# Fight over race radios



## PigmyRacer (Oct 3, 2007)

http://velonews.competitor.com/2011/02/news/listen-up-riders-want-radio_159042

Very interesting to see the teams standing together against the UCI. I personally think that the UCI is severely overplaying its hand. They can't afford to unilaterally manipulate this sport to their liking and expect the fans and the teams to go along with it. 

Any thoughts?


----------



## heathb (Nov 1, 2008)

Nice to see a quality rider mentioned that doesn't need radios......Philippe Gilbert. If only all of them could be such a man and not a sissy.

The radios are just one more thing that make modern cycling seem so robotic.


----------



## JohnHenry (Aug 9, 2006)

this is houston. do you copy?


----------



## username (Dec 21, 2007)

Teams talking about needing radios for safety seem overstated. I could be wrong. I like anything that makes the break more likely to succeed. As a lowly cat 5, it is unlikely radios will ever play a role in my racing, but if they did, I suspect I would argue to include them.


----------



## pianopiano (Jun 4, 2005)

heathb said:


> Nice to see a quality rider mentioned that doesn't need radios......Philippe Gilbert. If only all of them could be such a man and not a sissy.
> 
> The radios are just one more thing that make modern cycling seem so robotic.


Robotic is right. Besides, Phil Gilbert seems to be able to win a race without one. There are still as many crashes, if not more, in pro races these days, so I don't really buy into the argument that the radios are making the race 'safer'. It's the omnipresent dangers that professional riders are exposed to during their many hours of training that posess the greatest risks anyhow .


----------



## Wookiebiker (Sep 5, 2005)

What difference does it really make....Radio's or not?

If they keep the radio's, things stay the same. Sometimes breaks get away, sometimes now.

If they get ride of them, things won't change. The peloton will keep breaks closer and they will still get time updates, whether it's from race officials or team cars. In some ways keeping the breaks closer will make for even duller racing than there is now.

I actually think the radios make the races more interesting...at least those with sprint finishes. You get much better organized lead out trains with the radio's than without...and on climbing stages/races it still comes down to who is strongest...so what difference does it really make?

I know if I were in the Pro's I'd prefer radio's...if for no other reason than figuring out what was for dinner that night after the race.

The only place I can see radio's making any sort of difference is in time trials...and that's only if the team cars can not pull up along the riders and give them time splits. If they can still do that...there still is no difference between radio's and not.


----------



## spookyload (Jan 30, 2004)

I think their protest is immature and whiny. The UCI doesn't need to check with the riders when they make rules...that is their job to make rules. Does the NFL check with playes every time they modify the rules? I don't think so. The teams want radios for two reason...so managers can manage all riders on the team at the same time, and to cover their mistakes. 

A rider can sit right in during early parts of a stage and have no concern with who is making a move. The race director can simply get a radio message to all of his riders if there is an important person in the break. Furthermore, he can manage the break time to the second via the radio to all of his riders. He no longer has to get the message to one of his riders and have him work his way through the group to relay messages.

The safety topic is BS. That is just the excuse used to try to preserve their precious tool. Bad team postition can be compensated for by radios. A get out of jail free card. There has been racing for many more years without radios than with. There weren't riders falling off mountains or crashing into rail crossings in huge numbers without it. It might require the riders to learn a course a little more prior to strapping on a bike, but that is racing folks.

As for the reaction of the UCI to yesterday. They were wrong. They should have DQ'd every rider who wore a radio. After the first thirty or fourty were gone, the others would have fallen into line. Someone would want to win the race. If all riders do it, DQ them all. That will get the sponsors attention, the race organizers attention, and maybe show some freaking backbone by the UCI. The UCI caved and lost face yesterday.


----------



## TurboTurtle (Feb 4, 2004)

Too bad team managers aren't as passionate about doping. - TF


----------



## Wookiebiker (Sep 5, 2005)

spookyload said:


> As for the reaction of the UCI to yesterday. They were wrong. They should have DQ'd every rider who wore a radio. After the first thirty or fourty were gone, the others would have fallen into line. Someone would want to win the race. If all riders do it, DQ them all. That will get the sponsors attention, the race organizers attention, and maybe show some freaking backbone by the UCI. The UCI caved and lost face yesterday.


If you want to see the UCI go away....fast....have them start DQ'ing entire fields, thus ending races and taking away sponsorship dollars.

No race = no money = no UCI

If they know what's good for them the UCI will shut up about the radio's. If the riders want to push it, they will win. If the UCI pushes back and starts DQ'ing riders they will lose badly both in the PR department and when it comes to money to function. Somebody will be more than happy to step in as a "New" sanctioning body....Hmmm, maybe this is a good idea after all :thumbsup:


----------



## heathb (Nov 1, 2008)

I say do away with team support vehicles as well. 

Bring back neutral support. Make it against the rules to offer the riders any info. 

Just water bottles, food, wheels and some basic replacement bikes in the most popular sizes. Make it a mans sport again.


----------



## spookyload (Jan 30, 2004)

Wookiebiker said:


> If you want to see the UCI go away....fast....have them start DQ'ing entire fields, thus ending races and taking away sponsorship dollars.
> 
> No race = no money = no UCI
> 
> If they know what's good for them the UCI will shut up about the radio's. If the riders want to push it, they will win. If the UCI pushes back and starts DQ'ing riders they will lose badly both in the PR department and when it comes to money to function. Somebody will be more than happy to step in as a "New" sanctioning body....Hmmm, maybe this is a good idea after all :thumbsup:


Little confused by your response. Have you ever seen a sport where the players make the rules instead of the governing body? I haven't. This isn't smear the queer in your backyard. They applied to be part of the pro tour, not the other way around. And there are plenty of teams waiting to take the place of every team that doesn't fall in line. Let the pro's figure out another career off the bike. Flipping burgers or commentating is about all they are qualified to do. If you bow down to them, you are powerless. What will be next? Their job is to follow all the rules, not just the ones they like. 

I agree with the post above. Wish the DS were as passionate about anti doping.


----------



## spookyload (Jan 30, 2004)

Imagine If Fignon had had a radio when Lemond beat him in the final TT. I think he would have likely won with non-stop split. See how the radios change a race?


----------



## SantaCruz (Mar 22, 2002)

spookyload said:


> Little confused by your response. Have you ever seen a sport where the players make the rules instead of the governing body? I haven't. This isn't smear the queer in your backyard. They applied to be part of the pro tour, not the other way around. And there are plenty of teams waiting to take the place of every team that doesn't fall in line. Let the pro's figure out another career off the bike. Flipping burgers or commentating is about all they are qualified to do. If you bow down to them, you are powerless. What will be next? Their job is to follow all the rules, not just the ones they like.


The radio issue should take back seat to the bigger issue of the power of the new riders association. Have you ever seen a professional sport where the athletes have no input into any of the rules. Rule changes should be about improving the sport and that needs a full and open discussion. Not an abitrary decision from a select bunch of old guys. 

More power to a legitimate riders association!!! 
I like healthy controversy. YMMV


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

spookyload said:


> Imagine If Fignon had had a radio when Lemond beat him in the final TT. I think he would have likely won with non-stop split. See how the radios change a race?


If you've ever done a TT as an amateur, you've done so without any splits. Even if they had splits being given to them, both riders were giving 100%. Perhaps there may have been a different outcome given the 8 second margin, but I don't think Fignon would have been able to ride any harder than he did.


----------



## Alaska Mike (Sep 28, 2008)

SantaCruz said:


> The radio issue should take back seat to the bigger issue of the power of the new riders association. Have you ever seen a professional sport where the athletes have no input into any of the rules. Rule changes should be about improving the sport and that needs a full and open discussion. Not an abitrary decision from a select bunch of old guys.


This.

The UCI is making major decisions without consulting the athletes or manufacturers (stickers, anyone?). As I recall, they've also had more than their share of run-ins with promoters as well (ASO, for one).

Their power is derived from their recognition by the IOC, and I don't expect that to dissolve anytime soon, as the IOC is more corrupt and incompetent than the UCI could ever be. They're the UCI's role model.

Two years from now we'll have another name change- _*ProThingie!*_, and they'll come up with a whole new set of rules without outside input.


----------



## SantaCruz (Mar 22, 2002)

heathb said:


> I say do away with team support vehicles as well.
> Bring back neutral support. Make it against the rules to offer the riders any info.
> Just water bottles, food, wheels and some basic replacement bikes in the most popular sizes. *Make it a mans sport again.*


How about the women?

I favor moving away from old school in the pro peleton (but not in every cycling discipline). We've been there and done that and the future of this sport is inclusion and positive collaboration to achieve the best result in the public's eye and win their trust and support (... image all the people, living in harmony...). AND so they will buy the products of the industry. That's how growing professional sports organizations must be presented and marketed.

Oh and if you want Samsung, Sony, LG, etc as ProTeam sponsors - then they ought to be able to have cell phones, live video feeds of the leaders, visual comms with support vehicles. The sport can do bigger than Garmin.


----------



## ZoSoSwiM (Mar 7, 2008)

I'm all for ditching the radios. We don't use them as amateurs and the pros didn't before they were pro. So guess what.. they should remember how to race without them. Maybe team leaders will actually "lead" if the radios are canned.


----------



## Cableguy (Jun 6, 2010)

If safety is an issue, then all teams can simply use a common, race wide radio controlled by officials right?


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

ZoSoSwiM said:


> I'm all for ditching the radios. We don't use them as amateurs and the pros didn't before they were pro. So guess what.. they should remember how to race without them. Maybe team leaders will actually "lead" if the radios are canned.


I'm also an amateur as well, but I'm sure we'd be singing a different tune when races are ~100 miles, sometimes part of a stage race, and our livlihood is on the line.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

Cableguy said:


> If safety is an issue, then all teams can simply use a common, race wide radio controlled by officials right?


This is a possible solution, but with teams wanting to get food at different times and several languages being spoke, I'm not sure how a single open channel would work too well other than being full of constant chatter.


----------



## den bakker (Nov 13, 2004)

ZoSoSwiM said:


> I'm all for ditching the radios. We don't use them as amateurs and the pros didn't before they were pro. So guess what.. they should remember how to race without them. Maybe team leaders will actually "lead" if the radios are canned.


try a few point to point races through the dutch road furniture and let me know how you feel


----------



## Wookiebiker (Sep 5, 2005)

spookyload said:


> Little confused by your response. Have you ever seen a sport where the players make the rules instead of the governing body? I haven't. This isn't smear the queer in your backyard. They applied to be part of the pro tour, not the other way around. And there are plenty of teams waiting to take the place of every team that doesn't fall in line. Let the pro's figure out another career off the bike. Flipping burgers or commentating is about all they are qualified to do. If you bow down to them, you are powerless. What will be next? Their job is to follow all the rules, not just the ones they like.
> 
> I agree with the post above. Wish the DS were as passionate about anti doping.


Why yes, I have...They are called players associations and every major sport except cycling it seems has one. They give the players a voice in what rules are going to change, how long the season will be, maximum fines, etc.

Right now cycling doesn't have one, but it appears one may be on it's way quickly...at which time the UCI will lose a lot of it's power because they will acutally have to work with the cyclists to develop new rules and not just throw them out there and see what sticks.

I'd personally love to see the UCI DQ an entire peloton for using radios and the backlash they would get from the sponsors of the race....it wouldn't happen again (i.e DQ'ing an entire field), that much is for sure.

Last time I checked the UCI officials were getting paid...no riders, no paycheck. No teams, no pay check. No sponsors, no paycheck. The UCI needs the riders to cooperate as much or more than the riders need to cooperate with the UCI. The trick is getting all the riders to agree which is where the problem comes in. The UCI is very small compared to the number of riders out there, so it's easy for them to come to an agreement...Put 1000 racers in a room and it would be hard to come to a consensus...hence why the UCI still has control and power over the Peloton.


----------



## ghostryder (Dec 28, 2009)

Cycling has become boring, because of the constant radio communication. There are no surprises.


----------



## tranzformer (Dec 27, 2007)

:thumbsup:


spade2you said:


> This is a possible solution, but with teams wanting to get food at different times and several languages being spoke, I'm not sure how a single open channel would work too well other than being full of constant chatter.


Channel 1: German
Channel 2: Spanish
3: English
4: Italian 
5: French
6: Russian

Rider can pick which channel to listen to. Easy enough.


----------



## spookyload (Jan 30, 2004)

spade2you said:


> If you've ever done a TT as an amateur, you've done so without any splits. Even if they had splits being given to them, both riders were giving 100%. Perhaps there may have been a different outcome given the 8 second margin, but I don't think Fignon would have been able to ride any harder than he did.


Watch the stage on YouTube. He was damn near waving like a parade. He had a huge lead and didn't think he could lose. I remember watching it on abc an laughing at his performance. He was not racing hard for the first half.


----------



## kneejerk (Feb 2, 2007)

The radios should be used by race officials to communicate to the riders for reasons of safety, race situation (including riders up the road) and that's about it. Everyone should be on the same frequency.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

spookyload said:


> Watch the stage on YouTube. He was damn near waving like a parade. He had a huge lead and didn't think he could lose. I remember watching it on abc an laughing at his performance. He was not racing hard for the first half.


I did watch it and still remember LeMond on a box of Wheaties, but I was pretty young and haven't watched it since. Was meaning to purchase it from WCP, but got the Indurain DVDs instead, which clearly wasn't nearly as entertaining.


----------



## 32and3cross (Feb 28, 2005)

ZoSoSwiM said:


> I'm all for ditching the radios. We don't use them as amateurs and the pros didn't before they were pro. So guess what.. they should remember how to race without them. Maybe team leaders will actually "lead" if the radios are canned.


When, as an amature, have you had to drop back back into a convoy of 30+ cars, or navigate back up through the cars when returning from a mechanical. Do you often deal with racing in fields of 160 so riders, taking on courses that either you have never seen before, or are filled with hazards that you may or may not know about before you come upon them. 

Im not totally for race radios but as someone that has been responsible for transmitting information to riders mid race that concerned their safety I can tell you that equating your local racing to pro level racing is not clear thinking. Even in the p12 races locally your not dealing with the sorts of things that you come upon in a UCI point to point race or circute race where you have changing road conditions, large fields and caravans to deal with.


----------



## lamazion (Sep 11, 2004)

I'm for radios ... May the strongest team/rider win. BTW, I think radio use is a scapegoat for a change in racing style. The Giro still tends to have more exciting racing. In the tour, the big teams ride not to lose.


----------



## 32and3cross (Feb 28, 2005)

kneejerk said:


> The radios should be used by race officials to communicate to the riders for reasons of safety, race situation (including riders up the road) and that's about it. Everyone should be on the same frequency.


While this is an interesting idea it would not really work because when large crashes happen the information is all over the place, and having been on the recieving end of the official race radio I can tell you that on average it sucks they might as well mail you the numbers of the riders in the brake cause you might get them fast and right then and as far as who fell in a crash forget it unless its one rider and the pack is going easy.


----------



## JustTooBig (Aug 11, 2005)

32and3cross said:


> *Im not totally for race radios but as someone that has been responsible for transmitting information to riders mid race that concerned their safety* I can tell you that equating your local racing to pro level racing is not clear thinking. Even in the p12 races locally your not dealing with the sorts of things that you come upon in a UCI point to point race or circute race where you have changing road conditions, large fields and caravans to deal with.


so if this is really a safety issue, I assume that the statistics support the notion that the number of accidents and injuries due to hazards, road furniture, etc. has dropped substantially after the introduction of race radio, right?


----------



## 32and3cross (Feb 28, 2005)

JustTooBig said:


> so if this is really a safety issue, I assume that the statistics support the notion that the number of accidents and injuries due to hazards, road furniture, etc. has dropped substantially after the introduction of race radio, right?


When we used them is was a safety and logistics issue. Tactics happned too quickly at the front for me to provide instruction on what to do.


----------



## LostViking (Jul 18, 2008)

I'm not convinced that there isn't a real safety issue here, but I guess the only way to find out is a year without radios. 

If injuries go up dramatically, radios can be reintroduced (and this question can go away) - perhaps with the common race radio system some here have discussed.


----------



## kneejerk (Feb 2, 2007)

32and3cross said:


> While this is an interesting idea it would not really work because when large crashes happen the information is all over the place, and having been on the recieving end of the official race radio I can tell you that on average it sucks they might as well mail you the numbers of the riders in the brake cause you might get them fast and right then and as far as who fell in a crash forget it unless its one rider and the pack is going easy.


Well then the Officials need to do a better job of the actual identification of the people in the "lead of the race". Maybe this will also go far in trying to minimize silly pack crashes and if not, oh well...... they all need to be Professionals. 

Same goes for time trial events, the race radio needs to be coming from an Official not the team.


----------



## tranzformer (Dec 27, 2007)

kneejerk said:


> The radios should be used by race officials to communicate to the riders for reasons of safety, race situation (including riders up the road) and that's about it. Everyone should be on the same frequency.


Same frequency? What about different languages?


----------



## 32and3cross (Feb 28, 2005)

kneejerk said:


> Well then the Officials need to do a better job of the actual identification of the people in the "lead of the race". Maybe this will also go far in trying to minimize silly pack crashes and if not, oh well...... they all need to be Professionals.
> 
> Same goes for time trial events, the race radio needs to be coming from an Official not the team.



Sorry your comments are not based on any real world experinces while mine are. Trying saying oh well when you happen to know there is a squeze from 4 lanes to 2 and there is another field approaching from the opposite direction proceeded by its own lead cars. This is a typical thing taht happenes at Philly every year. Being able to warn your riders means taht rather than people slamming over at he last min when they see the oncoming feild there is at least a chance to react at a safer pace.

I see no reason why the infor needs to come from the Officals during a TT in fact it would cause alot of headaches as every rider would have a slightly different why they wanted delivered. The guy in 9th place over all is going to want his splits to the 10th place guy he prolly dosn't care about his splits to the leader of the race or the fastest time of the day.


----------



## Perico (Mar 15, 2010)

Two things:

1) Yes the players in the NFL do have a say in the rules through their union, the NFLPA, so do the players in the NHL, NBA and MLB. As a matter of fact each sport has a number of rules that were suggested by the players.

2) Fignon was going hard from the start, saying anything else is simply making excuses.


----------



## baker921 (Jul 20, 2007)

Are radios an expensive barrier to smaller teams or take up a disproportionate ammount of their budget? My guess is maybe yes when they were introduced but not now.
It seems to me that eliminating cheap technology will only put more reliance on manpower, covering the breaks and going back to the cars for info. I think this will play into the hands of the stronger teams and as a spectator what I want to see are more GT contenders not just the leaders of the big 2/3 teams. What I would like to see is anything that gives a better chance to good riders on weaker teams.


----------



## kneejerk (Feb 2, 2007)

32and3cross said:


> I see no reason why the infor needs to come from the Officals during a TT in fact it would cause alot of headaches as every rider would have a slightly different why they wanted delivered. The guy in 9th place over all is going to want his splits to the 10th place guy he prolly dosn't care about his splits to the leader of the race or the fastest time of the day.


They will allow the team car to follow in a TT, that is where the other info. can come from.


----------



## kneejerk (Feb 2, 2007)

tranzformer said:


> Same frequency? What about different languages?



Yeah, I guess that could be a problem. But, Spanglish is pretty universal these days? What about Morse Code (j/k!).


----------



## waldo425 (Sep 22, 2008)

spookyload said:


> The UCI caved and lost face yesterday.


No, they did that a long long time ago.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

kneejerk said:


> They will allow the team car to follow in a TT, that is where the other info. can come from.


Is yelling at the rider via bullhorn really that different from using a race radio? Same end result, but we're taking a few technological steps back.


----------



## 32and3cross (Feb 28, 2005)

kneejerk said:


> They will allow the team car to follow in a TT, that is where the other info. can come from.


So now we are back to the car trying to pull along side to deliver that info - back to a safety concern again


----------



## 32and3cross (Feb 28, 2005)

kneejerk said:


> Yeah, I guess that could be a problem. But, Spanglish is pretty universal these days? What about Morse Code (j/k!).


It would be a concern - once again this simply would not work.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

32and3cross said:


> So now we are back to the car trying to pull along side to deliver that info - back to a safety concern again


Wasn't it Boardman who was doing a blistering prologue, but biffed it due to the wet conditions and was almost hit by his team car?


----------



## MerlinAma (Oct 11, 2005)

You all do realize this is 2011. Every fan/bozo on the side of the road has a smartphone so getting the information is not really an issue. All a team needs to do is have strategically placed people along the route to deliver messages to their team. 
One board could have bogus info and one could have the correct info. 
Bruneel would probably have someone sending up smoke signals to tell his team what was happening if necessary.


----------



## ZoSoSwiM (Mar 7, 2008)

Having people out on course intentionally trying to seed bogus race data to other teams should be considered cheating. If that ever happens I'd be really disappointed with the team responsible... not that they care what I think.


----------



## MerlinAma (Oct 11, 2005)

ZoSoSwiM said:


> Having people out on course intentionally trying to seed bogus race data to other teams should be considered cheating. If that ever happens I'd be really disappointed with the team responsible... not that they care what I think.


I wasn't suggesting the whole purpose was to give bogus information. Only suggesting there had to be a way to tell your team without giving the information to everyone else.

But then if everyone is doing exactly the same thing, we're pretty much back to having the same info as race radio would give. So just keep the radios!


----------



## RRRoubaix (Aug 27, 2008)

TurboTurtle said:


> Too bad team managers aren't as passionate about doping. - TF


FTW! :thumbsup:


----------



## PigmyRacer (Oct 3, 2007)

I feel like the race radios, for better or worse, have turned cycling into more of a team sport in some respects than it was in the Lemond days or earlier (my earliest memories are Lemond). Some people call it predictable but there seems to be more strategy as well because the teams can communicate with their riders rather than saying "go all out and the strongest rider will win..."


----------



## spookyload (Jan 30, 2004)

32and3cross said:


> When, as an amature, have you had to drop back back into a convoy of 30+ cars, or navigate back up through the cars when returning from a mechanical. Do you often deal with racing in fields of 160 so riders, taking on courses that either you have never seen before, or are filled with hazards that you may or may not know about before you come upon them.
> 
> Im not totally for race radios but as someone that has been responsible for transmitting information to riders mid race that concerned their safety I can tell you that equating your local racing to pro level racing is not clear thinking. Even in the p12 races locally your not dealing with the sorts of things that you come upon in a UCI point to point race or circute race where you have changing road conditions, large fields and caravans to deal with.


Still not buying it. Riders will still drop back for a litany of reasons. Navigating through the support cars is just part of the sport. They do it for water, food, clothing, medical and any other number of races. Why should it be any different for tactics? Saying how dangerous it is for safety is a joke when riders do it non-stop for their conveniences the entire race.


----------



## TurboTurtle (Feb 4, 2004)

I think that the radio stink is all about team management control and has little (if anything) to do with rider safety. A recent comment from Friere (as an example that the riders have no solidarity):

"...the recent solidarity in relation to race radios came about as a result of the efforts of the teams’ association AIGCP rather than from pressure from the riders themselves."

I'm all for (most) anything that gives the 'little guy' a better shot and makes the top riders have to ride.

TF


----------



## 32and3cross (Feb 28, 2005)

spookyload said:


> Still not buying it. Riders will still drop back for a litany of reasons. Navigating through the support cars is just part of the sport. They do it for water, food, clothing, medical and any other number of races. Why should it be any different for tactics? Saying how dangerous it is for safety is a joke when riders do it non-stop for their conveniences the entire race.


I think you really have no idea what you talking about. Having been in the caravan you see how dangerous it is. You go back when you have to no one wants to be back in the cars.


----------



## ultimobici (Jul 16, 2005)

It is simple.

The teams/riders harp on about safety, safety, safety. If that is there concern then a universal open channel in the language of the race is all that is necessary. Many if not most professionals in Europe are able to understand/communicate in French/Italian/Dutch/Spanish. You could have a dual channel system with a Local Language/English set-up to make things better.

Radios that are team specific allow for a situation where the strongest rider may not necessarily win. Strength is not just physical, it is also mental. Cycling is often described as "Chess on Wheels", so let it stay that way. Guile is as important as leg & lung power, IMO.

If radios had been in use in the 80's Guimard would have possibly talked Mottet out of TT'ing to victory in Lombardia. More recently Gilbert was able to win Het Volk because his DS, Marc Madiot, was unable to dissuade him due to his earpiece malfunctioning. No one gave him a prayer of surviving but he did.

Football prohibits communication between the players & manager other than before the match and half-time. That's how it should be in cycling. Team briefing in the morning to dicuss the tactics for the day then it's down to the riders to put it into play as things unfold. Otherwise it is just automatons.


----------



## ultimobici (Jul 16, 2005)

32and3cross said:


> I think you really have no idea what you talking about. Having been in the caravan you see how dangerous it is. You go back when you have to no one wants to be back in the cars.


All you need is the commissaires to advise all cars that there is a rider coming through the convoy. 

If he needs service then there is a time honoured way of indicating it with your hand. 

Puncture - Rear=Right Front=Left
Food is covered by the feed station(s)
Bottles - advise the commissaires before dropping back to the team car or the team car is allowed forward.

Michael Barry had his book launch in London last year and was asked about this very subject. He called BS on the safety issue then and there. His observation was that with radios as they are used now, you get every DS shouting to their riders that there's a obstacle coming up so get to the front to stay out of trouble. All that this leads to is 180 riders scrambling to get to the front virtually simultaneously, often *causing* crashes rather than preventing them!


----------



## AJL (Jul 9, 2009)

After thinking about it last year - Radio for team captains (two) and that's it. I'm fine with each rider having a radio for ITTs.


----------

