View Single Post
Old 06-30-21, 03:25 AM
  #12  
canklecat
Me duelen las nalgas
 
canklecat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Texas
Posts: 13,522

Bikes: Centurion Ironman, Trek 5900, Univega Via Carisma, Globe Carmel

Mentioned: 199 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4558 Post(s)
Liked 2,798 Times in 1,798 Posts
I'd like to see some data indicating trends in crashes. I have a hunch that one reason why there seem to be more crashes now is that, lacking the best juice for fueling the mountain stages, riders are taking bigger risks to make up time elsewhere.

It'd be interesting to see whether the data indicates the peloton was generally safer during the peak era of doping because the leaders made their best times on climbs and took fewer chances on other stages.

I've watched way too many hours of race movies dating back decades, but it seems as though there were fewer serious crashes years ago. Hard to be sure because we didn't have the wall-to-wall coverage that captured every break, every sneeze, every bobble in the pack. In older movies of the grand tour an announcer might mention a crash but often those weren't recorded so we saw only the aftermath, not how it happened.

And maybe it's mostly due to the end of the patron era, the peloton bosses who dictated -- or at least strongly influenced -- the pace on segments and stages. It's pretty obvious from watching older movies of the grand tours that the pelotons often loafed a bit between intermediate sprints, primes, etc. (although their "loafing" would be my "lungs are exploding and blood is leaking from my ears" effort). And the sprint finishes and bunch sprints were nowhere near as frenetic decades ago as they've become the past 10-20 years.

TBH, I kinda miss the golden era of doping. Gotta admit, it made for some exciting races.
canklecat is offline  
Likes For canklecat: