As we all know *smiles proudly* the organisers of the Tour are clearly reading this blog, as they are now thinking of incorporating our suggestions of reducing the numbers of riders, in order to make the Tour safer.
OK, *rolls eyes* so they didn't exactly copy all my suggestions: but I have another suggestion that might help.
One of the main problems is the sheer number of riders in the peloton, which - frankly - is what leads to crashes.
Too many riders all trying to get up the front of the block, and too many riders being squeezed into narrow pinch-points along the route.
Mr Prudhomme's suggestion about reducing the teams to 8 members each is a step in the right direction - although I prefer my suggestion of having teams of 9, but only 7 of them ride each day. Teams can then select the best mix of riders for each day's parcours, with the proviso that GC and jersey contenders have to ride every day. So, basically, the domestiques can be interchangeable.
My next suggestion - ASO, are you listening? Sit up at the back, and pay attention - is to have alternative routes at a few points along the way, with teams/riders being able to choose which way to go.
For example, a steep hill with KOM points, could have an alternative flatter route. Riders choose whether to go up the climb, or take the (generally longer) route around the outside.
Yes, those Buffalo Boys can go round the outside. Round the outside? Round the outside.
This would make more sense of the breakaways, for example: a small break could ignore the KOM hill, saving their legs by riding around it, leaving the KOM points for the genuine climbers arriving later.
Sprint points, maybe, could be treated the same way: with a choice between the shorter route, or the longer route with Sprint point. So the riders going for the sprint jersey would go that way, and the early breakaway would take the shorter route, in order to stay away.
Every "choice" point would be, in effect, splitting the peloton: thus reducing the size of the bunch. It would also give teams a chance to demonstrate their firm grasp of team tactics (or not, ha! ha!) by forcing them to make decisions as to which way they would go.
It would also serve to keep the jersey points amongst those who are competing for it, rather than "wasting" jersey points on members of breakaways, who are often not even interested in jerseys.
And would tend to keep the jerseys separate from the GC contenders, who would obviously take the route that is easiest on their legs.
How does that sound, folks? Sensible? Silly? Worth a try? Do you have a better suggestion?
0 comments:
Post a Comment