First off, tomorrow on July 8
th is Race #2 of the
NashvilleCyclist.com
Criterium Race Series. Be There or Get Slower! See
www.NashvilleCyclist.com for a
flyer and series details.
Cyclingfans.comFor those of you at work, or worse like me without cable, you can check out this link with various online options for LIVE video/audio of the Tour
de France. The options vary each day, but you do get to hear Phil and Paul on most of them. I had to listen to a Russian feed for awhile today before an English version came online, but now I'm listening to Italian. I really should touch up on my foreign languages.
Team leadership still an issue at AstanaI am
assuming these reports are real regarding the lack of
understanding and
communications between Lance Armstrong and Johan
Bruyneel about Astana's protected rider at the Tour. We are still very early in the Tour with a lot to play out before the real drama begins. After a few mountain stages the clouds will clear as the cream will rise to the top.
Either there is real confusion or lack of emphasis on one rider or the Astana team is sly like a fox. Part of me believes they are just as good tacticians off the bike as they are on the bike. I'm certainly a big believer that you never state your game plan to your rivals if it's not necessary, and with all the bullets Astana has why would you? However, is Alberto
Contador on board and trusting that he's the #1 rider? My gut tells me he's not in a comfortable position, especially after reading his quote in the link below.
Was Armstrong just riding smart, or.....I'm with Armstrong on this one, it doesn't take rocket scientist smarts to be attentive towards the front. Every bike racer has been through this exact scenario with or without harsh cross-winds. Once the split in the field happened it's definitely the
responsibility of
unrepresented teams to chase, primarily sprinter teams for this stage if they wanted a shot at beating Mark Cavendish. Most
GC hopefuls were caught behind as well, but evidently didn't feel that losing nearly a minute to Armstrong is a huge loss. Let's see if they feel that way after the
TTT. Hats off to Columbia/
HTC for having their entire team of nine guys in the split. I loved George
Hincapie's post-race comments criticizing other teams for not taking a leadership role at the front prior to the split. Astana may have the overall strongest nine riders in the race, but this day's outcome shows some are missing a little wit about them.
Teams go in inverse order of team rankingToday's
TTT has different rules regarding the finishing time than in the past few years. I read in
Velonews' live rolling text coverage yesterday that actual finishing times of the team will be used this year and not some
mathematical equation to limit losses. In other words, a team's final time will be what they actually earn. I never liked the previous confusing rule, so this is a welcome relief back to sanity in my book.
Toronto bike maker has a lot riding on the big raceWow, almost a grass roots approach to creating a high profile
professional cycling team. I agree, you give the riders the opportunity to help shape the team culture and you'll be happy and proud to be a part of it. It certainly helps if you produce a bike that's respected and in high demand!
Team directors oppose the Tour's two-day radio banStage 10 and
Stage 13 are scheduled to be radio free days in the Tour's
peloton. Stage 10 is Bastille Day and ideal for the sprinters while Stage 13 is a mountainous challenge with five categorized climbs. It's
debatable whether or not this is a good idea or will actually add a positive dynamic to the race outcome. As long as riders are getting time checks from the motorcycles then they'll at least know time gaps on a regular basis, which in my view is a more critical piece of information that affects the outcome.
So why are team directors and many racers raising questions to the logic behind this addition to the Tour this year? Based upon what I've read that angle stems from a director informing riders about traffic obstacles and/or general course
descriptions that are just ahead. I believe it to be a valid point and now part of the
professional culture that's a generally accepted practice. Moreover, the safety aspect trumps the need to believe you're adding a "tactics" feature by banning radios for a couple of days. Whether you have radios or not there are tactics, and no matter what there will be vicious attacking at the start of every stage before a breakaway is formed; with or without radios. Again, with time checks from the moto the peloton will respond accordingly.
I'll give an example at the local level where a radio would have been beneficial. This past week the Masters Nationals road race in Louisville was on a very technical and twisty 5 mile loop in Cherokee Park. Imagine Percy Warner Park with better pavement and slightly wider roads, and of course very limited
visibility ahead. I
pre-rode the course three times the day before and twice the day of my race, but I talked to a LOT of guys who didn't at all. I thought they were crazy for not doing so, but they wrongly listened to officials at start/finish who told them they couldn't ride the course. They could on the areas not around start/finish without any trouble, and since there was only one race on the course at a time it meant you could easily get out of the way of the race caravan coming through.
There were several sharp turns and chicanes that helped knowing in advance. In our pack of 100 riders I had the comfort of knowing the course, which greatly reduced my nervousness in that pack at 30+ mph. Other guys weren't so comfortable and had great difficulty handling their bikes throughout the course. Sure, after a couple of laps you should have the course seared into your mind, but imagine having someone talking in your ear describing what you're about to encounter? Even after a few laps the intensity of the event can prevent you from thinking clearly and losing focus, so having a reminder chirping in your ear could easily help prevent an
unnecessary accident. Yes, I did see one horrific crash involving two guys on one of the most dangerous curves.
Now imagine being in a race like the
Tour de France with 180+ riders, 25-40mph, narrow roads, and having very little knowledge of what's ahead. Not having radios may not fall into the "unsafe" category, but having them would ensure the likelihood of a safer ride. Especially in those last 10k of a sprint finish. What's more, riders and
commentators both have mentioned how the traffic designs in Europe have changed
dramatically to include much more traffic islands and obstacles to slow down motor vehicle traffic. You can read the race bible all you want to get familiar, but in the heat of the moment your ability to recall important info you read isn't so good. Moreover, not every detail of the course is included in the race bible.
Tour organizers will feel some kind of dumb if any rider is seriously injured due to the lack of
communication about the course layout. I for one don't believe riders need the radios for strategy, but for safety I do believe they are useful tools. I would not expect there to be any increased accidents because these guys are
professionals, the best bike handlers in the world, but at the same time I'm sure they'll be a little bit more cautious. I'll tell you this, on that mountain stage it could get really interesting because riders won't get updates on where their teammates are on the mountain slopes,
ie think Astana!
Lastly, how many times have you been to a race where afterwards you say, "
Unbelievable, it sure would have been nice and smart to have that turn or obstacle pointed out more clearly! It's a wonder one of us wasn't killed. Man, that promoter is an idiot!" Yeah, I know.