merlinextraligh

I'll be careful here not to be a spoiler. However I got to think the race would have played out different with a TTT. Not necessarily a different end result, but certaily the route to the end would have been different. So I thought no TTT was a mistake, eliminating the beauty of that spectacle, making the first week too much sprinting, with nothing to bust it up, and deemphasising team. However now that we had one of the best TDF's ever, (at least top handful in the last quarter century or so.) perhaps it was best we didn't have a TTT.

pseudobrit

I predict T-Mobile would have won. Not sure how that would shake up the overall standings.

a_fire_inside

I agree.

I think T-Moblile would crush souls (even without Der Jan) and that could have possibly placed Kloden higher.

Smoothie104

They had 6 riders in the top 16 in the ITT, no one else was even close to that

Ritterview

The amount of time Phonak would lose would not be enough for Kloden.

According to the excellent Lance's Armstrong's War (which I am reading now).

Back when Discovery was strong, they put too much time on the other teams in the TTT. Ullrich lost 1:01 in 2003. In response, in 2004 the tour socialized the scoring, so that the second place team would lose only 20 seconds, the third place team 30 seconds, the fourth place team forty, and so on. According to Coyle, the TTT effectively gave the weak teams the day off. Phonak wouldn't take the day off, and likely wouldn't be so far down as to endanger the 1:29 lead Floyd now enjoys.

Hitchy

Disagree, TMobile have by far the strongest team & Phonak, one of the weakest. If there was a TTT Kloden would have been the winner of this years tour....but big deal, Floyd won...the fat lady has sung

classic1

I've always been of the opinion that the TTT is an artificial handicap to gun riders on weak teams. It also tends to stack the top of the GC with riders from two or three teams, which can shut down the race. Finally, when the differences aren't done on real times but on bonuses the top teams can bust a gut for very little.

If there is a TTT it should be short. I'd rather see a couple of hilly stages or a mountain stage in the first week. Doesn't have to have a heap of cat 1 climbs, just something to split the peloton. Seems to work ok in the Giro

robow

I love the TTT and wish it was there but I think it needs a little bit of everything. Flat enough that the TT and sprinter guys should do well but a few hills steep enough that the climbers can have their way too and long enough for the others. Otherwise you just load up your team on what the course demands. And add some time limits that serve their purpose but don't make it a day out of the office for some teams. I think this is doable.

TYB069

I never really liked the TTT. With time limits it just isn't as interesting. When its clear that you can't win, and your loss is 30 or 40 seconds max, teams just seem to let off. That being said, you need the time limits because teams can be overly strong - T-Mobile would have put a couple minutes into everyone other than maybe CSC or Disco this year (w/o time limits of course).

I do like the idea about a mountainous TTT though. Alpe d'Huez in a couple years???

classic1

They did a mountain TTT on the Tour of the Mediterranian a couple of years ago. It was a debacle.

Wilchemy

What about a TTT as a prologue but not counting towards overall time? Just put up some cash & a couple of slabs for prizes!

classic1

They kinda tried that too - in 88. Vuelta does it regularly. No one knows WTF is going on.

I think a miss and out, progressive points score handicap would be the go.

Wilchemy

Ah, didn't know that. But do they offer slabs as prizes??

classic1

I'm up for it, as long as the slabs aren't VB

Wilchemy

Fair enough. VB is not really much incentive... Let's make it Boags Premium then.