USPS wins by 1:07. But only gains 20 seconds on 2nd place Phonak due to the new rules. Should USPS have taken it easy in the last 5K if they had little to gain? (maybe they did - I didn’t see the race). Why push it when you know you’re ending the day with a 20 second victory? Just curious.
Because they were trying to maximize the time gains on all the teams, not just second place. That is to say, the 5th place team can lose up to 1 minute, then make sure they lose that minute. The 10th place team can lose 1:50, then make sure they lose the 1:50.
I knew there had to be a smart answer. Thanks.
(I still hate the rule).
Lance said afterwards it was the best time trial of his life. He also said they started out very conservatively because it was an absolute downpour when they started.
The rule blows. Clearly an anti-USPS/Lance rule. What are they going to do next year, limit time lost in the mountains?
Or maybe this rule could be applied to triathlon. Limiting the loss of a weak swim and a weak bike so that the run is really the only thing that matters.
Of course I only joke. There would never be a triathlon where only the run matters…
Remember the psychological impact that such an overwhelming victory makes on their rivals. I think many in the peloton believed that USPS and Armstrong wouldn’t be that powerful this Tour, due to Lance’s perceived overly-hectic past year (the divorce, moving in with Crow, training in the “mountains” of Malibu, shooting umpteen commercials, etc.)
For him to come out and beat all but one rider in the prologue, and then for USPS to destroy everybody in the TTT (there’s no denying 1:07 is a huge margain of victory) thereby putting LA back in yellow in only the fourth stage, must have been somewhat unexpected and must be demoralizing to many of the other riders/teams.
Sure, they only put Phonak down 20 seconds, but the reality is that USPS showed everyone in the world that they and their leader are by far the strongest and fastest riders in the tour right now.
I agree. Totally lame rule. What are they thinking? At last check, cycling was a team sport. Why then are they propping up the poor teams? Seems like they change the rules each year to make it more difficult for LA/USPS to dominate. This year the rule changes are just embarrasing. “Some other teams can’t compete with USPS, so we’ll just provide them with an inherent advantage, and USPS an inherent disadvantage, to keep it interesting. Oh yeah, of course it’s still about the best rider/team winning.” Nice rationale. Why don’t they quit trying to impress us with their creativity, call a spade a spade, and simply give USPS a 5:00 deficit from the start?
jhendric
Not sure I totally agree with the rule, but calm down a little. It used to exist in 1984 or something, so it’s not some totally new wacky rule they brought in for the first time this year.
If you think they wanted to take away a USPS advantage, they could have just removed the TTT, it was only brought back into the Tour a few years ago. Anyway, USPS doesn’t always dominate the TTT.
I think it’s got nothing to do with USPS like you say. It’s like a lot of sports have evolved for entertainment purposes. You get a team that smashes everyone in the TTT and suddenly the Tour isn’t quite as interesting for the next 2 weeks. Or you get a gun rider in a weaker team, who drops completely out of contention because his team is weak, his team has a pile up or just a lot of bad luck.
I’m not saying it’s right, but I’d say they’re doing it to ensure the fight for the Maillot Jaune remains interesting throughout most of the Tour. At the end of the day, the Alpe d’Huez TT is going to be much more exciting if there’s 4 or 5 guys still within striking distance of each other when they get there.
“Ernie Els shanks it into the trees at Amen Corner, but he’s safe since Woods is on the fairway and they’ll use his ball.”
Exactly… this rule is like turning the Masters Tournament into a Scramble. If they handicap the TTT, they should do the same across the board (mountains, sprints, etc.) Limiting time loss makes the sport less understandable and simply more wierd in my opinion - something that cycling doesn’t need. Scrambles in golf are good for fun & charity events because it eliminates the bad shots & “stress” of golf, but it’s stupid to do it in a championship setting - in my opinion.
So what you’re saying is that the Tour should be configured to be as exciting as possible to watch by fans, rather than a race in which the best rider/team wins based on their performance as compared to other riders/teams? BTW - I’m calm: )
Or maybe this rule could be applied to triathlon. Limiting the loss of a weak swim and a weak bike so that the run is really the only thing that matters.
Of course I only joke. There would never be a triathlon where only the run matters…I really like the sound of that!