limiting team sizes to 7, and increasing wild card teams. At the very least, let's try it for a few races.

Favourites might as well draw straws to see who wins the Tour.The element of good fortune would become ridiculously important.

Not true Mellow. Take a look at the 1993 Tour. The TTT was an incredible 82km. Some argue Tony Rominger lost that tour as Banesto was 2nd in the TTT a few seconds behind MG-GB, with Clas 4 minutes back, and Tony was penalized for pushing a teammate. But we don't have TTT's that long anymore, not even close. More like half of that, or less.

At the very least, teams should only allow one rider to drop from an TTT. One could argue that would be only for crashes, or full mechanical (as in pedals on ground, team car comes to a stop). But only counting the top five riders is a silly rule.

 

[Anonymous]

Favourites might as well draw straws to see who wins the Tour.
The element of good fortune would become ridiculously important.

I agree. With punctures, crashes and other misfortunes are already enough to disrupt someones race

Not true Mellow. Take a look at the 1993 Tour. The TTT was an incredible 82km. Some argue Tony Rominger lost that tour as Banesto was 2nd in the TTT a few seconds behind MG-GB, with Clas 4 minutes back, and Tony was penalized for pushing a teammate. But we don't have TTT's that long anymore, not even close. More like half of that, or less.

Many teams in this years 40km TTT lost over 3 minutes, which as were saw, was quite devastating for riders like Evans and Menchov

At the very least, teams should only allow one rider to drop from an TTT. One could argue that would be only for crashes, or full mechanical (as in pedals on ground, team car comes to a stop). But only counting the top five riders is a silly rule.

Every stage is a team race. I think thats why the individual time trial is so important, because it's the race of truth.

A TTT where 9 or 8 or 7 riders have to stay together further disadvantages a strong individual on a weak team, which means at the end of 3 weeks there are less overall contenders. The TTT is also a race of truth. It reveals how strong your team is. But so do the other 18 or so stage were a team is vital.

Why further add a team element to a race where very often the strongest team wins? The TTT just exxagerates the margins between the top contenders, and potentially ruins a talented individual rider chance at winning.

In 20 stages, if there are only 2 individual TTs, then thats 18 stages that require a team!! Making an additional team stage, the TTT, and saying that all riders (or 8 etc) must finish together ruins the race, IMO.

I agree that having 5 ppl finish is a bit silly, probably as silly as my 5km rule I suggested (which I think I will retract now), then I think just get rid of the TTT. Bring it to the olympics road schedule, Bring it to the track, make it part of the Chronos des Nations, but just leave it out of a grand tour please.

 

[Mellow Velo]

I take issue with the TTT, full stop.
It handicaps the lower budget teams who may afford a star rider and perhaps a decent domestique or two, but cannot afford to simply buy in several engines to make their contender competitive.

As for my attitude towards all 9 riders having to finish together, the 2004 TTT, in the wind and rain is too fresh in my memory.

 

[El Imbatido]

Many teams in this years 40km TTT lost over 3 minutes, which as were saw, was quite devastating for riders like Evans and Menchov

Evans i would definitely argue that point but Menchov you could argue lost the tour as soon as the bank closed You know which bank i'm talking about. Oh....and staying on the bike might have helped too.....crashing every second stage didn't help.

 

[Anonymous]

Evans i would definitely argue that point but Menchov you could argue lost the tour as soon as the bank closed You know which bank i'm talking about. Oh....and staying on the bike might have helped too.....crashing every second stage didn't help.

haha i hear ya

if Dennis the Menace did lose his high yielding savings account at the bank in question, I wonder how he will perform next year...

...i hope everyone realises i'm still following your bank pun and not referring the RaboPlus savings account haha

 

[Irish2009]

I think 7 is perfect, no one team could afford to ride on the front all the time as the lesser teams(no offence) sit in conserving themselves, large breaks become a major danger as teams try and figure out what to do(& no radios?).

It would become a major tatical race between the GC teams while the other teams send people up the road......loving it already

 

[auscyclefan94]

I agree with the others that we don't need a 5k rule. Many top GC racers learned to survive field sprints unscathed, it's part of the sport.

In my opinion, it's almost broke, and could use a tune-up. This is why I recommend things like limiting team sizes to 7, and increasing wild card teams. At the very least, let's try it for a few races.

Not true Mellow. Take a look at the 1993 Tour. The TTT was an incredible 82km. Some argue Tony Rominger lost that tour as Banesto was 2nd in the TTT a few seconds behind MG-GB, with Clas 4 minutes back, and Tony was penalized for pushing a teammate. But we don't have TTT's that long anymore, not even close. More like half of that, or less.

At the very least, teams should only allow one rider to drop from an TTT. One could argue that would be only for crashes, or full mechanical (as in pedals on ground, team car comes to a stop). But only counting the top five riders is a silly rule.

Which race then would be the scapegoat to the 7 riders rule? NO Race Director wants a trial on their race.

 

[Galic Ho]

+1
No one protects the sprinters in the mountains. I understand the rule but disagree. You need to make sure you are in the right place at the right time. It was part of the game. It needs to come back. Also, I would love to have more teams with less members but I would also suggest going to a completely neutral support. All teams give bikes, wheels, ect. to a support team and then the support is in charge of everyting.

Like neutral service? Ever heard of a bribe. Especially in nations like Spain and Italy. I like both but don't expect them to be neutral. Favouritism and elitism is wrong. If your own team wants to stuff up your wheel change or bike change you must be a real @rse wipe. Can we get an audit on the neutrality of neutral service? Why bother having teams in such cases? Why not just get sponsors and pay the riders for where they finish. Teams are needed to organise the logistics and coordinate their staff and riding roster. Neutral service function to help riders when the team cars are obstructed from the front of the peloton. Expanding that role is unwise.