Old 07-09-13, 10:40 AM
  #14  
grolby
Senior Member
 
grolby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: BOSTON BABY
Posts: 9,788
Mentioned: 27 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 288 Post(s)
Liked 86 Times in 60 Posts
Originally Posted by Racer Ex
Clocks not common around the 'holler?



The jersey competitions within a stage race are not a stage race. They are competitions designed to create aggressive racing. The TDF white jersey is decided on time BTW.



Which you note above is provided for in numerous stage races which let the terrain dictate the winner.

The points stage race format lets people mail home an effort in one stage yet still contend for the overall. Soft pedaling a hill climb while other people are actually racing (given that "racing" is what we are doing) seems to be the antithesis of racing.

On the other hand you could make the point that it forces people who would rather not bang handlebars in a sprint for 32nd place to bang handlebars for 32nd place. I'm not sure that this is of great benefit to anyone.
A couple of relatively major New England stage races (one being GMSR, the other was maybe Blue Hill or Working Man or something?) were decided on points until pretty recently IIRC. It's civilized up in them parts.

Anyway, I'm really not trying to make a strong argument for the merits of the points system, only pointing out that there's a long history of stage races being scored on points, and for all that the practice has receded at the professional level, races that used such a system included the Tour de France itself. That's not an argument for it being a good system, just pointing out that it is as much part and parcel of the stage race tradition as a timed GC.

As far as the merits go, I could play devil's advocate and point out that, while a points system seems to allow not racing a hillclimb or otherwise "mailing in" a stage and still contending for the overall, so too does a timed GC allow for sitting in the pack in a crit or even a flattish RR and mailing in that stage and still contending for the overall. Just in a different style of race. In either case, the person mailing it in is taking a risk that a rider who actually races those stages will also do well enough in the others to put them over the top - there's no reason a strong climber who races well in the hillclimb can't place well enough in a crit to beat the guy who rested on the hill.

Don't get me wrong, you're the stage race guy and I totally respect where you're coming from. Just saying there's a reason points stage races have existed in the past, and that time can reward a different kind of slack racing as well.
grolby is offline