TDF - how does it work? [Archive]

bigbrian

July 12th 03, 03:08 PM

Can someone explain this to me....

Watching the TDF coverage over the past few days, Petacchi has won 4
out of the 6 stages. Apart from the time trial, where his team did
well, Armstrong, on the other hand, has been conspicuous by his
absence in any of the stage finishes.

And yet the overall classification shows Pena at the top, Armstrong
second and Petacchi nowhere to be seen in the first 8 or 10 riders,
the last of which was 38 minutes off the pace on the chart I saw.

I know they have a points system for the green jersey, which Petacchi
is leading (or at least he was until he pulled out this afternoon),
but how can Armstrong and 8 or 10 others possibly be that far ahead of
him on time?

Thanks

H

Ian Smith

July 12th 03, 06:14 PM

On Sat, 12 Jul, Oliver Jones > wrote:

> <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
> <META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
> charset=3Diso-8859-1">
> <META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1170" name=3DGENERATOR>
> <STYLE></STYLE>
> </HEAD>
> <BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
> <DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>
> </FONT></DIV></DIV>
> <BLOCKQUOTE=20
> style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
> BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
> <DIV>"bigbrian" <<A=20
> </A>> =
> wrote in=20
> message <A=20
> =
> om">news:d3ccf3=
> </A>...</DIV>

Any chance you can fix your posting software Oliver?

I _can_ speak html, but I rather speak english.

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|

Ian Smith

July 12th 03, 06:14 PM

On Sat, 12 Jul, Oliver Jones > wrote:

> <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
> <META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
> charset=3Diso-8859-1">
> <META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1170" name=3DGENERATOR>
> <STYLE></STYLE>
> </HEAD>
> <BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
> <DIV>
> <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>
> </FONT></DIV></DIV>
> <BLOCKQUOTE=20
> style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
> BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
> <DIV>"bigbrian" <<A=20
> </A>> =
> wrote in=20
> message <A=20
> =
> om">news:d3ccf3=
> </A>...</DIV>

Any chance you can fix your posting software Oliver?

I _can_ speak html, but I rather speak english.

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|

Andrew Howes

July 12th 03, 07:21 PM

I think you will find that your 38 minutes was in fact 38 seconds. Pettachi
lost time in the prologue time trial, that is why he is not in the top ten.
Most of the riders will have been within a minute or two or three until the
mountains started today. So it is possible to win the tour without ever
winning a stage. Just add the daily times up for each rider, deduct a few
time bonuses and you have the GC !

Keep watching - I suspect Armstrong was quite pleased to be within three
minutes of Virenque on Saturday evening. He will pull it back in the time
trial stages and perhaps some of it at Alpe de Huez on Sunday (ITV 1 if you
do not have Eurosport)

Andy Howes
"Steve McGinty" > wrote in message
...
> On 12 Jul 2003 07:08:19 -0700, (bigbrian) wrote:
>
> >Can someone explain this to me....
> >
> >Watching the TDF coverage over the past few days, Petacchi has won 4
> >out of the 6 stages. Apart from the time trial, where his team did
> >well, Armstrong, on the other hand, has been conspicuous by his
> >absence in any of the stage finishes.
> >
> >And yet the overall classification shows Pena at the top, Armstrong
> >second and Petacchi nowhere to be seen in the first 8 or 10 riders,
> >the last of which was 38 minutes off the pace on the chart I saw.
> >
> >I know they have a points system for the green jersey, which Petacchi
> >is leading (or at least he was until he pulled out this afternoon),
> >but how can Armstrong and 8 or 10 others possibly be that far ahead of
> >him on time?
> >
> >Thanks
> >
> >H
> See
>
> http://www.cyclingnews.com/road/2003/tour03/?id=features/FAQ
>
> for a TdF FAQ.
>
> Regards!
> Stephen

Andrew Howes

July 12th 03, 07:21 PM

I think you will find that your 38 minutes was in fact 38 seconds. Pettachi
lost time in the prologue time trial, that is why he is not in the top ten.
Most of the riders will have been within a minute or two or three until the
mountains started today. So it is possible to win the tour without ever
winning a stage. Just add the daily times up for each rider, deduct a few
time bonuses and you have the GC !

Keep watching - I suspect Armstrong was quite pleased to be within three
minutes of Virenque on Saturday evening. He will pull it back in the time
trial stages and perhaps some of it at Alpe de Huez on Sunday (ITV 1 if you
do not have Eurosport)

Andy Howes
"Steve McGinty" > wrote in message
...
> On 12 Jul 2003 07:08:19 -0700, (bigbrian) wrote:
>
> >Can someone explain this to me....
> >
> >Watching the TDF coverage over the past few days, Petacchi has won 4
> >out of the 6 stages. Apart from the time trial, where his team did
> >well, Armstrong, on the other hand, has been conspicuous by his
> >absence in any of the stage finishes.
> >
> >And yet the overall classification shows Pena at the top, Armstrong
> >second and Petacchi nowhere to be seen in the first 8 or 10 riders,
> >the last of which was 38 minutes off the pace on the chart I saw.
> >
> >I know they have a points system for the green jersey, which Petacchi
> >is leading (or at least he was until he pulled out this afternoon),
> >but how can Armstrong and 8 or 10 others possibly be that far ahead of
> >him on time?
> >
> >Thanks
> >
> >H
> See
>
> http://www.cyclingnews.com/road/2003/tour03/?id=features/FAQ
>
> for a TdF FAQ.
>
> Regards!
> Stephen

lbockhed

July 13th 03, 02:39 PM

"bigbrian" > wrote in message
om...
> Can someone explain this to me....
>
> Watching the TDF coverage over the past few days, Petacchi has won 4
> out of the 6 stages. Apart from the time trial, where his team did
> well, Armstrong, on the other hand, has been conspicuous by his
> absence in any of the stage finishes.

when the peleton crossed the 1km to go flag, they all get the same time as
the winner (if the winner is in the peleton)
therefore armstrong does not have to be fighting to win the flat stages, as
there is no time gain (or only a small time bonus of a few seconds), all he
has to do is sit in the peleton......they are left to the sprinters to win

>
> And yet the overall classification shows Pena at the top, Armstrong
> second and Petacchi nowhere to be seen in the first 8 or 10 riders,
> the last of which was 38 minutes off the pace on the chart I saw.
>
> I know they have a points system for the green jersey, which Petacchi
> is leading (or at least he was until he pulled out this afternoon),
> but how can Armstrong and 8 or 10 others possibly be that far ahead of
> him on time?
>
> Thanks
>
> H

Ewan

July 13th 03, 08:07 PM

lbockhed wrote:
> "bigbrian" > wrote in message
> om...
>
>>Can someone explain this to me....
>>
>>Watching the TDF coverage over the past few days, Petacchi has won 4
>>out of the 6 stages. Apart from the time trial, where his team did
>>well, Armstrong, on the other hand, has been conspicuous by his
>>absence in any of the stage finishes.
>
>
> when the peleton crossed the 1km to go flag, they all get the same time as
> the winner (if the winner is in the peleton)
> therefore armstrong does not have to be fighting to win the flat stages, as
> there is no time gain (or only a small time bonus of a few seconds), all he
> has to do is sit in the peleton......they are left to the sprinters to win
>

It also makes the race safer as only the front riders will be sprinting
to get points/time bonuses - everyone else can ride safely in the
bounch. It's also easier just to give everyone in the bunch the same
time, rather than trying to work out exactly when each rider crosses teh
finishing line.

eat (out on the bike for the first time in months this afternoon:)

--
Latest photo collection added 12-July-03:
http://photos.eatnet.org.uk
scot-rail | scotland's online railway community @
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scot-rail

James Hodson

July 13th 03, 08:33 PM

On Sat, 12 Jul 2003 19:40:58 GMT, "Tenex" > wrote:

>I've ski'd at Alpe d'Huez and it took some time on the way down in the
>coaoch before I realised why there were markings on the road ... Damn it's
>steep even in a vehicle.
>

Memories, Tenex

My second ever skiing holiday was in Auris-en-Oisans. I discovered
after a day or two that the far vaster area of Alpe d'Huez was just
beyond the ridge - well, it was close enough. So I spent a fair chunk
of my pizza/beer money and bought a couple of one-day passes for Alpe
d'Huez.

Even though I had dry slope skied many, many times and had snow-skied
the previous year, I was too inexperienced to take full advantege of
those lift passes but I enjoyed my d'Huez gentle trundling
nonetheless.

In my latter sliding days, I tended towards L'espace Killy and Les 3
Vallées. I never did revisit Alpe d'Huez.

FWIW, I wouldn't like to cycle up any of those access roads either. As
you say, they are bad enough for coaches.

James

--
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/c.butty/Dscf0632.jpg

David Bertenshaw

July 14th 03, 07:04 PM

On Mon, 14 Jul 2003 13:41:11 +0100, "Dave Larrington"
> wrote:

<snip very informative post on the hilly bits...>

Thanks very much for that - very interesting.

I've wondered for many years why the tv companies don't put more of
this info on the screen.

IANATVEngineer so I'm probably talking complete Belokis, but would it
be so difficult to put an inclinometer on one of the motorbikes and
show the resulting slope on the screen? I think it would add a lot to
what is already brilliant entertainment...

David

AndyMorris

July 15th 03, 01:06 AM

Dave Larrington wrote:
>
> One last note. I think it is inappropriate to compare the ascents of
> climbs by the European pros with the efforts of us mere mortals. I
> have said this time and time again and I will repeat it now. It is
> very, very hard for the average person to comprehend just how fast
> the pros climb the big passes. Pace makes all the difference. Riding
> a climb is very different than racing it."
>

I'll second that, as a young lad I went on a Sunday ride with the Leeds Uni
cycling club, "just 50 miles or so round the back of Otley"

I didn't realize untill we got past Otley that the two skinny blokes on
fixies were entering the national Hill climb champs the next week.

Real serious climbers just don't slow down, you get to the bottom of Norwood
bank and they accelerate, its inhuman.

--
Andy Morris

AndyAtJinkasDotFreeserve.Co.UK

Love this:
Put an end to Outlook Express's messy quotes
http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/

MSeries

July 15th 03, 01:30 PM

Very interesting piece and I have no reason to not believe you. I read
somewhere that the ratings go a longway back to when cars were
becoming common place. Michelin produced a guide to the Alpine Cols
for motorists so they could judge whether or not their car would be
able to climb the cols.

"Dave Larrington" > wrote in message >...
> Farmer Alfalfa wrote:
>
> > I have noticed that none of the ITV commentators ever seem to give
> > you any indication of how steep a given climb is (either in old or
> > new money).
> >
> > Is this not considered important to most viewers?
>
> I've wondered about that too, but I just saw on letour.fr that:
>
> "The cat-1 Col du Lauteret climbs for 34.5km at an average gradient of 3.8%.
> The maximum gradient of this col which rises to 2,058m, is 8.5% in the first
> kilometer.
>
> The 'Hors Category' Col d'Izoard climbs for 19.4km at an average gradient of
> 5.9%. The maximum gradient of this col which rises to 2,360m is 9%. This
> steep section is in the 15th kilometer.
>
> The cat-2 Cote de St-Apollinaire rises to 1,253m after climbing for 6.7kkm
> at an average gradient of 7.4%. It peaks at the 156km mark.
>
> The cat-3 Cote de la Rochette climbs for 4km at an average gradient of 7.4%
> and peaks at the 176.5km mark."
>
> I also found this, a year or two back, from Bruce Hildenbrand's article
> "Rating the Climbs of the Tour de
> France":
>
> "One of the most frequently asked questions is how do the organizers
> determine the ratings for the climbs in the Tour de France (TIOOYK). The
> Tour organizers use two criteria: 1) the length and steepness of the climb
> and 2) the position of the climb in the stage. A third, and much lesser
> criteria, is the quality of the road surface.
>
> It is important to note several things before this discussion begins. First,
> the organizers of the Tour have been very erratic in their classifications
> of climbs. The north side of the Col de la Madeleine has flip-flopped
> between a 1st Category to an Hors Category climb, even though it seems to be
> in the same position of a stage every year.
>
> Secondly, rating inflation, so rampant in other sports has raised its ugly
> head here. Climbs that used to be a 2nd Category are now a 1st Category,
> even though, like the Madeleine, they occupy the same position in a stage
> year after year.
>
> Let's talk about the ratings. I will give you my impressions on what I think
> the criteria are for rating the climbs based on having ridden over 100 of
> the rated climbs in the major European tours.
>
> Note that gradual climbs do not receive grades. It has been my observation
> that about a 4% grade is necessary for a climb to get rated. Also, a climb
> must gain at least 100m for it to be rated.
>
> Categories:
>
> 4th Category - the lowest category, climbs of 300-1000 feet (100-300m).
> 3rd Category - climbs of 1000-2000 feet (300-600m).
> 2nd Category - climbs of 2000-3500 feet (600-1100m).
> 1st Category - climbs of 3500-5000 feet (1100-1500m).
> Hors Category - the hardest, climbs of 5000 feet+ (1500m+).
>
> The organizers of the Tour de France also claim that the quality of the road
> surface can influence the rating of a climb. If the surface is very poor,
> like some of the more obscure climbs in the Pyrenees, then the rating may be
> bumped up. Also, remember we are rating only paved (i.e. asphalt) roads.
>
> Dirt roads vary considerably in their layout, condition and maintenance
> because there really are no guidelines for their construction. This makes it
> difficult to compare these climbs and inappropriate to lump them with paved
> roads.
>
> Steepness also plays a factor in the rating. Most of the big climbs in the
> Alps average 7-8% where the big climbs in the Pyrenees average 8-9%.
>
> Please remember that I am giving very, very rough guidelines and that there
> are exceptions to every rule. For example, L'Alpe D'Huez climbs 3700ft
> (1200m), but is an Hors Category climb. This is because it usually comes at
> the end of a very tough stage and the climb itself is unusually steep (~9%)
> by Alpine standards.
>
> More confusing is the Col de Borderes, a mere 1000 feet (300m) climb outside
> of Arrens in the Pyrenees mountains. I have seen it rated anywhere from a
> 3rd Category to a 1st Category !!! This is most likely due again, to its
> placement on the stage. The 3rd Category rating came when it was near the
> beginning of a stage where its 1st Category rating came when it was near the
> end.
>
> Flat or downhill sections can also affect a climb's rating. Such sections
> offer a rest to the weary and can reduce the difficulty of the climb
> considerably. This may be one of the reasons that the aforementioned Col de
> la Madeleine, which has a 1 mile downhill/flat section at mid-height,
> flip-flops in its rating.
>
> European vs. United States Climbs
>
> I am often asked how climbs in the United States compare to those in Europe.
> Most of the US climbs are either steep enough by European standards (6-8%
> grade), but are short (5-10km) so they fall into the 3rd Category or 2nd
> possibly; or the climbs gain enough altitude, but are too long (they average
> <5%) so again they would fail to break the 1st Category barrier and end up
> most likely a 2nd or 3rd Category.
>
> Fear not, there are exceptions. Most notable to Californians is the south
> side of Palomar Mountain which from Pauma Valley climbs 4200' in 11 miles, a
> potential 1st Category ascent, though it may fall prey to downgrading
> because of the flat section at mile four. The east side of Towne Pass in
> Death Valley is definitely a 1st Category climb! A popular Northern
> California climb, Mount Hamilton, is similar to Palomar Mountain but, fails
> to be a 1st Category climb because of two offending downhill sections on the
> ascent and an overall gradient of 5%.
>
> For Coloradoans, you can thank the ski industry for creating long, but
> relatively gradual climbs that rarely exceed 5% for any substantial length
> (5+ miles). I never had to use anything bigger than a 42x23 on any climb in
> Colorado, regardless of altitude. Gear ratios of 39x24 or 26 are commonplace
> in the Alps and Pyrenees and give a very telling indication as to the
> difficulty of European climbs. One potential 1st Category climb for
> Coloradoans may be the 4000 ft. climb in about 15 miles from Ouray to the
> top of Red Mountain Pass.
>
> Other Rating Systems
>
> Also, it should be noted that there is not a single uniform rating scheme
> for all the races on the UCI calendar. What one race might call a 1st
> Category climb, may be called a 2nd Category climb, even though the stages
> of the two races are almost identical.
>
> Riding vs. Racing Climbs
>
> One last note. I think it is inappropriate to compare the ascents of climbs
> by the European pros with the efforts of us mere mortals. I have said this
> time and time again and I will repeat it now. It is very, very hard for the
> average person to comprehend just how fast the pros climb the big passes.
> Pace makes all the difference. Riding a climb is very different than racing
> it."
>
> Dave Larrington - http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/
> ================================================== =========
> Editor - British Human Power Club Newsletter
> http://www.bhpc.org.uk/
> ================================================== =========

Tony W

July 15th 03, 02:08 PM

"MSeries" > wrote in message
om...
> Very interesting piece and I have no reason to not believe you. I read
> somewhere that the ratings go a longway back to when cars were
> becoming common place. Michelin produced a guide to the Alpine Cols
> for motorists so they could judge whether or not their car would be
> able to climb the cols.

Didn't Duffers wax lyrical (and long) about this a year or three back?

More interesting than his usual description of the local cakes.

T

James Hodson

July 15th 03, 06:22 PM

On Mon, 14 Jul 2003 13:41:11 +0100, "Dave Larrington"
> wrote:

>Categories:
>
[SNIP]

>European vs. United States Climbs
>I am often asked how climbs in the United States compare to those in Europe.

[ANOTHER SNIP & Thanks, Dave]

What about a climb from sea level up to the Mauna Kea Observatories in
Hawaii? Now that would be nasty.

James

--
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/c.butty/Dscf0632.jpg