Tour de France Time Bonuses

Irondan

Administrator
Moderator
Tonton said:
No time bonuses. None.
ARTICLE 26 - Bonifications
Des bonifications sont attribuées dans toutes les arrivées des étapes en ligne, donc à l’exception des étapes contre la montre « individuel » et « par équipe ». Elles sont de 10, 6 et 4 secondes aux trois premiers coureurs classés.

Translated to English:

ARTICLE 26 - Bonuses
Bonuses are awarded for all Arrivals of the stages , so with the exception steps against time "individual" and " Team ". They are 10, 6 and 4 seconds the first three riders .
 
There was already a little discussion about that in the "tour de france route thread" but I will write it here again.
I think time bonuses support attacks on the last few kilometers of a mtf.
Let me make an example:
Chris Froome wins every single mtf after an attack from only 1 km before the finish, but each time he wins only by 15 seconds on nibali, who gets 2nd. Nibali however isolates froome on the glandon which leads to a big time gap between these two and at the end nibali wins with 1:30 advantage on froome who only gets 4th because he has to make most of the work. Now lets say there are no time differences between these two in the other stages which would mean nibali would win in a tour without bonus seconds while froome would win by one second in a tour with bonus seconds.

I know that example is extremely far fetched but here comes the point: Normally you have to make long range attacks to get a big amount of time on your rivals (which is definitely more exciting to watch). But you can't do long range attacks on every hard mountain stage because you have to spend much energy for that --> you can't win every mountain stage with this tactic while you can with the "attacking from one km to go" tactic. So because of time bonuses the more boring tactic gets supported.
 
Gigs_98 said:
There was already a little discussion about that in the "tour de france route thread" but I will write it here again.
I think time bonuses support attacks on the last few kilometers of a mtf.
Let me make an example:
Chris Froome wins every single mtf after an attack from only 1 km before the finish, but each time he wins only by 15 seconds on nibali, who gets 2nd. Nibali however isolates froome on the glandon which leads to a big time gap between these two and at the end nibali wins with 1:30 advantage on froome who only gets 4th because he has to make most of the work. Now lets say there are no time differences between these two in the other stages which would mean nibali would win in a tour without bonus seconds while froome would win by one second in a tour with bonus seconds.

I know that example is extremely far fetched but here comes the point: Normally you have to make long range attacks to get a big amount of time on your rivals (which is definitely more exciting to watch). But you can't do long range attacks on every hard mountain stage because you have to spend much energy for that --> you can't win every mountain stage with this tactic while you can with the "attacking from one km to go" tactic. So because of time bonuses the more boring tactic gets supported.
There are pluses and minuses to both points.

For example, the 2009 Vuelta was killed by the time bonuses, because Alejandro Valverde had the maillot oro from the end of week 1 onwards. Because Valverde was stronger in the sprint for the line, the opposition did not work to chase breaks and go for the stage wins because if they didn't shake Valverde he'd add to his lead by picking off the time bonuses after following them, which as race leader he is obviously entitled to do. With the tame ending to the race, Caisse just let the break go over and over again and nobody chased it down because of the fear of Valverde adding to his lead, with the TT the only chance to pull back on him.

However, at the same time, the Tour was hurt by not having time bonuses, because the lack of time bonuses combined with the awkward design of some of the mountain stages meant that the stage wins ceased to be of interest to major contenders. For the whole of week 2 you had Ag2r with the maillot jaune that they took because Astana and Saxo had no intention of chasing down the Brice Feillu break on one of the very few mountain stages that year, and the breakaway went, unchallenged. The break took most of the main stages, including the Mont Ventoux shootout that the ASO had staked the race's excitement value on. There was no incentive for the main contenders to be up at the front, and therefore there was no incentive for them to put early pressure on in the stage to make sure they could haul back the break, meaning legs were less tired, meaning gaps were fewer, and only really the excellent Le Grand Bornand stage saved the race.

Whether the time bonuses aid or hurt the racing really depends on who has the lead and what the design of the race is in order for others to feel like they can dethrone them.
 
Jun 30, 2014
7,060
0
0
Maybe I sound like an angry old man, but I just don't like bonus seconds, gaps should be created on the road and not artificially.
 
Jul 29, 2012
11,703
3
0
Re:

Mayomaniac said:
Maybe I sound like an angry old man, but I just don't like bonus seconds, gaps should be created on the road and not artificially.
It isn't, you earn it on the road.
 
May 3, 2011
1,791
0
0
Re:

Mayomaniac said:
Maybe I sound like an angry old man, but I just don't like bonus seconds, gaps should be created on the road and not artificially.
This. The winner of the race should be the one who completes the course in the shortest time. Time bonuses create situations like the 2011 Vuelta.

Wining a stage should be its own reward.
 
irondan said:
Tonton said:
No time bonuses. None.
ARTICLE 26 - Bonifications
Des bonifications sont attribuées dans toutes les arrivées des étapes en ligne, donc à l’exception des étapes contre la montre « individuel » et « par équipe ». Elles sont de 10, 6 et 4 secondes aux trois premiers coureurs classés.

Translated to English:

ARTICLE 26 - Bonuses
Bonuses are awarded for all Arrivals of the stages , so with the exception steps against time "individual" and " Team ". They are 10, 6 and 4 seconds the first three riders .
I know the rules: and so what? I'm against time bonuses. Period.

Je connais le reglement: et alors? Je suis contre les bonifications. Point final.
 
When GTs can be decided by a handful of seconds, the very idea that a rider can win or podium by aggregate time and end up losing due to something so artificial gives me an ulcer. Give away money, free airfare for life to Tenerife, a date with one of the Kardashians, anything. Not time. Some may disagree. I don't :D .
 
Libertine Seguros said:
For example, the 2009 Vuelta was killed by the time bonuses, because Alejandro Valverde had the maillot oro from the end of week 1 onwards.

However, at the same time, the Tour was hurt by not having time bonuses, because the lack of time bonuses combined with the awkward design of some of the mountain stages meant that the stage wins ceased to be of interest to major contenders.
First paragraph: I agree that the '09 Vuelta Valverde (team La Vie Pas Claire) was/is quite outstanding ;) .

Second paragraph: agree, but I'm not so sure that lack of time bonuses and course design are to blame. How about ear pieces, HR monitors, and the likes, that make riders listen to numbers instead of listening to their instincts (good or bad)? Finally, how much is lack of interest, and how much is lack of hunger and panache? For one '14 Nibbles, how many top guys choose the conservative "hang on close until the final ITT" approach, or wait for the last 2K of a MTF to attack?
 
In a GT the principle of who gets from A to U, so to speak, in the quickest time should remain. Lesser races are made more exciting (this year's California), but GTs are too important for frivolity.
 
Oct 6, 2009
5,273
2
0
10-6-4 bugs me. Why should 3rd place get a higher advantage over 4th place than 2nd place gets over 3rd?

If they're going to use them, why not 10-6-3 or 10-5-2 or some other arrangement? It's just weird to have that tiny gap between 2nd and 3rd.
 
Atleast we no longer have to endure Cancellara in yellow for 10 days.

It is really ridiculous how many yellow jerseys he has. He had to win the prologue and then the next 5 stages it was impossible to overtake him. Happy the bonuses are back
 
Re:

Billie said:
Atleast we no longer have to endure Cancellara in yellow for 10 days.

It is really ridiculous how many yellow jerseys he has. He had to win the prologue and then the next 5 stages it was impossible to overtake him. Happy the bonuses are back
Only because the one time they actually put a difficult stage in the first week he neutralized the stage (he still lost the jersey to Chavanel, who he then attacked the next day when Sylvain punctured on the cobbles to get it back).

On the other hand, if Cancellara picks up the yellow jersey at the start that means they started the race with a prologue instead of a TTT which is always preferable. Of course, when they've had road stages to start it's been different; starting with a flat stage is just asking for trouble because everybody wants to protect something and there's bound to be crashes like in 2013; they try to negate this with a puncheur finish sometimes, which worked well in 2008, but not so well in 2011 when people crashing outside the last 3km were then held up by a road blocked by another crash inside the last 3km, so got double-penalized because those in the second crash didn't lose any time, but those in the first crash lost the original time plus the time lost because of being held up by the second crash.

However, if there must be time bonuses, they MUST be consistent. Applying them in some stages but not all like the Giro did one year is simply ridiculous and more artificial than having them uniformly. Look at the situation with the Tour of California, where Sagan collected more seconds in bonuses than were available to Alaphilippe because the hilly and mountainous stages didn't offer any, and then the GC was settled on flat stage time bonuses that Alaphilippe couldn't get. Now apply that to a GT and watch sparks fly! After all, both Cobo and Froome knew the rules on time bonuses when they went in, that's why Froome was chasing the time bonuses in intermediate sprints in week 3, because his team had held him back for Wiggins when Cobo had popped up to gain seemingly insignificant time on a couple of stages, most notably La Covatilla.
 
Mar 13, 2015
2,637
0
0
Re: Re:

Richeypen said:
Mayomaniac said:
Maybe I sound like an angry old man, but I just don't like bonus seconds, gaps should be created on the road and not artificially.
This. The winner of the race should be the one who completes the course in the shortest time. Time bonuses create situations like the 2011 Vuelta.

Wining a stage should be its own reward.
What situation? Strongest guy won there...
 
Re:

Beech Mtn said:
10-6-4 bugs me. Why should 3rd place get a higher advantage over 4th place than 2nd place gets over 3rd?

If they're going to use them, why not 10-6-3 or 10-5-2 or some other arrangement? It's just weird to have that tiny gap between 2nd and 3rd.
Or 9-6-4-3-2-1 while we're at it, and ask Nikki Lauda if he wants to ride a bike with the '70s-'80s point system? I can't believe it!!! (Nothing personal here, just me venting). And next year give the green jersey a spin? First one out of the shower gets 2 points? Or slap a guy running alongside you in the mountains and get an extra KOM point? That one I would agree with :D .
 
If i remember correctly, in 1974 the bonusses on flat stages were 20-12-8 for flat stages. Plus 6-4-2 for intermediate sprints. The early part of the tour was taken over by a sprinting battle between Merckx, Karstens and Sercu (all holding the yellow jersey at some point). The french press went crazy complaining that merckx gained almost 3 mins from bonusses. They figured that without them (and poupou's bonk on galibier) poupou might have been able to win. Lots of ifs. Particularly since there were also 1 min bonusses for the rider cresting the Ventoux and the Tourmalet first in mid-stage. The rest of the time bonuses were then directly calculated on how far behind you were at the top.

Not surprisingly it was the last time they did that.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY