What if race timing were actual time across the line?

[Krebs cycle]

Just an idea for discussion here. With the commentary surrounding the value of "being up front" to avoid crashing what would be the consequences of a timing policy which records the actual time that a rider crosses the line and then you are given that time as opposed to same time for finishing in the bunch? Thus if you're down the back of the bunch you could potentially loose 3 or 4 sec to someone up front.

Would this make the racing too dangerous due to fighting for position on every stage or would it make things more exciting and add another tactical element to the race? Would this add to the excitment of cycling as a spectator sport?

Sometimes I have to wonder about stages in which the break is allowed to get away. The bunch containing the GC contenders often doesn't race to the line (on stages without hill or mtn finishes) they just roll over and so its rather uneventful sometimes watching a stage race when only seconds separates the GC rivals but nobody is actually racing to the line except the guys up the road.

*Nb: last 3km usual rules would of course still apply and there would just need to be a clear policy on exactly what time is given in the event of a crash eg: only if a crash occurs then the actual time across the line rule becomes nullified and so everyone gets the same time.

 

[The Hitch]

The favourites used to have a pact where they pull back and cross the line later than the sprinters to avoid crashes. Would probably see that.

 

[yetanothergreenworld]

Friends who aren't cycling fans ask me this all the time. I tell them that it's not just a safety thing but also reflects the reality that in road cycling, unlike in running or mountain biking (or even uphill finishes in road races) riding in packs is an inescapable strategic element of the sport. In road cycling the speeds are such that working in a group is a positive necessity and not just something that happens by default; when you cross the line with ten other guys, it's often because you were trying to stay and work with them in the first place.

 

[Alex Simmons/RST]

It would only be reasonable if the field of play was wide enough to permit all riders a fair opportunity to move ahead of their opponents.

 

[GuyIncognito]

Mass crashes everywhere

 

[Roude Leiw]

Would hate it. Flat finishes should be for the teams who know what they do, no point that some 55kg Colombians try to stay in front to avoid 6 times 4 sec lost in the 6 flat stages of a GT in the first week. All you will do is provoke crashes. I could also conceive that for flat, but technical endings (corners, roundabouts,...) the time is taken before they enter the urban area. This will allow a lot of people to take it easy and not jockey for position. I hate it when the likes of Saxo/Sky et al mix it up with the sprint teams until the 3km to go and cause nothing but trouble.

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

*Nb: last 3km usual rules would of course still apply and there would just need to be a clear policy on exactly what time is given in the event of a crash eg: only if a crash occurs then the actual time across the line rule becomes nullified and so everyone gets the same time.

So a convention would arise whereby domestiques from GC relevant teams whose principals are not well placed on the stage bump into each other at the back of the bunch with 500m left: group neutralised. This happens a dozen or so times, and the rule reverts to what it is now.

 

[willbick]

Would hate it. Flat finishes should be for the teams who know what they do, no point that some 55kg Colombians try to stay in front to avoid 6 times 4 sec lost in the 6 flat stages of a GT in the first week. All you will do is provoke crashes. I could also conceive that for flat, but technical endings (corners, roundabouts,...) the time is taken before they enter the urban area. This will allow a lot of people to take it easy and not jockey for position. I hate it when the likes of Saxo/Sky et al mix it up with the sprint teams until the 3km to go and cause nothing but trouble.

This is a good idea, or something similar. Something needs to be done to reduce the amount of riders involved in fast urban finishes

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

Would hate it. Flat finishes should be for the teams who know what they do, no point that some 55kg Colombians try to stay in front to avoid 6 times 4 sec lost in the 6 flat stages of a GT in the first week. All you will do is provoke crashes. I could also conceive that for flat, but technical endings (corners, roundabouts,...) the time is taken before they enter the urban area. This will allow a lot of people to take it easy and not jockey for position. I hate it when the likes of Saxo/Sky et al mix it up with the sprint teams until the 3km to go and cause nothing but trouble.

So what happens if the remnants of the break are still 30 secs clear of the peloton with 4 k left at the start of town?

 

[Netserk]

I have been pro this for stages without the 3km rule instead of bonus seconds for a long time. So on flat stages everything is as it is currently, but on MTF and some HTF it would be with individual timing. Would mean that a race like Down Under that doesn't have a TT wouldn't come down to riders with the same time in GC.

Imo this can only work on stages without the 3km rule.

 

[Roude Leiw]

So what happens if the remnants of the break are still 30 secs clear of the peloton with 4 k left at the start of town?

The same principle as today with the 3 km rule would apply

 

[Master50]

With electronic timing and reliable photo finish it is possible to assign a time to each rider. It cannot be done manually except on Mountain top finishes that are really hard.
If you make the line wide enough for safety how does a camera get the depth of field to focus on the body numbers? It would present some new technological issues and certainly finding an appropriate finish we would need 4 lanes for the last 3 km. Transponders might be the primary method to get timing but bike changes can screw that up. For GC the count back on position works pretty much the same, as finish position breaks ties just as effectively a 1000ths of a second.

 

[xanadu]

If the system aint broke don't fix it. This proposed change to the timing sounds like a recipe for disaster. Think of all the 'argie bargie', i cant help feeling there would be bodies everywhere.
Lets just keep the finish civilised, there just aren't enough ambulances to go round.