# I was watching some older (86, 89, 1990) TDF videos and noticed...



## Frank121 (May 14, 2002)

several things about them compared to more recent TDF videos I have seen. 

It was pretty cool to see lugged steel bikes...downtube shifters...threaded forks...quill stems...chrome...no earpieces for constant communication with the team car..."heavier" riders...teams with more than one rider who could win the TDF...seeing teammates jockeying for position with each other for position in the race...and many other things I am sure I forgot. 

The biggest positive difference to me was the racing. That may be because of the recent domination of Armstrong, and before him Indurain, but it was fun to watch a TDF where the winner of the tour, as well as so many individual stages, was open to so many. It also seemed that the riders had more of an opportunity to develop tactics and make decisions while on the road, rather than everything being scripted and directed by someone not on a bike. 

It was fun to watch someone break away from the pack and having the folks behind him having to wonder how big his lead was. I enjoyed seeing teammates vying for the lead in the race when both had good form. I enjoyed the drama in the 1986 race when LeMond and Hinault were teammates and Hinault had vowed to work to help Lemond win the TDF after LeMond held back in '85, yet Hinault attacked until he finally blew up and LeMond emerged the winner. LeMond comments during the race he doesn't trust Hinault...and with good reason. 

I know the racers and equipment are better today with the advancements in technology and training and medicine, but for many reasons the older TDF's I watched over Thanksgiving seemed more interesting and exciting to me.


----------



## Einstruzende (Jun 1, 2004)

I gotta agree with you, in that racing in years long gone seems to have been more exciting. Unfortunately technology has made things almost "by the numbers."


----------



## The Carlster (Sep 16, 2005)

yep, w/ computers and radios now, the team's just have to wait for the DS to figure out mathmatically exactly what's going on with whom, and tell the teams what to do via radio. 

nixing radios in pro racing is something that a lot of cyclists I know would be in favor of.


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

Frank121 said:


> It was fun to watch someone break away from the pack and having the folks behind him having to wonder how big his lead was.


I don't know exactly when moto chalk boards and race radio started, but it was long before '86. For the races you watched, riders were well aware of the makeup and gaps to the break. You should have noticed riders dropping back to the team cars to speak to the director to discuss tactics much more than they do today. Radios haven't changed the basic communication between riders and directors; they've just made it much easier.


----------



## Under ACrookedSky (Nov 8, 2005)

asgelle said:


> Radios haven't changed the basic communication between riders and directors; they've just made it much easier.


You cannot drop back to the team car when the peloton is under full flight. Even dropping back at normal speeds takes a significant amount of time. It used to be that the riders themselves were expected to be tactically savvy. Now you have racers like George Hincapie who barely knows how to tie his shoes without his DS telling him how to do it.

The communication is now so fast and easy that it fundamentally changes the nature of the relationship between team support and the riders.


----------



## whit417 (Jul 5, 2005)

> Now you have racers like George Hincapie who barely knows how to tie his shoes without his DS telling him how to do it.


Lucky for ol' George his Carnac Quartz's have velcro.


----------



## Fignon's Barber (Mar 2, 2004)

no doubt that radios detract from the sporting nature of cycle racing. it makes for less aggressive racing. for example, jacky durand would have never won the tour of flanders if his race took place today.


----------



## ttug (May 14, 2004)

*really?*



Under ACrookedSky said:


> You cannot drop back to the team car when the peloton is under full flight. Even dropping back at normal speeds takes a significant amount of time. It used to be that the riders themselves were expected to be tactically savvy. Now you have racers like George Hincapie who barely knows how to tie his shoes without his DS telling him how to do it.
> 
> The communication is now so fast and easy that it fundamentally changes the nature of the relationship between team support and the riders.



So when the go to guy drops back and gets water for their team, he cant do that or that has never happened? 

Nope, it happens alot.


----------



## dagger (Jul 22, 2004)

*Why did you have to go there?*



Under ACrookedSky said:


> Now you have racers like George Hincapie who barely knows how to tie his shoes without his DS telling him how to do it.
> .


Why did you have to insult a most capable guy?


----------



## wipeout (Jun 6, 2005)

Einstruzende said:


> I gotta agree with you, in that racing in years long gone seems to have been more exciting. Unfortunately technology has made things almost "by the numbers."


So how do you feel about the earliest TdF races then? No help at all, carry your own tools/tubes, etc? Were those more exciting races?


----------



## cosmo3 (Nov 1, 2005)

Fignon's Barber said:


> no doubt that radios detract from the sporting nature of cycle racing. it makes for less aggressive racing. for example, jacky durand would have never won the tour of flanders if his race took place today.


I've gotta disagree with you, here. Directors were telling riders what to do long before radios came on the scene, and riders still regularly ignore them. Did Tapie need a radio to keep Lemond from winning the '85 Tour? Or, conversely, did Erik Dekker pay even a second's worth of attention to his radio at the '01 Amstel? Theo DeRooy had to pull up next to him and yell out the car window to stop pulling through, and Dekker still ignored him (and still won).

TV motos can only broadcast one image at once, meaning that the DS is limited in what they can monitor. Furthermore, they can't hear how hard someone is breathing, or catch little details like a rider doing up their velcro extra tight in preparation for an attack, or hear the conversations between opposing teammates. A rider has to be aware of and process all this information on their own, while at the same time enduring serious physical disress. You think the radio really helps them do that?

Basically, a DS can be as smart and savvy as the illegitimate love child of Garry Kasparov and Johan Bruyneel, and he can have all the radios he wants, but it's still the poor sap on the bike who's got to grab the bars and turn the cranks.


----------



## Fignon's Barber (Mar 2, 2004)

cosmo, please re-read the quote. "radios detract from the sporting nature of cycle racing". Picking out 2 contradictory situations over 21 years of racing kind of proves my point. Also, I never illuded to the riders having it easy, nor did I say there were no longer tactics in racing because of the use of radios. In addition, the DS does more than sit in the car and watch broadcast TV of the race. For example, with the use of GPS and race radio, they keep track of the where-abouts of each cyclist down to the second. Even in one on one mountain climb situations, bruyneel told lance when to go,when to stop, when to stand,etc... Wouldn't you rather have it come down to rider vs. rider? As Max Sciandri is quoted as saying,"they tell us when to attack,they tell us when to sit up, they tell us when to eat, they tell us when to piss."


----------



## harlond (May 30, 2005)

cosmo3 said:


> . . . the illegitimate love child of Garry Kasparov and Johan Bruyneel. . .


Scary thought.


----------



## ttug (May 14, 2004)

*I dont get it*



Fignon's Barber said:


> cosmo, please re-read the quote. "radios detract from the sporting nature of cycle racing". Picking out 2 contradictory situations over 21 years of racing kind of proves my point. Also, I never illuded to the riders having it easy, nor did I say there were no longer tactics in racing because of the use of radios. In addition, the DS does more than sit in the car and watch broadcast TV of the race. For example, with the use of GPS and race radio, they keep track of the where-abouts of each cyclist down to the second. Even in one on one mountain climb situations, bruyneel told lance when to go,when to stop, when to stand,etc... Wouldn't you rather have it come down to rider vs. rider? As Max Sciandri is quoted as saying,"they tell us when to attack,they tell us when to sit up, they tell us when to eat, they tell us when to piss."


Most of the foklks who have an issue with radio (a numeric majority) are NOT the riders. 

SO, how about that rider perspective?

Personally, IF I were the person suffering on a climb so that I could MAYBE get a few seconds I would do ANYTHING to hear a little heads up info. Radios are fine. EVERYONE has access to the technology. EVERYONE has a car to observe their riders etc etc. It does come down to the rider and their inaction/action. 

Where is the detraction?


----------



## euro-trash (May 1, 2004)

I'd like to see some modification to the use of radios. Riders should have 2 way radios, and the directors should only have one-way (incoming). The directors could hear what's going on with their team, and could respond to calls such as, "need a new rear wheel". It would allow the racers to get what they need more quickly. But if they need to talk tactics, they should have to drop back to the car (or at least a domestique for the team should have to and then relay the message to the team). Neutral support and the officials should also be able to communicate with the riders, warning them of upcoming dangerous spots on the route. 

I think such a system would allow the benefits of radios: improved safety and faster replacement of supplies, while giving the riders a little more control over their tactics. I also think they should get secure lines, it kind of sucks other teams can listen in on the plans of teams instead of having to figure-out the intentions of others team on the road.


----------



## joebyrne72 (Oct 20, 2005)

*don't forget the format.. and MUSIC*

john tesch and yanni rock! listen to them and your average speed increases quite significantly!!!

man i am square!~


----------



## brewster (Jun 15, 2004)

The racing has changed too. There was one stage later on in the 89 TDF, when Delgado, LeMond, and Fignon got away as a trio, on a flat portion! Here they were pace-lining out on the open road. At that point, they were 1-2-3 on the podium. Teams would never let something like happen nowadays. The Sunday afternoon ABC viewers must have thought there was only 3 guys in the race.

brewster


----------



## atpjunkie (Mar 23, 2002)

*and nothing like watching*

the guy in front of you reach down to drop into the small chainring to launch your big ring attack on a climb


----------



## magnolialover (Jun 2, 2004)

*Look guys...*

Radios make it easier to communicate between riders and DS's. Radios also make the racing safer. Does it make it more boring? I don't think so. Take Spring classics for example. Many times year after year after year, you know where the crucial break is going to form for the most part. Run the same race over the same parcours year after year, and things get predictable. You know that in Paris Roubaix when you hit the first section of cobbles, if you want a chance of actually winning the race, you've got to be at the front for example. 

I've seen plenty of interviews and read interviews from a rider's perspective on radio use, and from what I've seen, they generally agree that it is better to have them. And this is what counts here. It's their sport, and we are just spectators. Radios don't distract from the tactics and the spectacle that is bike racing. And also, for the most part, there are tons and tons of bike races, and most of them are boring to watch (has been this way forever). Sure there are usually key moments in races where something exciting happens, but let's not quibble that in a 200km stage of a grand tour, it's not going to get boring. It does, it has, and it always will. Radios don't make bike racing boring, bike racing makes bike racing boring.


----------



## joebyrne72 (Oct 20, 2005)

*OOOHH!!! lets make predictions!! tdf 2025*

fast forward - TDF 2025

total interface .. voice activated and/or a complete handle bar interface that control sunglasses that can display whatever data is requeste to the wearer .. OH small remote control airplanes.. that can weave in and out of the peleton... to get fantastic video shots...

whate else??





Under ACrookedSky said:


> You cannot drop back to the team car when the peloton is under full flight. Even dropping back at normal speeds takes a significant amount of time. It used to be that the riders themselves were expected to be tactically savvy. Now you have racers like George Hincapie who barely knows how to tie his shoes without his DS telling him how to do it.
> 
> The communication is now so fast and easy that it fundamentally changes the nature of the relationship between team support and the riders.


----------



## fletchnj05 (Apr 27, 2005)

dagger said:


> Why did you have to insult a most capable guy?


Really?


----------



## Gnarly 928 (Nov 19, 2005)

*Besides Radios, how about...*



Frank121 said:


> several things about them compared to more recent TDF videos I have
> I know the racers and equipment are better today with the advancements in technology and training and medicine, but for many reasons the older TDF's I watched over Thanksgiving seemed more interesting and exciting to me.


Ok, here's another question pertaining to the use of technology. I know it maybe would change the whole nature of the Tour some, but why don't the riders get timed down to the second on each finish? They have the technology to know exactly, to the "fempto-second" when each rider crosses the finish line. So why not time each rider, each stage, using thier transponder chips and a sensor in the street, just like is done for racecars?
Then, at the finish of a long stage, you'd not have dozens and dozens of guys just sitting in, knowing they'll get "same time"...Every race would be counted towards GC..every second would count in every race. Guys would be "making moves" on each other for the whole depth of the field, all the friggin way to the finish..Just wondering..what say you all bout that, not that the Powers that Be give a crap what us Forum creatures say, but...
Don Hanson


----------



## Waxbytes (Sep 22, 2004)

Gnarly 928 said:


> Ok, here's another question pertaining to the use of technology. I know it maybe would change the whole nature of the Tour some, but why don't the riders get timed down to the second on each finish? They have the technology to know exactly, to the "fempto-second" when each rider crosses the finish line. So why not time each rider, each stage, using thier transponder chips and a sensor in the street, just like is done for racecars?
> Then, at the finish of a long stage, you'd not have dozens and dozens of guys just sitting in, knowing they'll get "same time"...Every race would be counted towards GC..every second would count in every race. Guys would be "making moves" on each other for the whole depth of the field, all the friggin way to the finish..Just wondering..what say you all bout that, not that the Powers that Be give a crap what us Forum creatures say, but...
> Don Hanson



Something about 190+ rider bunch sprint at the end of every stage seems a little whack to me. Would be good for filling hospital beds, but not much else.


----------



## cydswipe (Mar 7, 2002)

*Technology.*

I am always interested in tech. debates when it involves cycling. I like everyones thoughts on the subject. I used to think, "How would Merckx/Anquitiel/etc. have done on Lance's equipment?" I'm not sure it would have mattered a lot. The athelete makes up the majority of the success. With the radios, I feel if everone has 'em, it's all fair. True, the directors have a lot to do with the tactical side of the peleton. But, the cyclists have to do the work needed to make the "plan" function.


----------



## cosmo3 (Nov 1, 2005)

Fignon's Barber said:


> cosmo, please re-read the quote. "radios detract from the sporting nature of cycle racing". Picking out 2 contradictory situations over 21 years of racing kind of proves my point. Also, I never illuded to the riders having it easy, nor did I say there were no longer tactics in racing because of the use of radios. In addition, the DS does more than sit in the car and watch broadcast TV of the race. For example, with the use of GPS and race radio, they keep track of the where-abouts of each cyclist down to the second. Even in one on one mountain climb situations, bruyneel told lance when to go,when to stop, when to stand,etc... Wouldn't you rather have it come down to rider vs. rider? As Max Sciandri is quoted as saying,"they tell us when to attack,they tell us when to sit up, they tell us when to eat, they tell us when to piss."


21 years? They've been using radios for 21 years? Because that would mean those "older races" that started this thread were radio era events. As for "two instances" that was two instances off the top of my head...

If I'd wanted rider v. rider, I'd watch match sprints. Road racing has always been rider vs rider. vs everything else. Only difference now is "Everything else" includes a fat man in a car with a radio and a TV.


----------



## wipeout (Jun 6, 2005)

cosmo3 said:


> 21 years? They've been using radios for 21 years? Because that would mean those "older races" that started this thread were radio era events. As for "two instances" that was two instances off the top of my head...
> 
> If I'd wanted rider v. rider, I'd watch match sprints. Road racing has always been rider vs rider. vs everything else. Only difference now is "Everything else" includes a fat man in a car with a radio and a TV.


Face it, the TdF has been going downhill since they allowed mechanics to help riders with mechanical problems. A true Tour would be one where riders are on their own, have to carry everything, and fix their own damned flats. Wrap a couple of tires around your shoulders, strap on a pump, and Talley Ho! - may the best man win!


----------



## Hardy Cyclamens (Mar 21, 2005)

You should have seen the Tour back in the 60's when Anquetiel was riding. They had national teams. The riders finished the Tour and went on to other races. Black wool shorts with real chamios. Leather saddles/shoes. Centerpull brakes. No helmets.


----------

