• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.


When did the sport change to the last few kms

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Apart from a few full genius performances from the Dawg, the benefits of being a super climber has reduced dramatically because of new unipurito routes and teams being much more stronger than they used to be. So, teams and riders do not risk anything to gain 10 seconds to lose more time in the TT in most cases. Also, looks like the value of finishing 6th in GC become much more higher than it used to be, maybe that's how you get paid by the teams.

If you go through the GT's that had action from far out in last 10 years, you will see a few recurring factors.

Best climber/ best placed GC rider does not have/rely on the best team: 2006 Tour, 2007 Tour, 2007 Vuelta, 2011 Tour, 2015 Giro
The "underdog" in the GC is willing to attack at all costs: 2006 Vuelta, 2007 Tour, 2011 Tour, 2007 Vuelta, 2012 Vuelta, 2016 Vuelta, 2009 Giro, 2010 Giro (Basso and others were underdogs in the GC)
Best TT'er having a crappy team and not being the best climber: 2007 Tour, 2007 Vuelta, 2008 Tour, 2011 Tour, 2015 Vuelta
Crap weather/crash derailing the GC leader: 2013 Giro, 2016 Giro

So, unless I am missing something (feel free to correct me), it is becoming increasingly rare to see action from far out in GT's. I think the reason is we don't get enough "underdogs" because of the crappy route design and best riders usually have a very strong team, which kills the incentive to move from far out. So, we can expect to see less action with this type of design, or we have to hope for a Aquila stage to see action from far out, which becomes less and less likely with the lack of long hilly stages and stronger teams.
It's not really that complicated. The central issues have already been discussed - vast disparities in team budgets make teams of superdoms viable, radios and power meters mean that everyone knows how long an attack can be sustained and can punish such sub optimal riding.

Budget caps are probably unenforceable, but other reforms can have a significant impact. The key issue is to break the ability of teams to control things. That means restricting information - radios, meters - and restricting numbers on teams. The teams absolutely hate any such measures though, and sponsors want to sell meters.

It should be said though that we are talking about tendencies here rather than an absolute change. There were lots of boring stages and races prior to this decade, we just tend to remember the fun ones. And there are still long range attacks nowadays, just less of them. Superman Lopez tried to win the Osterreich Rundfahrt by going solo with 75km to go the other day.

Netserk said:
Tbh, we've had a lot of great racing this year. The problem is primarily the Ardennes (this year minus Amstel) and the Tour.
Yup. Gilbert won the Ronde from 80km out solo. MSR came down to the Poggio again, but what a final 10km.

Amstel was a great race too, so it gives some hope for LBL when they (potentially) move the finish back to Liege in a year or two and La Redoute is close enough to the finish to actually be raced up rather than an 80 rider peloton cruising up together.
Well today just shows what we've been saying. One team being too strong for all the others is the single biggest factor. If Sky wasn't so completely dominant, someone would have attacked much earlier. Especially when Landa ran off the road. Or someone would have gone with Contador. Or more moves would have been made to put pressure on Froome. But there were enough Sky riders there setting a high enough pace, that discouraged attacks for long enough.