Did Vino Know?

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Did Vino know he would get the bonus for the stage win, or did he just
go out and take the stage anyway? I don't know how anyone can knock
this guy! (Except the sprinters, of course.)

This is the answer.

What's most important than winning the last stage
at Champs Elysees?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Did Vino know he would get the bonus for the stage win

Why is everybody making a fuss about this? It seems perfectly obvious (to
me) that there would be time bonuses at the finish, in spite of the "take
GC time upon entering circuit" rule. That is just the same as on every
other stage: neutralized from the 3 km mark (previously 1 km), but time
bonus and points at the line.

--
Firefox Browser - Rediscover the web - http://getffox.com/
Thunderbird E-mail and Newsgroups - http://gettbird.com/

Yes, and it makes sense to keep the final sprint time bonuses, since
they cancelled the 2nd sprint time bonuses. I don't see how anyone
could find that inconsistent. /sarcasm

It is consistent with the normal 3k rule by my reckoning, but that is
NOT the same as neutralizing the GC. If the GC can still be affected
by bonus, it is definitionally not "neutralized," it is "in play."
Which is fine, as long as the players have the opportunity to know the
rules and it's applied consistently.

Hunter said:

they cancelled the 2nd sprint time bonuses.

I didn't know that, haven't seen the stage and haven't read the full
reports yet.

Quoted message said:

It is consistent with the normal 3k rule by my reckoning, but that is
NOT the same as neutralizing the GC.

Yeah I know. I guess it depends on what they really meant by "taking GC
time at circuit entrance" (or whatever it was they said exactly). I
gathered it probably meant the same as the 3 km rule, which is indeed not
really neutralized. Anyway, I think it's obvious: I don't know what I'm
talking about.

E.

--
Firefox Browser - Rediscover the web - http://getffox.com/
Thunderbird E-mail and Newsgroups - http://gettbird.com/

Ewoud Dronkert said:

Quoted message said:

Did Vino know he would get the bonus for the stage win

Why is everybody making a fuss about this? It seems perfectly obvious (to
me) that there would be time bonuses at the finish, in spite of the "take
GC time upon entering circuit" rule. That is just the same as on every
other stage: neutralized from the 3 km mark (previously 1 km), but time
bonus and points at the line.

I can live with that - just wanted to know. (You might note that Bobke said
'but they didn't tell Levi, so you know I think that they will probably go
back to the original and it will be Levi back in fifth place'.)

jj

My question goes to what the racers knew. Did everybody know what they
were racing for under these strange and changing circumstances, and did
Vino characteristically sense a real opportunity in the confusion? Did
Levi believe that he had fifth or not?

The most consistent solution would have been to extend the 3k rule
to the start of the circuit. Given the recent history of the Champs
circuit,
that means that no one would have lost more than 30 seconds or so
due to a crash.

I got the feeling that Lance's and Discovery's Rassmussen like
behaviour during the Clamart crash
scared the referees into Rassmussen like inconsistency. Just goes
to show that he wasn't the only one suffering from the tension.

-ilan

Hunter a écrit :

Quoted message said:

Yes, and it makes sense to keep the final sprint time bonuses, since
they cancelled the 2nd sprint time bonuses. I don't see how anyone
could find that inconsistent. /sarcasm

It is consistent with the normal 3k rule by my reckoning, but that is
NOT the same as neutralizing the GC. If the GC can still be affected
by bonus, it is definitionally not "neutralized," it is "in play."
Which is fine, as long as the players have the opportunity to know the
rules and it's applied consistently.

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

My question goes to what the racers knew. Did everybody know what they
were racing for under these strange and changing circumstances, and did
Vino characteristically sense a real opportunity in the confusion? Did
Levi believe that he had fifth or not?

Did you read the answer before?
I'll write it again in a different way.

It doesn't matter if they knew or not,
the result would've been the same.

"It was a great feeling to win here.
I went of course in the first bonfication sprint,
but to win here is a great feeling, a great emotional
moment and it makes me very happy."
~ Alexandre Vinokourov

What is "bonfication" please?

Quoted message said:

The most consistent solution would have been to extend the 3k rule
to the start of the circuit. Given the recent history of the Champs
circuit,
that means that no one would have lost more than 30 seconds or so
due to a crash.

I got the feeling that Lance's and Discovery's Rassmussen like
behaviour during the Clamart crash
scared the referees into Rassmussen like inconsistency. Just goes
to show that he wasn't the only one suffering from the tension.

Unless the official race communique is posted to rbr, we'll never know.
You solution is the most wise one, though.

He is one of my favorite riders now. The whole tour, he just attacked.
From dusting Discovery a couple of times and changing the race, to going for
the final stage win. He is one cool dude and pretty damn tough.

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Did Vino know he would get the bonus for the stage win, or did he just
go out and take the stage anyway? I don't know how anyone can knock
this guy! (Except the sprinters, of course.)

juani said:

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

My question goes to what the racers knew. Did everybody know what they
were racing for under these strange and changing circumstances, and did
Vino characteristically sense a real opportunity in the confusion? Did
Levi believe that he had fifth or not?

Did you read the answer before?
I'll write it again in a different way.

It doesn't matter if they knew or not,
the result would've been the same.

[censored]. Gerolsteiner would've been all over his moves. He might have
still pulled off the win, but there's no way in hell to predict what
would've happened.
This is a great way to sign off on the Tour and the pact.
Don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.
See ya next year, if you bother to show up now that Lance is gone.
Bill C

curt said:

He is one of my favorite riders now. The whole tour, he just attacked.
From dusting Discovery a couple of times and changing the race, to going for
the final stage win. He is one cool dude and pretty damn tough.

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Did Vino know he would get the bonus for the stage win, or did he just
go out and take the stage anyway? I don't know how anyone can knock
this guy! (Except the sprinters, of course.)

He was riding for a new contract, and did more damage to his position
than good. I see him attacking Jan, Basso, and Cunego next year and
going down in flames again before it's over.
Bill C

I agree that an extension of the 3k rule would have been a logical
course of action, but I'm looking at the the Tour regulations and they
say that the 3k rule operates as follows:

"In the event a rider or riders suffer a fall, puncture or mechanical
incident after passing the "red flame," and such an incident is
duly recognised, in the last 3 kilometres, the rider or riders involved
are credited with the same finishing time of the rider or riders they
were with at the time of the incident. They are attributed this ranking
only upon crossing the finish line."

Now, this is not at all what was described in the media reports that
I've seen. The official Tour website Newsflash states:

"Jean-Francois Pescheux, the Tour's sporting director, has just
announced that the time for the general classification of the final
stage will be taken on the first pass of the finish line.
The peloton will still complete the eight laps of the Champs Elysees
circuit but that is just to determine the stage winner.
This decision has been made because it has been raining in Paris and
the organizers fear for falls in the closing kilometers of the race."

The rule book only states, "If the road surface of the Champs-Elysees
has become slippery before the riders reach it, then the [finishing]
times may be taken for the first crossing of the finish line....
[R]iders and Sports Managers will be informed immediately. In any
event, riders must complete all of the circuits of the Champs-Elysees
to be ranked at the final finish." With respect to bonuses, the rules
book states that "bonuses are awarded at all in line finishes," and
that the race mgmt "reserves the right to move or cancel some
intermediate sprints for which bonuses are awarded." It does not allow
for the cancellation of finish bonuses explicitly, at least by my quick
reading.

This is obviously very different to the 3k rule, crediting a
fallen/waylayed rider with the time of his group. Since the rules
state that the intermediate bonuses may be scrubbed, but that all in
line stages get finish bonuses, I'd say that Leipheimer was treated
fairly. Furthermore, if they had any doubt about the rule, they should
have thrown everyone up there to try to avoid what occurred.

"juani" <[email hidden]> a écrit dans le message de news:
jaWEe.28935$s54.18089@pd7tw2no...

Quoted message said:

It doesn't matter if they knew or not,
the result would've been the same.

I don't think so. Gerolsteiner could have made sure he didn't get any
daylight. The pack would have been all over him well before the line.

<[email hidden]> a écrit dans le message de news:
[email hidden]...
The most consistent solution would have been to extend the 3k rule
to the start of the circuit. Given the recent history of the Champs
circuit,
that means that no one would have lost more than 30 seconds or so
due to a crash.

-ilan

As I understand it, the purpose of the 1K/3K rule was not so much not to
penalize folks who get caught behind a crash in the final, but rather to
reduce the chance that such a crash will occur by limiting the number of
people trying all to get to the front to not be caught out behind such a
crash. However, gaps that appear that are not due to a crash are still
valid.

Remember 2003 where Lance lost something like 12 seconds at the finish in
Paris because he was behind a gap that had developed (no crash involved,
thus no 1K rule invoked?) With 160 riders and some very small time
difference between 5th 6th and 7th, yesterday's ruling had the effect of
making sure that riders weren't competing with sprinters and their teams to
be at the front to avoid getting caught behind such a gap. And reducing the
risk of such a crash. (I don't know if it was shown on the television, but
there was a group of riders that crossed the finish line just about 10
seconds before Vino. They were about to be lapped, but were in no hurry to
catch back up to the pack. They had the same time as everyone else, thanks
to the rule.)

At the time of the ruling, I was sitting in the stands just after the turn
onto the Champs. Looking at the wet cobblestones 300 meters from the line, I
was certain there would be a massive pileup there, especially since it had
been raining very lightly, enough to make the cobbles wet, but not enough to
wash away the oil that sits on the surface. Fortunately, it dried up before
the finish.

juani said:

Quoted message said:

It doesn't matter if they knew or not,
the result would've been the same.

trg said:

I don't think so. Gerolsteiner could have made sure he didn't get any
daylight. The pack would have been all over him well before the line.

Several Gerolsteiner riders covered him at the bonus sprint and he still
got some daylight on them (which was quite a feat considering the weather).

juani said:

Quoted message said:

It doesn't matter if they knew or not,
the result would've been the same.

trg said:

I don't think so. Gerolsteiner could have made sure he didn't get any
daylight. The pack would have been all over him well before the line.

Several Gerolsteiner riders covered him at the bonus sprint and he still
got some daylight on them (which was quite a feat considering the weather).

juani said:

Quoted message said:

It doesn't matter if they knew or not,
the result would've been the same.

trg said:

I don't think so. Gerolsteiner could have made sure he didn't get any
daylight. The pack would have been all over him well before the line.

Several Gerolsteiner riders covered him at the bonus sprint and he still
got some daylight on them (which was quite a feat considering the weather).