Bonuses of the Women's TDU

The title of this post has a double meaning (why wouldn't I play with words where I can?), and so I'll start with the obvious points before getting to the core issue of time bonuses (or lack of!) within the race and discussing what my armchair solution would be.

Firstly, the benefits of having the Santos Women's Tour are plenty. Exposure for the women's NRS which attracts precious little publicity, by way of the stage around the People's Choice Classic circuit right before the Classic and the presence of media and spectators in the city; the opportunity for local riders to race against some of the top teams and riders in the world; and further opportunity for the South Australian Government to showcase areas like Mt Torrens. I approve thoroughly of having the race, and think that the format of the race is almost ideal. Four stages is enough (maybe push it to five starting on the Friday, but that's a short five-day turnaround from Nationals which might not be enough time), and the race is run complementary to the Tour Down Under (road stages Saturday and Monday with no men's race, criteriums at accessible times to watch both the Tour Down Under and Santos Women's Tour). All of this is excellent.

What I would change are only very small issues. I'm not sold on both a tough Stage One AND a time limit. I'm not sure how flexible the UCI would be on this, but it spat twelve riders out of the race on the first stage, potentially eliminating the chances for some criterium specialists to race the criteriums. If a purpose of the organisers is to use the race as a pathway for the NRS riders to compare themselves to the international teams, eliminating them at the first opportunity seems counter-productive to the development of Australian cyclists.

Onto the crux of what had been my issue for 12 months - time bonuses on the finish line. I was superbly critical last January when Valentina Scandolara clipped off of the front to win by six seconds into Murray Bridge. With a strong team, all Scandolara had to do was stay upright in the criteriums, and remain in the front group into Campbelltown (which finished after a long descent off of Checker Hill, with the summit coming 41km into a 71km race. 30 kilometres is enough time to organise a chase!). With the remaining three stages expected to finish in groups instead of individuals or pairs, the race was effectively over on day one. Had there been time bonuses, the General Classification would have still been alive, and Scandolara would have been defending against the sprinting speed of Melissa Hoskins.

I've worked out what would have happened if time bonuses of 10 seconds, 6s and 4s (what many races use) had been awarded on the lines for each stage of the past two years. "Hypo GC Gap" is the hypothetical time gaps had the bonuses been included.

In the 2015 race, had there been time bonuses, Hoskins and Scandolara would have cleared away from the field, but the result would have been reversed, and it would have been reversed in the final sprint, with them both entering the stage level on time. Realistically, Scandolara wouldn't have let Hoskins take all of the Orica-AIS resources on that stage though, and tactically the race would have been different, potentially playing into the hands of Giorgia Bronzini. Instead of a regulation sprint for a stage win, the sprint would have taken on race-defining proportions, which would have added to the drama and interest. Alternatively, Orica-AIS could have avoided the intra-team rivalry and let a breakaway claim a narrow win - itself not a bad result considering the presence of the NRS teams, and certainly an incentive for them to attack and animate the racing.

As three of the four stages in 2016 are completed though, not having time bonuses has kept the race more open. With four riders finishing Stage One together, four riders were locked on time, and still are. The race is coming down to a final-stage count-back, which it wouldn't have done had time bonuses been factored in, as can be seen below. The race for the overall win would almost certainly be Garfoot's, but the race for the podium placings would still be wide open, with five riders within four seconds of each other.

If time bonuses had been counted this year, instead of a four-way count-back for positions, the only possible way for Katrin Garfoot to lose the race lead (if we make the assumption that it will be a bunch sprint with no leading riders being dropped) would be for Shelley Olds to sprint to a win, without Garfoot placing. Given how Stage 2 played out, I'd suggest that such a scenario is unlikely. The threat of time bonuses might have made an impact on Stage Three (five more seconds to Williams would have put her second overall, placing greater impetus in the chase perhaps), and the threat of Williams taking further bonus seconds could have changed how teams defended their podium places from bonus seconds as well as count-backs. For instance, if Lauren Kitchen were to follow Williams' wheel to fourth place behind, say, Edmondson and Wells, she'd find herself off of the podium, instead of second overall!

It's all conjecture and wild speculation, but I still feel that time bonuses are necessary in a race that features two criteriums in a four-stage race. Unless the race parcours is hard enough to create gaps on more than one stage (granted, in 2016, it has been), then the race for GC comes down to one day only, which can take the interest out of the other stages. While the suspense for the riders may be high, the count-back for the public is harder to work out in one's head than time bonuses, and the final result will likely only be announced once official results are in, some time after the final sprint.

So don't get me wrong. I really like the Santos Women's Tour, and if it were to remain as it is, I'd still be very content. Eliminating riders doesn't seem ideal, but time bonuses are certainly something that organisers have control over. Adding them to the race adds another consideration, creates final-stage criterium suspense; and might just change the complexion of the event to something more favourable for spectators. With or without bonuses, I'll still be at Victoria Park watching the sprinters have their day.

Update: With bonuses, after the final stage the top four places would have been identical to the official final results (without bonuses). If anything, I think that this is a good thing - if the race breaks up, the bonuses don't decide the race; if the race stays together, then the bonuses still create intrigue.

Road Nationals - Road Race Day 1

Here we were at last: the day that a bunch of recreational riders had been looking forward to and training for, and the day that some of the under-23 men had been training for but maybe dreading. At least the weather was about as much as you could have asked for (it was 30deg, but this is an Australian summer, so it could be worse. It will be worse, tomorrow, incidentally!).

Having slept in myself, I arrived at the circuit just in time to hear some of the stories coming out of the Gran Fondo event, which (barring the severity of the climb) were all positive and in good humour. If what I've heard is representative of everyone who rode it; Cycling Australia will be rightly pleased with what they have created, and I look forward to future editions. While I found myself a coffee, the Under-23 men signed on and went through their last-minute preparations before the start time, which was delayed a minute or two while a quick mechanical fix was carried out on time trial winner Callum Scotson's machine - and he was wearing #13, for those who are superstitious!

As soon as the riders had passed and were away up the hill, I followed them at a far more sedate pace to find a nice rock to sit on on the roadside. By the time that the riders came up Mt Buninyong Rd for the second lap, Rylee Field had broken clear with Jason Lea (who had been particularly active in the criterium too) and they had established a gap of close to two minutes. By lap three, Lea had decided against persisting with only one companion, and shared a joke or two with the spectators as he drifted back to the main field on the climb, under the control of the Jayco/John West/VIS team. Jason ended up finishing in the second chase group that contested 9th place, and finished 19th.

Rylee Field continued on his own, and set about establishing an unassailable lead in the King of the Mountain competition, and when he was swept up by the solo attack of Chris Harper, I had visions of him blowing completely (he'd looked in trouble for several laps...) and missing the time cut and therefore the jersey. It's happened before! Fortunately his GPM team kept a rider with Field, who did safely cross the line to claim the KOM jersey and put in a contender for best ride of the day.

Chris Harper was also staking a claim for best ride of the day up front, establishing a lead of three minutes with three laps to go - Paul Sherwen's classic model of one minute to lose for every 10km. Ultimately, that doesn't cater for climbs and Harper was swept up on the final ascent of Mt Buninyong Rd, but was able to hook into the Miles Scotson-led chase group to eventually finish 6th.

Chris and Lucas Hamilton were the next and final riders to lead the race, stretching the elastic for several laps before snapping it on the last ascent. Lucas had remembered Chris' win in last year's criterium, and riding up the final, steepest section of the climb he tried several times to shake Chris off of his wheel, but to no avail. He must have been mighty close judging by Chris' expression near the summit! Understanding that they still had a group behind them containing the power of Miles Scotson and the sprint of Alistair Donohoe (who had been dropped more than once on the climbs before clawing his way back), they continued to work to the finish, where ultimately the sprint of Chris Hamilton proved marginally quicker. Both riders deserve credit for fantastic rides though, and after Lucas' attacks, both riders could argue that their rides were the most impressive of the day.

Fifteen seconds later, Miles Scotson ramped up the pace to a point where even Alistair Donohoe couldn't come past him to take the bronze medal - which now gives him four medals (including every colour) over the past four national road championships that he's raced. Michael Storer finished 5th, Harper 6th, and Jai Hindley 7th. In 8th place (+1:29) was Ryan Cavanagh, who had spent several laps riding solo in no-man's land between the front of the race and the chase that included many of the remaining pre-race favourites.

And so with Saturday night falling, the legs of the under-23s and the Gran Fondo participants will likely be sore from repeatedly ascending Mt Buninyong, but most of the riders will have an interesting and impressive story or two. My lasting memory of today though will be seeing the (possibly) outgoing women's road race champion Peta Mullens among those jumping barriers and running across the road to congratulate her training partner Chris Hamilton as he crossed the line and slowed around the first corner. Her reaction to a fantastic win is a credit to the culture of friendship that cycling can create, and reinforces my opinion that so few of the riders here this week believe that they are above others. It was a moment that made me smile at the end of a top-quality, entertaining race that had me on the edge of my seat. Or, more accurately, the edge of my rock.

And so Sunday beckons. I'll be made to look a fool by making predictions, but I'll accept that and make them anyway. Both races look to be there to lose for Orica-AIS and Orica-Greenedge, with so many cards to play and past champions suited to the circuit. Orica-AIS have a gaggle of riders with international experience, and their challengers who also race overseas are almost entirely racing on their own - Lauren Kitchen, Peta Mullens, Tiff Cromwell and Shara Gillow as but four examples. I think Orica-AIS will soften the field up, with Rachel Neylan, Katrin Garfoot or Gracie Elvin taking a solo victory. The under-23 race within the race is usually won in a sprint within a larger bunch, and for that reason alone, I'm picking Shannon Malseed. Jenelle Crooks will almost certainly be in the group too though; and it wouldn't surprise me to see either Emily Roper or Ellen Skerritt win after their time trial performances.

In the men's race, Drapac and Avanti-IsoWhey showed that they won't take defeat lying down, but the course suits Caleb Ewan and Simon Gerrans too well, especially considering that they're on the same team! If it comes to a larger group sprint, Ewan has showed on this course that he can climb with the country's best and sprint with the world's best, and Gerrans packs a better sprint than most in a select group; giving them options for two race scenarios. Durbridge has also shown that he can motor to a win if need be, covering a third possible outcome. I'd like to see a locally-based rider or Adam Hansen win, though the race will need to play into their hands to do so.

If it truly is a Super Sunday; it will follow a superb Saturday, and cap off a high-quality and exciting week of racing.

ASO and the UCI's Staring Contest

As the sport of cycling kicks off into the 2016 season, one of the talking points is the imminent arrival of the UCI's WorldTour reforms for 2017, and the Amaury Sport Organisation's (ASO) strong-arm tactics to oppose them. But where does this leave the sport and what would my solution be?

The UCI WorldTour (UWT) reforms have been a work in progress for two-and-a-half years. The plans were presented after some revisions and consultation in June 2015, and the key points on a sporting level are as follows:
- Fixed three-year licences to the teams. This is designed to create stability about a team's future, by attracting sponsors to the sport knowing that their investment will have three years worth of exposure at the highest level.
- Eighteen teams in the UWT, with an unrestricted number of teams in what is currently the ProContinental and Continental Tours. These 18 teams will take part in all existing UWT races, with new races included in the UWT calendar optional.
- Expanding the UWT to include more races - up to 170 race days in total from 148.
- Reducing the maximum number of riders per UWT team from 30 to 25.
- Create a rolling ranking in the same mould as tennis, where points are retained for 52 weeks. This eliminates the annual overall winner in favour of a form guide for the past 12 months.

For years, ASO and the UCI haven't seen eye-to-eye on a range of issues, most notably the UCI inviting all of the WorldTour teams to ASO's parties. ASO have been gracious hosts once the guests arrived, but ASO want total control of their guest lists. In objection to the reforms, ASO have taken their events (including the Tour de France, la Vuelta a Espana, Paris-Roubaix, Liege-Bastogne-Liege, Paris-Nice and Criterium du Dauphine among their most prominent) off of the UWT, and registered them as Hors Category.

Which means what exactly? Well, the UWT events are mandatory for the UWT teams. Hors Category rules dictate an upper limit of 70% of the teams competing to be WorldTour. ASO also wants to reduce peloton sizes from 22 teams to 20 on the grounds of safety (which is a good idea, I mean, have you seen how many crashes happen in the first week of the Tour these days?!?!), which then means no more than 13 UWT teams can be - and I stress - INVITED to the Tour. This achieves ASO's goal of complete control in regards to teams competing and the number of teams. This might sound like great news - more competition for places, smaller fields, a return to the years past where a Henry Anglade or Roger Walkowiak-type rider from a small team can create a surprise, French presence in French races etc., but there are definite downsides.

Three-year licences are intended to create stability. The Tour is the most well-covered race on the planet (and almost always has been, even founder Henri Desgrange was aware that his Tour was the biggest drawcard for the sport, which is why he reluctantly switched from national teams to trade teams well after most other races), and therefore presents the greatest opportunity for sponsors to get return on investment. Why would someone fund a team for three years only to risk not being invited to the biggest shop window in the sport merely because someone doesn't like someone else who happens to be within the team organisation? I'm sure it wouldn't get that petty, but it would be ASO's prerogative.

And where would this leave the UCI WorldTour? Does anyone genuinely think that previous winners Alejandro Valverde or Joaquim Rodriguez will skip le Tour, la Vuelta and Liege to consider their season rankings by picking up points at the Tour of Poland instead? For sure, they might miss these races, but I doubt it'll be to focus on the ranking points. Removing what amounts to over 40% of the race days from the current UWT would undermine the entire premise of the UCI's system and the prestige associated with it. The rankings system is already struggling for exposure when compared to that of the tennis or golf models, where being #1 is a huge honour in itself. Losing the biggest races will put an invisible asterisk next to the leader's name. In a time where UCI president Brian Cookson is trying to restore credibility, losing ASO's races and undermining his WorldTour is a big blow.

So what do I think of the issue, and what would I do differently? Firstly, I think that the UCI has gone the wrong way with regards to race days. Reduce the UWT to only the prestigious events with history, or better yet, weight them more significantly with points. John Degenkolb won two of the sport's five "Monuments" yet ranked 12th overall. Fabio Aru was second in one Grand Tour (the Giro) and won another (the Vuelta) to finish fifth overall. Weight the important races that riders base their seasons around more heavily. That way, those at the top of the ranking are there because they're winning the big races as opposed to riding consistently. Put the prestige back into the ranking. I'd prioritise the Grand Tours and the Monuments, and bring back a distinctive leader's jersey. Alternatively, remove the smaller races to a second tier, but in terms of revenue for the races and long-term stability, this would not be a step forward.

Secondly, if you are going to have more race days, don't reduce the team sizes! If the teams are stretched to be at every race with fewer riders and more race days, it reduces the possibility of a big-name rider turning up to give a small event some publicity. The UCI wants to "create a stronger pyramid," but it appears to be stacking the top too heavily - give the smaller races a chance to draw big names! Admittedly, this could leave races like the Tour of Catalonia (which is already struggling financially, but in the middle of such a pyramid) short of quality riders, but the requirement to have UWT teams participate is still there, so riders good enough to be in the WorldTour will still be present regardless.

Make no mistake, this is a power struggle between the two most powerful bodies within cycling - the one that organises and administrates the sport, and the one who puts on the biggest show. ASO have stated that they plan to continue the European heritage of the sport driven by publicity and where "sporting criterion" are the most important, yet the UCI is trying to globalise the sport and bring in sustainable commercial pathways. The two goals sound mutually exclusive, but I'd like to see a scenario where both are possible. The longer it takes someone to blink and subsequently concede some of their power, the more uncertainty will surround the sport, which places the investment into teams in jeopardy, which in turn weakens the sport in the long term. ASO are protecting their own interests from the stronger position (if nothing changes, they get what they want in the short-term while they have more than 13 UWT teams), but I'm struggling to see a long-term winner from this scenario.

The Tour de France will continue, people racing bikes will continue as they always have, WorldTour or not. But while most other sports are moving forward, if the WorldTour disbands and races take responsibility for themselves, it would be more akin to cycling in the mid-twentieth century. There is a bigger picture, and this may be a case of winning the battle, only to claim a mound of scorched earth.

Road Nationals - Time Trial Day

It's now Thursday of Road Nationals, which means it was the day of the Race of Truth. After the intensity and tactical chaos of the criteriums, the focus today was on which riders could control their resources the best, as well as who had the most resources to leave on the road. With a rest day tomorrow where riders can recover and prepare for the road races on Saturday (Men's under-23) and Sunday (Women's combined and Elite Men), today, those brave enough to drain themselves to the point of uncontrollably shaking while still riding (not an exaggeration!) were able to race themselves and the clock.

The new course introduced for 2015 is an out-and-back affair near the township of Buninyong. Where the road race turns left immediately after the start/finish line up the Midland Highway, someone riding straight through that roundabout would have found themselves in the starter's box only a minute or two later. The wind that had toughened up the "crits" last night had subsided to what would have been described as a "breeze," but was still present, and creating a headwind on the road until the turnaround point. Fortunately, the stereotypical Australian January temperatures gave way to a rather more mild day, where I definitely didn't regret taking arm warmers out, even if I didn't need them while riding out on the road!

The under-23 men were the first away, with defending champion Miles Scotson setting a blistering average speed of 47 km/h on the road out to the checkpoint, where unsurprisingly, he held a lead over the rest of the field (the delicate phrasing from Joshua Harrison in the Hot Seats at the time was that Miles' average speed to that point was "pretty impressive!") Claiming that he was taking his pacing strategy - where he started conservatively and roared home on the return leg - from Miles' ride last year was his brother Callum, who overcame the deficit at half-way to claim the green and gold jersey by 20 seconds. Ben O'Connor was third fastest, 1:12 behind Callum.

As the women were warming up after the under-23 presentations, I took the chance to ride the road race course away from eyes to laugh at my lack of form. Once again, I came away feeling that riding the circuit would be far different to racing it - I was able to find a nice rhythm up the Midland Highway, and used all of my gears up Mt Buninyong Road when I felt the gradient. Those racing on Saturday (Under-23 men) and Sunday (combined women and Elite men) won't have that luxury! Neither will they be able to ride gently along the plateau at the top of the climb, nor enjoy an easy freewheeling roll down Fisken Road. The circuit is delightful to ride, but race pace will make it a tough proposition. Unless the wind direction shifts dramatically from the past couple of days, the last few kilometres are too exposed to make an attack worthwhile (at least in my opinion) with the wind coming across the exposed side of the road.

Having done a couple of circuits, I arrived back to the start house just in time to see Bridie O'Donnell and Shara Gillow take the start, which meant that soon I was able to watch all of the women arrive. The under-23 category was incredibly close, with a mere 6.6 seconds separating Ainslie Bakker in fourth from a gold medal. I hope Ainslie doesn't read this, because she might not want to know that 6.6 seconds as a percentage of her total time is 0.23% difference! 2.7 seconds ahead of her (which means that less than four seconds covered the medals) was Jenelle Crooks, who noted on the podium that she had taken the gold medal two years ago by a similar margin. Second was Ellen Skerritt, returning after a 2015 blighted by injury, while the same can be said for the year of Emily Roper, who becomes the first rider to claim gold in the category in the criterium (2013), road race (also 2013) and now the time trial. Personally, I'm pretty pleased with such a podium, because it's nice to see two riders coming back to the top of the sport, while Jenelle has been consistently performing strongly for the past few seasons. The Elite category was dominated by Katrin Garfoot, who romped home in such a time that only Shara Gillow (2nd, +46s) and Tiffany Cromwell (3rd, +1:37) were within two minutes of her time. With the form from the crit of Rachel Neylan, a strong team and now Garfoot's performance, it really feels like the road race is Orica-AIS' to lose. But I said that right up until Sophie Mackay won yesterday too...

The Elite men's race was expected to be won by either Rohan Dennis or Richie Porte, with several riders expected to fight for the final podium position. Rohan Dennis came out on top, sparing the potential blushes of Team BMC, who had already released their incarnation of the National Champion's jersey (and it looks slick!). They definitely had reason to think the jersey would stay within their team, but it would have been a bit embarrassing if neither had won! Third place was the somewhat surprising name of Sean Lake (+1:35) of the Avanti-IsoWhey team. I say surprising with all due respect - he is after all a repeat winner of the Grafton to Inverell classic, the first rider to win back-to-back - because the names that he finished ahead of include previous U23 World Champions Damian Howson (4th, +1:51) and Jack Bobridge (a disappointed 10th at +4:20) amongst a strong field.

So with the time trials done for another year, the Scotson family, BMC, and a bunch of people in Queensland cycling communities will be the happiest with the results. The attention now turns to the more drawn-out tactics of the road races, where strength in numbers gives the advantages to State of Matter/MAAP, Orica-AIS and Orica-Greenedge. But as the races so far have shown, so many other riders are up for the fight, and in previous years riders haven't treated the races as a foregone conclusion, which makes for exciting racing! I'll be watching on either from somewhere roadside with a TV so that I don't miss a second of the action; or on the climb to soak up the atmosphere. That I have such a tough choice is a credit to the event itself, I can't wait!

Road Nationals - Criterium Day

I'm going to take a slightly different approach to my blog this week. I'll try to post something every day, but it will be a bit more personal than everything else that I've put up so far. I'm hoping to capture my own experience while still discussing what's actually happening at the Road Nationals. In short, I'm trying to balance race reports/analysis with my own self-indulgence.

I arrived Tuesday evening (in Warrenheip, which is a bit out of Ballarat, but a delightful and beautiful ride a bit out of Ballarat), having taken about an hour over a late lunch in Stawell. The Stawell Central Park that houses rose gardens and the Oval used for the annual Stawell Gift is a remarkable place. It is incredibly well kept, and has tremendous history. There are three old grandstands around the grass oval, with a fourth made of metal scaffolding. The stand that I ate lunch in dates back to 1899, and the whole vibe of the place is relaxing, historical and impressive. As ultimately irrelevant to cycling as it is, I encourage those passing through to check out an Australian sporting landmark.

But I'm in Ballarat to watch the cycling National Championships, which kicked off with the men's Under-23 criterium on the Wednesday afternoon. Overcast skies, mild January temperatures, a few half-hearted attempts at rain, and a stiff breeze were the order of the day. Fortunately, the course stayed dry throughout the afternoon, which possibly saved some headaches - it's not safe to run a criterium like that in the rain, but can you really call off a National Championship? The course through the heart of Ballarat's CBD isn't a traditional and technical "crit" course (it's a hotdog circuit, actually) but the bottom corner is off-camber and at the end of a downhill run, which is a bad enough combination in the dry! This makes the finish line near the top of an uphill drag of 2-3%. Today, the breeze was such that the uphill run had the tailwind, and the downhill section the headwind, so there was no let-up for the riders.

Mind you, the U-23 riders didn't seem to want a let-up in the race pace anyway. Groups formed off of the front constantly, with State of Matter/MAAP omnipresent both in the breaks and on the front of the chase. A group of nine riders finally made an attack stay away with the black Focus kits well represented by Tom Chapman, Jason Lea and Scott Bowden. Ultimately though, the gap never exceeded 12 seconds and the race was being set up for Daniel Fitter from the State of Matter/MAAP team (despite the ticket-collecting presence of team-mate Ryan Cavanagh in the break), who ultimately suffered a mechanical problem in the sprint to the line. As personally disappointed as Fitter will be, team founder Leigh Parsons will be pleased that Jesse Kerrison was able to sprint to the win ahead of JML's Sam Welsford, with Fitter still finishing third. I'm excited to think what MAAP can do with some creative license designing an Australian Champion's jersey!

The second race of the evening was the women's combined Elite and Under-23 race. With 36 riders registered, and five of them from the Orica-AIS squad, the race was always going to be a different spectacle to the men's Under-23, and so it proved. After a slowish, watchful start (which allowed me to find a spot right on the barriers 20 metres behind the line, a spot I wasn't going to move from all evening!), Rachel Neylan was the first rider to create a significant gap, despite a couple of tentative digs from Lauren Kitchen, which at least yielded sprint points if not a sizable lead. The reaction came from the impressive Peta Mullens, Amanda Spratt and Loretta Hansen (who was sacrificing her own U-23 race in order to help defending champion Kimberley Wells) who worked to keep the field together. Ultimately though, Mullens and Wells were caught out when a strong group of nine riders formed under the impetus of Lizzie Williams and Miranda Griffiths. With four Orica-AIS riders up the road and no-one in the chase having any team-mates, the gap kept stretching. The positive of this break was that it effectively separated the sprints for the Elite and U-23 races, with none of the U-23s making the front selection. Despite controlling the break leading into the last lap, Orica-AIS were upstaged by Sophie Mackay, who outsprinted Lizzie Williams and Lauren Kitchen to take a memorable win. 32 seconds later, Jessica Mundy outsprinted Shannon Malseed, who half-heartedly suggested that her line on the barriers may have been impeded. Sophie Mackay was ecstatic with her win, and should be easy enough to spot this week if she's telling the truth about not wanting to take the jersey off for a week!

After the exciting conclusion to the women's race, and an incredibly positive presentation ceremony, the Elite men took to the start line. Caleb Ewan was the clear favourite with a strong team and superb form from the Mitchelton Bay Cycling Classic, but Brenton Jones, Anthony Giacoppo, Scott Sunderland and Steele von Hoff were also on the start line. This race was also fast and aggressive, with attacks going off of the front right from the start in a bid to unsettle Orica-Greenedge. Avanti-IsoWhey and Drapac were the constant thorns in Orica's side, with their riders represented in every move. Sam Spokes, Adam Phelan, Lachlan Norris and Robbie Hucker were particularly prominent, and were joined intermittently by individual opportunists such as Cameron Bayly, Jay McCarthy, Shaun O'Callaghan and Darcy Woolley. Orica-Greenedge (or more specifically, Luke Durbridge and Jack Haig) were determined to keep every attack on a short leash though, and ultimately brought the race back together with 4 laps to go. Still with riders in reserve, and despite the presence of lead-outs from Drapac and Avanti, Orica-Greenedge gave Caleb Ewan an armchair ride into the finishing straight, where he duly crossed the line with enough of an advantage to salute before the finishing line.

This might only be the first day of RoadNats, but I'm once again impressed by the quality of racing, the city of Ballarat, the organisation, and the crowds that lined the uphill drag at least 3 people deep for most of the straight. Such a crowd meant that I knew I wasn't going to give up my position on the barriers because I couldn't have got back to it if I'd tried, and that's a credit to cycling fans who are here for the same reasons that I am. I also wonder if some people have decided to make a week of the event because of the Gran Fondo Championships on Saturday morning, and if they have, it's a masterstroke from Cycling Australia that increases spectator numbers all week, general interest, and coverage of the women's race on the Sunday before the men's race. I guess I'll find out if there are more cyclists around when I ride out to watch the Time Trials tomorrow morning.

I'm looking forward to the rest of the week already!

Motorists vs Cyclists on the Roads

South Australia has implemented a minimum passing distance law for cyclists effective as at the 25th of October 2015. In doing so, the State Government has followed Queensland's lead. I've been meaning to put my thoughts on cycling safety down in writing for a while, and this seems like a good moment.

Firstly, this law has reminded us that public debates on the internet are fairly unproductive. On a polarising topic; there will be two sides and no winners. Very few people seem to accept reason or logic; and the challenge to their views only causes them to defend them ever more ferociously. So I ask that you keep an open mind while reading this - I'm not trying to assault your views!

Secondly, these are my opinions and my opinions only. I know that they certainly do not represent the broad cycling public.

Thirdly, I feel that this whole issue arises because humans remember the bad behaviour as opposed to the good. I have very few issues with cyclists while I'm driving. I was taking note of inconsiderate or dangerous drivers while both commuting and training, and without recording details, I suspect 99.8% of drivers do the right thing and don't endanger me.

Onto the broader aspects of the debate.

Personally, I don't think that imposing a minimum passing distance will change all that much. Most drivers do the right thing. But, how do you measure a metre on the road? I can only assume that warnings will be given to those who "might be a bit" close, but only those drivers being truly reckless will be fined. And I feel that only the truly reckless should be - I don't need a full metre clearance to feel safe while being overtaken. If a driver is smooth about the pass, half of that can be enough. But that's just my opinion. Not everyone is as comfortable on a bike in traffic.

The second issue is that of vehicle safety - yes it is now legal to overtake when there are double white lines; but is that really a good idea? If some common sense is applied (by drivers, cyclists and police) everyone should be able to get along.

When I'm riding on narrow roads by myself, I stick to the left as much as possible. When I'm with others, we listen out for cars from behind and do our best not to slow them down. If I'm holding up a car approaching a blind right-hand corner and I can see around it better than the driver; I'll wave them through or hold up a hand to indicate that it's not safe depending on the circumstances. Yes, I can legally ride two abreast, but again, is that really a good idea? Often the answer is a firm "no". Some common courtesy doesn't go astray, and we all have our own reasons to be on the roads. I'm going to try to get along with everyone who's considerate out there!

There is a big push from the comments sections for cyclists to be registered as well. But the simple fact is that it's not going to happen. Where do you begin? With the 12- and 13-year-olds riding to school? Would the cost of registration be proportional to the damage inflicted (based on power and weight) to the roads? If so, that's a negligible amount. Would "rego" have cumbersome number plates with it? Where do the plates go when you consider the various bike geometries? How would licences (so I would have my Cycling Australia licence, a drivers' licence, and a state-issued cycling licence?) be applied? Should there be a test to qualify? Who covers the cost of that - because driving licences are issued by the Government and paid for by the individual. The 12- or 13-year old? Could I ride a bike if I were suspended from driving? Suddenly, a casual Saturday ride to stay fit can't be done on a whim, and would arguably increase the stress on the health system as a long-term consequence of inactivity; due to deterrents such as extra cost and a rego plate "being less aero, brah!" Registering cyclists is currently a long, long way away.

Oh, and subtly in there as well is a law that cyclists can now legally ride on the footpath. Except that again, it's not a very smart idea to. Ideally, there should be a speed restriction on this law - I see why it's there when bike riders don't want to mix themselves with cars; but if I ever take up the option, my riding will be done at a pace that doesn't endanger any pedestrians (i.e., at walking pace!).

On top of the broad arguments; there have been some specific concerns raised by some motorists, and I'd like to take a moment to touch on them.

Uploaded to Facebook

This image has been doing the rounds. Firstly, the argument is that they are 4 abreast - if you look closely though, they aren't! They are just a terrible two abreast. A laughable, dangerous, terrible two abreast. This enrages both motorists and fellow cyclists, trust me.

But, this image being bandied about as evidence is somewhat funny. Allow me to explain: they appear to be on carbon bikes and full custom kit, and are behaving this poorly on the road while carrying a few kilos too many, with questionable riding positions. This suggests that the riders have sufficient disposable income to afford an expensive bike to ride once a week. Sufficient disposable income suggests a higher-than-average paying job. A higher-than-average paying job means higher-than-average income tax. Tax (not registration, geez!) pays for the roads. Which means that these guys are likely paying more for the roads' upkeep than the average angry motorist!

Another argument is that there is "no onus" on cyclists under the new laws. Legally, maybe not. But everyone knows who will come off second-best in a collision. An onus is on the cyclists not to put themselves in a position where they might die. Given the choice between a trip to hospital with serious injury (or worse, the morgue) or a $345 fine, I'd prefer the fine! This, in my mind, is a very selfish argument that doesn't view a cyclist as human.

"Peanuts should get off the road!" What's the alternative mode of transport? You might think several cyclists hold you up on your drive to work, but imagine if they were also in cars. You're advocating traffic congestion. Think these things through.

"Make them pay rego before introducing new laws." So you want mandatory registration without introducing laws? That one lacks logic too.

As sarcastic and patronising as I became there, cycling safety is a huge, genuine issue. Cyclists and motorists alike are humans, with feelings, breakable bones, jobs and families. The social media rage tends to forget this aspect. What I really want first and foremost is a greater amount of respect for all road users, from all road users. If you're not willing to consider that, I'll leave you with the words of one Gil Slade on one such thread - "When I got a licence I was made aware of the rights of cyclists. If I had a problem with that then I had the choice to not get a licence......." Anyone - ANYONE - who has an insurmountable issue with other road users always has the choice to not use the road.

Motos vs Cyclists at a Professional Level

Anyone who has been on a recreational bike ride (or driven!) around a metropolitan area (at least in Australia) probably knows about the feud between cyclists and motorists. I'll cover that topic in a separate post soon. But such a discussion shouldn't be happening at a professional level, in the WorldTour no less; where there is motorbike accreditation, and crucially, closed roads! But it has been brought to the forefront of the cycling public consciousness due to the motorbike incidents (yes, plural!) involving Tinkoff-Saxo riders Peter Sagan and Sergio Paulinho in this year's Vuelta a Espana.

Sergio Paulinho after his incident with a motorbike in the Vuelta
(Image: http://cdn.media.cyclingnews.com/2015/09/02/2/bettiniphoto_0220874_1_full_670.jpg)

I would put them down to unfortunate circumstances and one-off incidents, but crashes caused by vehicles in pro cycling races seem to be becoming more frequent. Looking further back, high profile incidents have included Jakob Fulgsang recently in the Tour de France (and very nearly Ryder Hesjedal from the previous group on the same climb), the Shimano service vehicles in the Tour of Flanders, and a moto crash into spectators at Paris-Roubaix, all occurring this year. Other infamous incidents include Nicki Sorensen being dragged along behind a moto in the Tour de France; and the Johnny Hoogerland/Juan Antonio Flecha incident with a French TV car and a barbed wire fence from 2011.

So, there is a problem. But now there needs to be a solution. So far, ASO, RCS, and Flanders Classics (the organising bodies of the afore-mentioned races) have kicked the drivers out of the race with a suggestion that they don't apply to drive in the races again. This solution was acceptable when they were isolated incidents. As these incidents become more prevalent however; it stands to reason that the incoming drivers will be inexperienced in navigating races. If a higher proportion of moto riders are inexperienced, the racing becomes more dangerous, and further incidents become more likely. This could end up being a vicious (and harmful) cycle. I don't see booting all offending pilots from the races as a decent long-term solution.

So what do I see as a decent long-term solution? Firstly, reducing the number of motorbikes that operate in the midst of the race. TV cameras are important, yes. Photography adds visual aid to the reports and draws interest, so at least one is necessary. I don't have a magic number (and it will vary race-to-race anyway), but I believe that the organisers of all races (especially the biggest on the calendar) need to review the quantity of motorbikes and cars in between the groups within the race. I can only assume that accreditation is paid for, but how many of the incidents like these can be classed as (in the words of the UCI fine issued to Peter Sagan) "behaviour which damages the image of cycling"? If the safety of the riders; and having the best riders remaining in the race to create spectacle is what the organisers want; they should review their policies to create fewer potential fast-moving hazards.

I'll admit, asking promoters to potentially reduce the money that they can make might be a bit optimistic. So I have a second idea to suggest - ensure that the moto pilots and car drivers understand how cyclists act (cornering, swinging off of the front, the swirling of the peloton etc.) and how races unfold. This can be done with extensive (and I mean extensive!) training for those who haven't been involved in cycling; or by using retired riders to pilot, after they have done sufficient training handling motorbikes. I've heard an anecdote from an Australian NRS race of a trained police motorcyclist impeding the race to a greater degree than the photographer's regular driver, who is a trained cyclist. Furthermore, it appears that professional team cars (generally driven by directeur sportifs who are retired professionals) have fewer collisions with the competitors as well; although that might also be due to them not often needing to move through groups. Drivers and pilots with a strong understanding of the race and the cycling environment may just create a safer environment for current cyclists by knowing when and how to stay out of the way.

In the meantime, I know that these suggestions certainly won't be taken into account this season, and possibly not at all; so I continue to wish for all cyclists' safety until something genuine is done to curb the occurrence of these incidents. Even in the current era (probably the best so far to be a professional), the safety of the cyclists seems to be a secondary priority. Personally, I don't find such a situation to be acceptable. Racers at all levels should be able to race without worrying about being knocked off by motorbikes. I hope for their sake that something changes and they won't need to consider it a possibility.