Road Bike, Cycling Forums banner
1 - 8 of 8 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,274 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Why, in the age of miniature electronic devices, don't at least the big Grand Tour races get scored accuratly, on actual total time? It would certainly add something to the flat races, and keep every race more meaningful right up till each rider crossed the line and tripped his number on the computer timer.

They have those teenie transponders that you could get accurate times right to the .000x second for every single rider. Then, if you wanted to be a tour leader and contender for the GC win, you would actually have to RACE each race against the other contenders rather than just 'sitting in" and taking 'same time' finishes when the course doesn't suit your strengths..

Maybe some teams would even be able to win the tours by taking time on the flats..At least we wouldn't have essentially two different races...the flat terrain lead up to the mountains where the race actually starts (for GC, that is) and then that race..Teams could configure themselves differently...

Just curious, Don Hanson
 

·
Fly on a windshield
Joined
·
1,272 Posts
Gnarly 928 said:
Why, in the age of miniature electronic devices, don't at least the big Grand Tour races get scored accuratly, on actual total time? It would certainly add something to the flat races, and keep every race more meaningful right up till each rider crossed the line and tripped his number on the computer timer.

They have those teenie transponders that you could get accurate times right to the .000x second for every single rider. Then, if you wanted to be a tour leader and contender for the GC win, you would actually have to RACE each race against the other contenders rather than just 'sitting in" and taking 'same time' finishes when the course doesn't suit your strengths..

Maybe some teams would even be able to win the tours by taking time on the flats..At least we wouldn't have essentially two different races...the flat terrain lead up to the mountains where the race actually starts (for GC, that is) and then that race..Teams could configure themselves differently...

Just curious, Don Hanson
I do believe that one reason is safety.

Can you imagine a bunch sprint where the entire peloton is fighting to be up front or darn right near the front? Many old European roads are quite narrow.
 

·
Impulse Athletic Coaching
Joined
·
5,758 Posts
Besides the safety that MG537 mentioned..

One reason is that scoring/placing is from the first thing that crosses the finish line (the tire). The closest place you could put a transponder is the fork -- which is fine for times in the race, but not for tracking the top 20 or XX number of riders.

Also, cycling has a looong tradition and change often comes really slow or not at all in this sport. Adding precise electronic timing and taking away s.t. would be hard fought by every rider and team.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,274 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
MG537 said:
I do believe that one reason is safety.

Can you imagine a bunch sprint where the entire peloton is fighting to be up front or darn right near the front? Many old European roads are quite narrow.

No, that is hard to imagine...but I don't see that would be happening often, full peloton sprints, if every second were counted for every racer. Stronger guys with stronger teams would shell off the majority of the peloton long before the end of each race if they felt they had to work for every nano-second of every race.

Teams might be better composed with fewer 'no-chance workers'. Getting together a team capable of beating all the other teams all the way to the finish in each and every race and also over the course of the whole tour...That would make for more interesting racing, I would think. Teams would have to consider keeping a couple of riders with low overall times and race-finishes would become important even after the GC leader crosses the finish..

There could also be timed 'intermediate' points awarded, if the officials wanted to give themselves something else to feel important about and TV wanted to make bike racing more watchable.
Don Hanson
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,083 Posts
It's not that long ago the rules were changed such that the timing was done some km from the finish on the flat stages.
The reason is exactly to avoid having 190 riders whose sprint is sh!t trying to mix it up with Boonen, Freira, and bennati.
The idea of shattering the pack is pretty much a pipe dream on most flat stages.
It's already being tried all the time if the opportunity is there. But if there is no long stretch with a strong cross wind it's just not going to happen.

Gnarly 928 said:
No, that is hard to imagine...but I don't see that would be happening often, full peloton sprints, if every second were counted for every racer. Stronger guys with stronger teams would shell off the majority of the peloton long before the end of each race if they felt they had to work for every nano-second of every race.

Teams might be better composed with fewer 'no-chance workers'. Getting together a team capable of beating all the other teams all the way to the finish in each and every race and also over the course of the whole tour...That would make for more interesting racing, I would think. Teams would have to consider keeping a couple of riders with low overall times and race-finishes would become important even after the GC leader crosses the finish..

There could also be timed 'intermediate' points awarded, if the officials wanted to give themselves something else to feel important about and TV wanted to make bike racing more watchable.
Don Hanson
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,838 Posts
iliveonnitro said:
Besides the safety that MG537 mentioned..

One reason is that scoring/placing is from the first thing that crosses the finish line (the tire). The closest place you could put a transponder is the fork -- which is fine for times in the race, but not for tracking the top 20 or XX number of riders.

Also, cycling has a looong tradition and change often comes really slow or not at all in this sport. Adding precise electronic timing and taking away s.t. would be hard fought by every rider and team.
I am happy with the current state of affairs in scoring.

Definitely seems fair. I do also agree with time bonuses here and there, especially on mountain top finishes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,375 Posts
den bakker said:
It's not that long ago the rules were changed such that the timing was done some km from the finish on the flat stages.
As far as I know there is no such rule. The rule was changed so in the case of mishap (in any stage) in the final 3 km, up from the previous 1 km , a rider gets the same time as the group he had been in. In the specific case of a short finishing circuit, it may be announced in advance that time will be taken at the start of the circuits.
 
1 - 8 of 8 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top