Why Cycling Should Not Be a Team Sport

[dauwhe]

Why should cycling be a team sport? Is there a sporting reason for this? I don't see how having a servant bring water bottles to the star during a stage makes the sport more exciting, or more meaningful. I would argue that it makes tactics less interesting, especially as practiced in modern grand tours. I admire a sprinter who doesn't need a leadout train more than one who does. The star doesn't have to worry about the breakaway; he or she can just sit behind teammates rather than making tough decisions. The team structure makes the rich richer, and gives power and influence to the directors rather than the riders. How is it fair that a rider can sit in the pack while the world TT champion and one of the great rouleurs destroy the field at the start of the final climb? Those riders can spend themselves before the finish precisely because they are not fully competing in the race, and thus can drop off and ride the final climb at my speed (well, probably not ;) ).

I believe the main advantages of teams are financial--I'm sure the sponsors like it. And perhaps more importantly, it allows us many more opportunities Monday-morning quarterbacking, so those of us who could never win a race criticize those who could. And then we criticize the winners for not deliberately losing, or for being insufficiently deferential to their teammates.

Cycling seems to have little in common with any other team sport. Foremost is the fact that it would be recognizable as a sport without the idea of teams.

Dave, feeling argumentative but not wanting to talk politics :argue:

[Ray]

I think teams would form organically, whether they were sanctioned or not. Its advantageous to have allies in the pack, whether they ever fetch water or not. The strong riders would likely end up paying the guys he gets to work for him, whether through a formal team arrangement or less formal deals made on the road. You need help to chase down breaks, to set the pace, to launch attacks to make another guy work, for whatever reasons. I don't know the history of the sport, but I'd guess in the earliest days of racing there probably weren't teams but they evolved naturally. You could ban 'em but they'd still form. It gives the top riders the help they need and it gives the lesser riders a way to make a living without winning races. There's something in it for everyone - how do you stop that?

If you didn't carry the entire kitchen along with you on every ride (including the sink), you'd probably hang on the climbs with the grupetto just fine!

-Ray

[johnnymossville]

That was a really good comment Ray. Now cross-country, that is barely a team sport. They keep score, but it's basically every man for himself out there.

[R2D2]

Would be kinda hard to have a TTT.
Bu they seem to have dropped that mostly.

[Ti Designs]

And perhaps more importantly, it allows us many more opportunities Monday-morning quarterbacking, so those of us who could never win a race criticize those who could. And then we criticize the winners for not deliberately losing, or for being insufficiently deferential to their teammates.


I'm always amazed at how little most cycling fans really understand about racing. Forget what you think you know about the sport of the superstars for a second and work with this scenario: The human body puts out a pathetic amount of power, if you were a car you would be able to power the lights and the radio, and that's about it. The rules of racing are simple, first person across the line wins. You have a team with so many riders, each rider puts out their own pathetic power curve and they each have mass. Some have higher peak power outputs (sprinters) some have better power/weight ratios (climbers), drafting saves energy as a function of speed. Just to add a few more twists, the scoring of a multi-race event is based on just one rider and lesser riders often go unnoticed, so they can take the victory from a star if others aren't willing to make the effort. Now it's a chess game, how do you win?

Racing coverage clearly doesn't show what really goes on during races. If you were ever in a stage race when your team leader had a bad day, or if your GC guy is a pure climber and the days race is a crit, you would understand what the team in cycling is all about. Ray nailed it on the head when he said teams would form by themselves. There was this training race just south of Boston where the IME team would show up, and Frank Lucas would ride around the parking lot saying "it's everybody against IME, it's everybody against IME." Even in training rides, secret alliences are formed as town lines draw near. My best example of teams working was the Harvard womens team of 2002. There was a large Saturday group ride back then, the womens team used that ride to work out team tactics and communication withing a larger group (it's easy to communicate when it's just them, much harder when it's a large group, last I checked they let other riders into the races...). As the group got closer to the town lines you would see the red jerseys moving to the front. Then the attack would come, a little too early but well played. Two harvard jerseys and anyone else alert enough to get on. There was always a well timed response from a couple of guys, and Julia was tucked in behind them taking the ride up. If you tow her to the line you're going to lose. So, while the Harvard women would lose to the men every time if it were a simple drag race, they just put themselves in the position where they win if the break stays out, they win if the break gets caught.

[harlond]

I watched the triathlons in the Olympics and I thought what was wrong with the bike leg was that they had no teams. Did not make for very interesting bike racing.

[aLexis]

Wow, just wow.
Is it April 1st?

Why should cycling be a team sport? Is there a sporting reason for this? I don't see how having a servant bring water bottles to the star during a stage makes the sport more exciting, or more meaningful. I would argue that it makes tactics less interesting, especially as practiced in modern grand tours. I admire a sprinter who doesn't need a leadout train more than one who does. The star doesn't have to worry about the breakaway; he or she can just sit behind teammates rather than making tough decisions. The team structure makes the rich richer, and gives power and influence to the directors rather than the riders. How is it fair that a rider can sit in the pack while the world TT champion and one of the great rouleurs destroy the field at the start of the final climb? Those riders can spend themselves before the finish precisely because they are not fully competing in the race, and thus can drop off and ride the final climb at my speed (well, probably not ;) ).

I believe the main advantages of teams are financial--I'm sure the sponsors like it. And perhaps more importantly, it allows us many more opportunities Monday-morning quarterbacking, so those of us who could never win a race criticize those who could. And then we criticize the winners for not deliberately losing, or for being insufficiently deferential to their teammates.

Cycling seems to have little in common with any other team sport. Foremost is the fact that it would be recognizable as a sport without the idea of teams.

Dave, feeling argumentative but not wanting to talk politics :argue:

[fiamme red]

I watched the triathlons in the Olympics and I thought what was wrong with the bike leg was that they had no teams. Did not make for very interesting bike racing.Triathlon should be an individual sport, with no drafting, let alone teams. Allowing drafting in the Olympics means that the swim and bike are merely a warm-up for the 10km run.

[girlie]

:crap:

There is offense and defense in cycling.
I think one of the most important concepts to grasp is - local racing, maybe, should not be compared to professional racing concerning the conversation of team.

girlie

[William]

I can think of a few ways to make it more "interesting".

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51J8WABD9XL._SL500_AA240_.jpg






William :bike: ;)

[acorn_user]

Well, lower category USAC and collegiate races often fit this description, so the OPs wish has been fulfilled to an extent.

p.s. Harvard tactic committed to memory. Now to get to the end of the race in the pack ;)