would changing the timing lead to safer sprints and better Tours?

[2wheels]

I know some people like the crashes, but I'd rather see the sprint stages actually end with a full-on sprint that doesn't wipe out the GC guys on the first or second day of the Tour.

Maybe they should change the timekeeping, just on sprint stages: Let's say the front pack is three dozen guys, then there's a 1- or 2-second gap and another big group right behind them. Everyone in the second group would receive a time just the 1- or 2-seconds slower than the winner's group-- rather than the fifteen or twenty seconds they'd lose under the current "running time" system. This change would allow the GC guys and their lieutenants to ride a much safer finale, knowing that the most they might lose would be four or five seconds. As it is now, they're forced to jam it right up with the sprint trains, just to guard against potential time losses.

Again, I'd only do this on sure-fire sprinter's stages; running time is great on mountain finishes. I'd also like to see the organizers avoid the 90º-turns and leave enough boulevard between the barriers in those last 3K, so that the leadout trains can actually have a safe chance to wind it up.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

My solution is more drastic and less elegant, but I think would make for better cycling:

eradicate sprint finishes entirely by not providing uninspired, sprint-tastic routes.

 

[luckyboy]

I know some people like the crashes, but I'd rather see the sprint stages actually end with a full-on sprint that doesn't wipe out the GC guys on the first or second day of the Tour.

Don't think I've ever seen anyone say they like the crashes

My solution is more drastic and less elegant, but I think would make for better cycling:

eradicate sprint finishes entirely by not providing uninspired, sprint-tastic routes.

Yep.

 

[2wheels]

Somebody must like the crashes-- the organizers keep giving us stages that guarantee them; the websites keep showing us big splashy photos of them; the threads go on endlessly about who caused them. Also, remember a few years back, how the riders union had to fight to get the UCI to extend the crash zone from 1K to 3K?

Granted, the riders and the serious cycling fans hate them-- that was kind of my point. That's why I'd like to see them made safer.

 

[saganftw]

i like crashes...not the casarteli like crashes but seriously beloki-armstrong crash was one of the most exciting moments in the history of tdF

 

[screaming fist]

Why not take the time at the 3km to go point and then let the sprinter teams do their thing on the remaing distance? The other riders just could roll home savely without losing any time.

 

[2wheels]

Right; there will never be a shortage of crashes in the Tour--on descents, in bad weather, or fighting for position before cobbles. It is part of racing-- but to set the stage for massive pileups at 65 kph on almost every sprint finish seems like one more case of treating the riders like they're expendable entertainment fodder.

 

[The Hitch]

My solution is more drastic and less elegant, but I think would make for better cycling:

eradicate sprint finishes entirely by not providing uninspired, sprint-tastic routes.

what do you mean by that? not have flat stages? Surely flat stages will more often than not end in a sprint, and for it to be a tour de frace, you cant have them just spend 21 days in the alps and pyranees but also need them to go through the flat areas.

Why not take the time at the 3km to go point and then let the sprinter teams do their thing on the remaing distance? The other riders just could roll home savely without losing any time.

Now this is a good idea. Great idea. It could even result in gc candidates going for sprints on the 3k to go banner and then sprinters battling it out 2 minutes later.

 

[2wheels]

Why not take the time at the 3km to go point and then let the sprinter teams do their thing on the remaing distance? The other riders just could roll home savely without losing any time.

Excellent idea-- I yield the thread to it! Can't see why this wouldn't work to everyone's advantage-- including sponsors, who have to watch their million-euro investments getting turned into road pizza at the very start of the Tour.

 

[eleven]

i like crashes...not the casarteli like crashes but seriously beloki-armstrong crash was one of the most exciting moments in the history of tdF

You must love NASCAR!

Seriously, though - I think Joseba might have a different opinion about how exciting that was.

 

[eleven]

Excellent idea-- I yield the thread to it! Can't see why this wouldn't work to everyone's advantage-- including sponsors, who have to watch their million-euro investments getting turned into road pizza at the very start of the Tour.

But then the sprinters who *&$% up and aren't in front get an equal chance at the sprint. I like the notion of finding a way to make sprints safer, but I'm not sure that's the solution.

A really simple solution might be, eh...avoiding turns that people predict beforehand will lead to crashes. Crazy, I know!

 

[Libertine Seguros]

what do you mean by that? not have flat stages? Surely flat stages will more often than not end in a sprint, and for it to be a tour de frace, you cant have them just spend 21 days in the alps and pyranees but also need them to go through the flat areas.

That's exactly what I mean. The flat stages are usually irrelevant to the plot and serve as little more than rest days anyway, they're boring as hell to watch, and are predictable. Why not eradicate flat stages entirely and simply have more interesting races? Of course you can't spend 21 days in the Alps and Pyrenées. But that's what the Massif Central and the Vosges and Ardennes mountains were made for.

Admittedly, my plan would be much more easy to implement in the Giro and Vuelta, owing to geography, but even so I think it's best for cycling.

 

[hfer07]

are the new generations getting soft?-WTF?
how about this: why don't the organizers set a speed limit leading up to the last km-so the peloton wouldn't risk their a$$es sprinting....
I'm sorry but perhaps I'm too old and have seen many races, just to bear the thought of "changing the sprints" for the sake of a few fellows that feel panicked by the idea of a massive crash.....

 

[2wheels]

are the new generations getting soft?-WTF?
how about this: why don't the organizers set a speed limit leading up two the last km-so the peloton wouldn't risk their a$$es sprinting....
I'm sorry but perhaps I'm too old and have seen many races, just to bear the thought of "changing the sprints" for the sake of a few fellows that feel panicked by the idea of a massive crash.....

Must have been hard for you when they made the riders all wear helmets-- another case of pampering?

 

[powderpuff]

Why don't we just have everyone pull into a big carpark at the one km to go banner and have everyone run to the finish. Oh hold on that's a triathlon isn't it. Or maybe each teams sprinter and lead out man could have a three legged race? Or maybe they have to finish every sprint stage on an airport runway at least 50metres wide and 2km long.

It's all part of cycling just leave it the way it has been for years.

 

[ingsve]

I don't see the big problem...The problem only exists in the first couple of stages of the Tour and usually not anywhere else. In other races the crashes happen when sprinters or other riders mess up and you can't regulate that away. Also the problem of having too many GC guys trying to be far up on the finishes is helped a lot by the shift from 1 to 3 km. The only other change that I would propose is no be extra careful with how the finishing 5 km are in the first few stages of the Tour. Todays finish was actually very good except for a turn that was a bit too steep perhaps. Other then that the finish was 1.6km without any turns which is a lot better than what you see in most other races.

 

[hfer07]

Must have been hard for you when they made the riders all wear helmets-- another case of pampering?

I've been Pro-Helmet since the 80's and nowadays they're so light and ergonomically fit that is difficult to get bothered by them.

now I reckon Jens Voigt wasn't sprinting when he crashed last year-so what's your take on that?-transform the sport into american football for the sake of "protection"?

 

[2wheels]

I don't see the big problem...The problem only exists in the first couple of stages of the Tour and usually not anywhere else.

I'd agree that the problem is at its worst at the start of the Tour, but that's the worst possible time-- for teams, sponsors, or fans-- to lose a star rider.

The other gripe I have with using running time is when a rider intentionally lets a gap open up, just to make riders behind him lose time; another reason why GC riders are forced to stay at the front. Doesn't seem very sporting, but it happens.

 

[2wheels]

now I reckon Jens Voigt wasn't sprinting when he crashed last year-so what's your take on that?-transform the sport into american football for the sake of "protection"?

No, it wouldn't still be a sport if you made it like football!

The difference is a matter of inherent, accidental risk (which Voigt's crash exemplified) versus needless, designed risk (which happens when you stuff 192 guys through a tight pipe at 45 mph). I just don't see how it improves the race for anyone to force the GC guys to bump shoulders with the sprint trains. Dr. Ferrari might agree with the "that's cycling; don't try to change it" mentality, but I think there's always room for tweaking the rules in the interest of fairness and safety.

 

[luckyboy]

i like crashes...not the casarteli like crashes but seriously beloki-armstrong crash was one of the most exciting moments in the history of tdF

Ah, so fatal crashes aren't your bag, just serious career-altering injuries.

That's exactly what I mean. The flat stages are usually irrelevant to the plot and serve as little more than rest days anyway, they're boring as hell to watch, and are predictable. Why not eradicate flat stages entirely and simply have more interesting races? Of course you can't spend 21 days in the Alps and Pyrenées. But that's what the Massif Central and the Vosges and Ardennes mountains were made for.

Admittedly, my plan would be much more easy to implement in the Giro and Vuelta, owing to geography, but even so I think it's best for cycling.

I seriously dislike flat stages, but I wouldn't go as far as eradicating them altogether. There are 8 in this Tour, which is too many. 4 hilly stages, 1 cobbled, 2 TT's, 6 mountains with 3 mtf's. Needs more mtf's, and not that ****ty neutralised Pau stage.

 

[Martin318is]

I know this sounds a bit harsh but its the riders themselves that ultimately cause a crash aren't they? (dogs and spectators not withstanding).

They have bigger and nastier crashes at the Tour each year than pretty much anywhere else and I think that its simply because the riders care so much moreabout the prestige of a win or high finish in a Tour stage.

Its a bit like motor racing really. They don't HAVE to go that fast around each corner. Its up to them to decide whether its more important to win or to be "safe".

 

[2wheels]

I know this sounds a bit harsh but its the riders themselves that ultimately cause a crash aren't they?
. . .Its up to them to decide whether its more important to win or to be "safe".

To win or be "safe"; that's the same question they face with doping, and sadly the high stakes in any professional sport lead many to choose winning. Generally, the guardians of the sport then compensate by making rules that don't force the players to choose one over the other.

 

[180mmCrank]

Others will know better than I...

But haven't they done this in the past when there was concern a finish would not be safe. I am sure they did this as recently as the ToC 2009 - the stage that Mancebo won in the pouring rain.

Am I remembering this right?

 

[pedaling squares]

I'm torn on this one. I enjoy seeing everyone fighting right to the end, either for a stage win or to protect a GC position. But I hate seeing stages end like today or like that Vuelta stage last year when about 6 riders went to the line (3 on one team IIRC). I also hate seeing a GT contender forced to resign in the first week. On one hand, that's pro cycling. On the other hand, I'd like to see these stages left for the sprinters and the GC guys having some incentive to back off in the last km.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Others will know better than I...

But haven't they done this in the past when there was concern a finish would not be safe. I am sure they did this as recently as the ToC 2009 - the stage that Mancebo won in the pouring rain.

Am I remembering this right?

That's correct. It also happened in the Giro stage won by Boasson Hagen last year, and in the stage of the Settimana Coppi e Bartali won by Bartosz Huzarski this year.