TdF final stage

The Beeb site said on saturday that Lance Armstrong had only to stay
upright on the final stage to win, as it was against "tradition" for
the second place rider to try and win on the final stage! Why?!

I'm no fan of road cycle racing, due to all this team help in an
ostensibly individual event, and other unwritten rules that seem to
determine who's allowed to win. This one seems mad - I can't think of
any other sport where the second place competitor stops trying until
the end, so that makes it sound like a fix to me.

What's that all about then?

--

Regards,

Mark Davies

I don't think that tradition would have deterred Jan Ulrich
from challenging Lance Armstrong in the final stage, but
tradition /would/ have deterred him from launching that
challenge early (that is, before the six laps of the
Champs Elysee). I'm reasonably confident that if the
second-placed rider were within a few seconds of the
yello-jersey holder, all hell would break loose during
those final six circuits, but Jan was just too far behind
to make a challenge worthwhile.

** Phil.
--------
MD wrote:

The Beeb site said on saturday that Lance Armstrong had only to stay
upright on the final stage to win, as it was against "tradition" for
the second place rider to try and win on the final stage! Why?!

I'm no fan of road cycle racing, due to all this team help in an
ostensibly individual event, and other unwritten rules that seem to
determine who's allowed to win. This one seems mad - I can't think of
any other sport where the second place competitor stops trying until
the end, so that makes it sound like a fix to me.

What's that all about then?

--

Regards,

Mark Davies

On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 12:07:38 +0100, "MD" wrote:

The Beeb site said on saturday that Lance Armstrong had only to stay
upright on the final stage to win, as it was against "tradition" for
the second place rider to try and win on the final stage! Why?!

I'm no fan of road cycle racing, due to all this team help in an
ostensibly individual event, and other unwritten rules that seem to
determine who's allowed to win. This one seems mad - I can't think of
any other sport where the second place competitor stops trying until
the end, so that makes it sound like a fix to me.

What's that all about then?

Whether or not it's against tradition it was no possible for Ullrich
to pull back over a minute on the final stage. He had said before the
TT that if it was winnable he would attack on the last stage and
expect Armstrong to do the same. The TT result meant it was not
winnable.

There's only ever been one non-TT final stage where the jersey has
changed hands on the last day and that was 50 years ago.

Regards!
Stephen

Philip TAYLOR [PC87S-O/XP] wrote:
I don't think that tradition would have deterred Jan Ulrich
from challenging Lance Armstrong in the final stage,


I suspect it's as much that the chance of anyone else winning is so
remote that it is not considered reasonable to ruin the leader's victory
parade by trying to escape.

James

That could be because you don't understand the traditions of the race. There
are traditions like no attacking the yellow jersey if he needs to go to the
loo on a stage. A perfect example of the unwritten rules/traditions was when
Lance fell (or technically (though he stated it was his fault for being so
close) when his handlebar was caught by a bag somebody in the crowd was
holding) and Ullrich waited for him to get back on. That's being gentlemanly
and not taking what could be an unfair advantage. Also when a rider dies,
the peleton would ride as a procession in memory of the rider, this too
isn't a rule, and how would you feel if your TEAM (they do enter the Tour de
France as teams) lost a member tragically and then another cyclist sprinted
off and won the stage. Riders accept that the sport still (unlike many
others) has it's own special and somewhat peculiar traits. This is one of
those sports where traditions are still alive, I for one hope it stays that
way.

Finally as per Phil, Ullrich would have had a job on his hands making up
time on this stage anyway.


"Philip TAYLOR [PC87S-O/XP]" wrote in message
...
I don't think that tradition would have deterred Jan Ulrich
from challenging Lance Armstrong in the final stage, but
tradition /would/ have deterred him from launching that
challenge early (that is, before the six laps of the
Champs Elysee). I'm reasonably confident that if the
second-placed rider were within a few seconds of the
yello-jersey holder, all hell would break loose during
those final six circuits, but Jan was just too far behind
to make a challenge worthwhile.

** Phil.
--------
MD wrote:

The Beeb site said on saturday that Lance Armstrong had only to stay
upright on the final stage to win, as it was against "tradition" for
the second place rider to try and win on the final stage! Why?!

I'm no fan of road cycle racing, due to all this team help in an
ostensibly individual event, and other unwritten rules that seem to
determine who's allowed to win. This one seems mad - I can't think of
any other sport where the second place competitor stops trying until
the end, so that makes it sound like a fix to me.

What's that all about then?

--

Regards,

Mark Davies

Philip TAYLOR [PC87S-O/XP] wrote:
: Champs Elysee). I'm reasonably confident that if the
: second-placed rider were within a few seconds of the
: yello-jersey holder, all hell would break loose during
: those final six circuits, but Jan was just too far behind
: to make a challenge worthwhile.

Jan said that were he only a few seconds behind on the final
stage then it would be legigimate for him to attack.

Mainly it's because there's no way for anyone to make up enough
time on a flat stage to affect the final result so everyone
just has a celebration stage until they do a big crit for the
last 60k.

Arthur

In message , Terry
writes
That could be because you don't understand the traditions of the race. There
are traditions like no attacking the yellow jersey if he needs to go to the
loo on a stage. A perfect example of the unwritten rules/traditions was when
Lance fell (or technically (though he stated it was his fault for being so
close) when his handlebar was caught by a bag somebody in the crowd was
holding) and Ullrich waited for him to get back on. That's being gentlemanly
and not taking what could be an unfair advantage.

Being gentlemanly is holding a door for a lady. I think you are
referring to some form of sportsmanship. I was disappointed to see the
race lose its excitement because of Ullrich's sportsmanship. Armstrong
was at fault for his fall and deserved to suffer for his error. If
Ullrich had been ahead in the days when the riders didn't have radios he
would have been well away so I wonder how old these 'traditions' are.

It seems as if only the yellow jersey enjoys these privileges, anyway.
I didn't see Armstrong stop when Beloki fell and he didn't take a time
out when Ullrich fell in the TT either.

If the organisers of the TdF want to further increase its appeal they're
going to have to find ways of increasing the excitement and allowing
riders not to attack is not exciting.
--
Michael MacClancy

"Michael MacClancy" wrote in message
...
In message , Terry
writes
That could be because you don't understand the traditions of the race.
There
are traditions like no attacking the yellow jersey if he needs to go to
the
loo on a stage. A perfect example of the unwritten rules/traditions was
when
Lance fell (or technically (though he stated it was his fault for being
so
close) when his handlebar was caught by a bag somebody in the crowd was
holding) and Ullrich waited for him to get back on. That's being
gentlemanly
and not taking what could be an unfair advantage.

Being gentlemanly is holding a door for a lady. I think you are
referring to some form of sportsmanship. I was disappointed to see the
race lose its excitement because of Ullrich's sportsmanship. Armstrong
was at fault for his fall and deserved to suffer for his error. If
Ullrich had been ahead in the days when the riders didn't have radios he
would have been well away so I wonder how old these 'traditions' are.

It seems as if only the yellow jersey enjoys these privileges, anyway.
I didn't see Armstrong stop when Beloki fell and he didn't take a time
out when Ullrich fell in the TT either.

If the organisers of the TdF want to further increase its appeal they're
going to have to find ways of increasing the excitement and allowing
riders not to attack is not exciting.
--
Michael MacClancy

Hmm, increase it's appeal, well, now let's see. How many people have
complained about what happened compared to how many watched this great race?

Also, Beloki fell, LA had his handlebars caught by a bag, effectively he was
tripped over, bit of a difference there. Similarly with Ullrich, he lost
control as a result of the wet, not because somebody's bag caught his
handlebars. What about when LA did the same for Ullrich a few years ago.

If you don't like watching the race because it doesn't appeal to your sense
of sportsmanship, hit the remote and turn over.

Michael MacClancy wrote:

Being gentlemanly is holding a door for a lady. I think you are
referring to some form of sportsmanship. I was disappointed to see the
race lose its excitement because of Ullrich's sportsmanship.

It lost nothing for me, and gained a very great deal; demonstrations
of sportsmanship such as that displayed by Jan Ullrich can surely
only /add/ to the appeal of the race, not detract from it.

Philip Taylor

"Michael MacClancy" wrote in message
...
In message , Terry
writes
Also, Beloki fell, LA had his handlebars caught by a bag, effectively
he was tripped over, bit of a difference there.

Beloki crashed because his wheel locked on sticky asphalt, Armstrong
fell because (as you wrote) by his own admission he rode too close to
the crowd. Not much difference there. Both were rider errors.

As a feat the TdF is amazing, as a sporting event the last day was a
washout.
--
Michael MacClancy


I think you'll find that he said that because he's a sportsman, rather than
blaming someone else he blamed himself (though only he can confirm or deny
this and this was HIS admission not mine). Beloki can blame his mechanic or
his bike, not a spectator with a bag too close to the riders perhaps.

I guess we'll have to beg to differ, some of us like the way the RIDERS
decide what they will do on the final day and you don't. I still doubt
Ullrich would have made up the time anyway.