A TDF TT I'd Like to See
#51
as I used to be
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Tulsa, OK
Posts: 653
Bikes: 2006 Lemond Tourmalet triple
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
IF ANYTHING, its the other way around. a specific course is laid out and then a specific bike is developed to give the rider the best advantage over that course. Remember that the course is announced about 9 months in advance. Saying "oh they picked the perfect route for my favorite bike" and then not adjusting anything is not how to win a race. That is what you are describing.
I also don't think it is fair to say aero equipment "diluted" TT's. Regardless of what they are riding on, a long flat TT will play to the advantage of a big roller who can ride hunched over the whole time. An uphill TT will alway play to the advantage of a tiny climber who can sustain a good power/weight ratio.
In my original post, I didn't advocate a mountain TT. I advocated a course with a mixture of terrain, with enough climbing to penalize riders who can't climb, enough flats to penalize riders who can't do anything but climb, and enough duration to create more tactical/strategic choices for the riders. An example would be Habas to Laruns, via the Côte de Barcus (cat 3) and the Col de Marie-Blanque (cat 1). Elevation profile can be seen here. Habas is at the 18.5k point on the profile, Laruns is at the 140k point.
The equipment does not change those fundamental truths. Also consider that about 75% (or more) of the drag force during a TT is produced solely by the rider's body and position. The bike is a very small part of the picture, but it's where pro tour teams dump the money because, well you can only shrink the rider so much.
And Obree built his first 1-hour bike for about £70. The fact that a few individuals can do well on a modest budget doesn't mean they wouldn't do better with a big budget.
#53
Cat WTF
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 1,296
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
The time trial is sometimes called "the race of truth". However, modern TT practices, such as short, flat courses and absurd aero equipment, have diluted that truth. Lose the aero crap, put in enough hills to shake out the fat boys, make it long enough that you have to pick your attacks carefully, and you can restore the TT to its proper place in the grand scheme of cycling - the best way of picking the best rider.
Define "best". I'm not getting it. Your time trial idea still favors the guy who doesn't blow up. Is that the best? No climbing skill, no sprinting skill, no FTP skill used in your idea. It's a STAGE race. Your idea would be a one day race at best. You get a flat or any other mechanical and the entire race is over.
#54
as I used to be
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Tulsa, OK
Posts: 653
Bikes: 2006 Lemond Tourmalet triple
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Define "best". I'm not getting it. Your time trial idea still favors the guy who doesn't blow up. Is that the best? No climbing skill, no sprinting skill, no FTP skill used in your idea. It's a STAGE race. Your idea would be a one day race at best. You get a flat or any other mechanical and the entire race is over.
And who said the riders couldn't have a support car? If they have a mechanical, they can have a new wheel, or a whole friggin' bike from the team car. I said I wanted to get back to the good old days, not the bad old days, where a rider with a broken fork carried his bike to a blacksmith's shop, forged a replacement fork, and got a time penalty because the blacksmith's kid pumped the bellows.
To summarize, I wanted an individual time trial that was:
- Longer than normal, to give the riders more strategic/tactical choices.
- A mixture of flat, climbing, and descending, to punish riders who are weak in any of the three disciplines.
- Limited to "normal" road equipment, to make it about the riders, not the teams' wind tunnel budgets.
#55
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 6,840
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 31 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
#57
elitist jerk
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Blow - hio
Posts: 4,187
Bikes: CAAD9
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
What no climbing skill? Did you read any of my posts other than the one you replied to? I not only stated that I wanted a hard climb or two, I even linked to an elevation profile of an example of what I wanted. It was basically the first half of the Stage 10 course of the 2000 Tour. It had a Cat 3, a Cat 1, and the descents down the hills. As for sprinting skill, the sprinter's primary skill is wheelsucking. I stood up and cheered when Cancellara caught the ba$tards with their bibs down in Stage 3, this year.
And who said the riders couldn't have a support car? If they have a mechanical, they can have a new wheel, or a whole friggin' bike from the team car. I said I wanted to get back to the good old days, not the bad old days, where a rider with a broken fork carried his bike to a blacksmith's shop, forged a replacement fork, and got a time penalty because the blacksmith's kid pumped the bellows.
To summarize, I wanted an individual time trial that was:
And who said the riders couldn't have a support car? If they have a mechanical, they can have a new wheel, or a whole friggin' bike from the team car. I said I wanted to get back to the good old days, not the bad old days, where a rider with a broken fork carried his bike to a blacksmith's shop, forged a replacement fork, and got a time penalty because the blacksmith's kid pumped the bellows.
To summarize, I wanted an individual time trial that was:
- Longer than normal, to give the riders more strategic/tactical choices.
- A mixture of flat, climbing, and descending, to punish riders who are weak in any of the three disciplines.
- Limited to "normal" road equipment, to make it about the riders, not the teams' wind tunnel budgets.
If TTing was totally about aero bling shouldn't Sastre of done better on his P3 like Cancellara and Zabriskie.
#58
as I used to be
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Tulsa, OK
Posts: 653
Bikes: 2006 Lemond Tourmalet triple
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
#59
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Blacksburg, VA
Posts: 4,850
Bikes: Yeti ASRc, Focus Raven 29er, Flyxii FR316
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Climb: Bettini, Valverde (TT and Climb), and Freire (to a certain degree for El Gato).
Last edited by Duke of Kent; 11-27-07 at 01:54 PM.
#60
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 6,840
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 31 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
If you want to blab on about bike racing, spend your time learning about the sport, or go out and race your bike, instead of trolling on internet forums. There's more to it than the tour de france.
#61
as I used to be
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Tulsa, OK
Posts: 653
Bikes: 2006 Lemond Tourmalet triple
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I don't hate TT equipment. I just think it's become too specialized (and too expensive). The typical TT bike doesn't climb worth a damn. It's not particularly good for descending, either. TT course layouts pander to this specialization, which breeds even more specialization.
The cost of top-level gear and setup is also ridiculous, in spite of UCI efforts to curb the worst of the excesses.
Time trialing, over a mixed-terrain course, can probably tell us more about who's really good than any other cycling discipline. But TTs rarely get run on mixed terrain anymore. They're flat, flat, flat, and if organizers slip up and put a Cat 4 climb in the course, they make sure to cut the length of the course to make up for it.
I'm really not surprised that time trialists hate my idea. Most of them get into time trialing because they don't like climbing. Hell, I don't like climbing, either, but I recognize that it's an essential skill of a well-rounded rider.
The cost of top-level gear and setup is also ridiculous, in spite of UCI efforts to curb the worst of the excesses.
Time trialing, over a mixed-terrain course, can probably tell us more about who's really good than any other cycling discipline. But TTs rarely get run on mixed terrain anymore. They're flat, flat, flat, and if organizers slip up and put a Cat 4 climb in the course, they make sure to cut the length of the course to make up for it.
I'm really not surprised that time trialists hate my idea. Most of them get into time trialing because they don't like climbing. Hell, I don't like climbing, either, but I recognize that it's an essential skill of a well-rounded rider.
#62
Cat WTF
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 1,296
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I don't hate TT equipment. I just think it's become too specialized (and too expensive). The typical TT bike doesn't climb worth a damn. It's not particularly good for descending, either. TT course layouts pander to this specialization, which breeds even more specialization.
The cost of top-level gear and setup is also ridiculous, in spite of UCI efforts to curb the worst of the excesses.
Time trialing, over a mixed-terrain course, can probably tell us more about who's really good than any other cycling discipline. But TTs rarely get run on mixed terrain anymore. They're flat, flat, flat, and if organizers slip up and put a Cat 4 climb in the course, they make sure to cut the length of the course to make up for it.
I'm really not surprised that time trialists hate my idea. Most of them get into time trialing because they don't like climbing. Hell, I don't like climbing, either, but I recognize that it's an essential skill of a well-rounded rider.
The cost of top-level gear and setup is also ridiculous, in spite of UCI efforts to curb the worst of the excesses.
Time trialing, over a mixed-terrain course, can probably tell us more about who's really good than any other cycling discipline. But TTs rarely get run on mixed terrain anymore. They're flat, flat, flat, and if organizers slip up and put a Cat 4 climb in the course, they make sure to cut the length of the course to make up for it.
I'm really not surprised that time trialists hate my idea. Most of them get into time trialing because they don't like climbing. Hell, I don't like climbing, either, but I recognize that it's an essential skill of a well-rounded rider.
And you hate sprinters too from the looks of it.
And we're STILL talking about STAGE racing, not a ONE DAY MIXED TERRAIN TIME TRIAL, as in the subject line. Unless "TDF" means something other than what I think it does.
As for time trials being flat, look to the climb at the end of the Tour of California's prologue, TT's in the Tour of Georgia, and several of the past TT's from the Vuelta and stage 16 of 2004's TDF (Tour De France). I believe that one wasn't flat. That what I can think of off the top of my head with little thought. I'm sure I can dig up a load of non "flat flat flat" time trials, but I have work to do.
#63
as I used to be
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Tulsa, OK
Posts: 653
Bikes: 2006 Lemond Tourmalet triple
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Stage 13 (54 km, 166 starters): 141st place - Thor Hushovd +10:18, 157th place - Tom Boonen +11:08.
Stage 19 (55.5km, 141 starters): 123rd place - Thor Hushovd +9:42, 131st place - Tom Boonen +9:56.
Valverde's a GC man who can sprint when he has to, but he's not in Boonen's or Hushovd's class as a sprinter. He might win the occasional pack sprint, but few people would bet on him to do so.
#64
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Blacksburg, VA
Posts: 4,850
Bikes: Yeti ASRc, Focus Raven 29er, Flyxii FR316
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
2007 TDF Results
Stage 13 (54 km, 166 starters): 141st place - Thor Hushovd +10:18, 157th place - Tom Boonen +11:08.
Stage 19 (55.5km, 141 starters): 123rd place - Thor Hushovd +9:42, 131st place - Tom Boonen +9:56.
Valverde's a GC man who can sprint when he has to, but he's not in Boonen's or Hushovd's class as a sprinter. He might win the occasional pack sprint, but few people would bet on him to do so.
Stage 13 (54 km, 166 starters): 141st place - Thor Hushovd +10:18, 157th place - Tom Boonen +11:08.
Stage 19 (55.5km, 141 starters): 123rd place - Thor Hushovd +9:42, 131st place - Tom Boonen +9:56.
Valverde's a GC man who can sprint when he has to, but he's not in Boonen's or Hushovd's class as a sprinter. He might win the occasional pack sprint, but few people would bet on him to do so.
2006 TdF Prologue:
1 Thor Hushovd (Nor) Crédit Agricole 8.17.00 (51.43 km/h)
2 George Hincapie (USA) Discovery Channel 0.00.73
3 David Zabriskie (USA) Team CSC 0.04.21
4 Sebastian Lang (Ger) Gerolsteiner 0.04.80
5 Alejandro Valverde (Spa) Caisse d'Epargne-Illes Balears 0.04.92
6 Stuart O'Grady (Aus) Team CSC 0.04.93
7 Michael Rogers (Aus) T-Mobile 0.06.30
8 Paolo Savoldelli (Ita) Discovery Channel 0.08.02
9 Floyd Landis (USA) Phonak 0.09.26
10 Vladimir Karpets (Rus) Caisse d'Epargne-Illes Balears 0.10.09
11 Serguei Gonchar (Ukr) T-Mobile 0.10.11
12 Tom Boonen (Bel) Quick-Step-Innergetic 0.11.21
Big Maggie: 2004 Paris Roubaix
1 Magnus Backstedt (Swe) Alessio-Bianchi 6.40.26 (39.11 km/h)
2 Tristan Hoffman (Ned) Team CSC
3 Roger Hammond (GBr) MrBookmaker-Palmans
4 Fabian Cancellara (Swi) Fassa Bortolo
5 Johan Museeuw (Bel) Quick.Step-Davitamon 0.17
6 Peter Van Petegem (Bel) Lotto-Domo
7 Leon Van Bon (Ned) Lotto-Domo 0.29
8 George Hincapie (USA) US Postal Service presented by Berry Floor
9 Tom Boonen (Bel) Quick.Step-Davitamon
Tom Boonen: 2005 Paris Roubaix
1 Tom Boonen (Bel) Quick Step 6.29.38 (39.88 km/h)
2 George Hincapie (USA) Discovery Channel Pro Cycling Team
3 Juan Antonio Flecha (Spa) Fassa Bortolo
4 Magnus Backstedt (Swe) Liquigas-Bianchi 1.09
5 Lars Michaelsen (Den) Team CSC 2.43
6 Leon Van Bon (Ned) Davitamon-Lotto 3.49
Stuart O'Grady: 2007 Paris Roubaix
1 Stuart O’Grady (Aus) Team CSC 6.09.07 (42.181 km/h)
2 Juan Antonio Flecha (Spa) Rabobank 0.52
3 Steffen Wesemann (Swi) Team Wiesenhof Felt
4 Björn Leukemans (Bel) Predictor-Lotto 0.53
5 Roberto Petito (Ita) Liquigas 0.55
6 Tom Boonen (Bel) Quickstep-Innergetic
#65
Senior Member
What's your point? In those stages, neither was in a position to win the stage nor did they care about time for the GC.They made the time cut and saved their energy. All in all, a pretty successful day.
#66
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Blacksburg, VA
Posts: 4,850
Bikes: Yeti ASRc, Focus Raven 29er, Flyxii FR316
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Agreed. They CAN if they want to, but why waste energy and sacrifice their chances of getting a stage win, and getting to Paris? That's not what they are paid to do.
#67
Blast from the Past
NotAsFat, contrary to the modern Lance Armstrong view there is more to Professional cycling than the TDF. The Sprinters are a side show and know it. Cut em loose and any one of these riders is very talented in his own right.
#68
as I used to be
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Tulsa, OK
Posts: 653
Bikes: 2006 Lemond Tourmalet triple
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
And you hate sprinters too from the looks of it.
And we're STILL talking about STAGE racing, not a ONE DAY MIXED TERRAIN TIME TRIAL, as in the subject line. Unless "TDF" means something other than what I think it does.
As for time trials being flat, look to the climb at the end of the Tour of California's prologue, TT's in the Tour of Georgia, and several of the past TT's from the Vuelta and stage 16 of 2004's TDF (Tour De France). I believe that one wasn't flat. That what I can think of off the top of my head with little thought. I'm sure I can dig up a load of non "flat flat flat" time trials, but I have work to do.
And we're STILL talking about STAGE racing, not a ONE DAY MIXED TERRAIN TIME TRIAL, as in the subject line. Unless "TDF" means something other than what I think it does.
As for time trials being flat, look to the climb at the end of the Tour of California's prologue, TT's in the Tour of Georgia, and several of the past TT's from the Vuelta and stage 16 of 2004's TDF (Tour De France). I believe that one wasn't flat. That what I can think of off the top of my head with little thought. I'm sure I can dig up a load of non "flat flat flat" time trials, but I have work to do.
I don't see what's so radical about my suggestion. Yes, it's longer than the norm, and yes, it's hillier, but so what? If one guy manages to ride away and pick up 4-5 min on the field (which I think is unlikely), then every other GC contender in the field is going to spend the rest of the tour attacking him. He'll have very little help, other than his own teammates, chasing down the breaks, especially in the mountains. He'll either defend his lead, or he won't
As to the nature of TdF time trials, I did a little digging, and this is what I found:
1998
Stage 7: 58km, one Cat 3
Stage20: 53km, no categorized climb.
1999Stage20: 53km, no categorized climb.
Stage 8: 56km, one Cat 4
Stage 19: 57km, no categorized climb.
2000Stage 19: 57km, no categorized climb.
Stage 1: 16.5km, no categorized climb.
Stage 19: 58.5km, no categorized climb.
2001Stage 19: 58.5km, no categorized climb.
Stage 11: 32km, mountain TT, one HC climb.
Stage 18: 61km, no categorized climb.
2002Stage 18: 61km, no categorized climb.
Stage 9: 52km, no categorized climb.
Stage 19: 50km, one Cat 3
2003Stage 19: 50km, one Cat 3
Stage 12: 47km, no categorized climb
Stage 19: 49km, no categorized climb
2004Stage 19: 49km, no categorized climb
Stage 16: 15.5km, mountain TT, one HC climb
Stage 19: 55km, no categorized climb
2005Stage 19: 55km, no categorized climb
Stage 1: 19km, no categorized climb
Stage 20: 55km, no categorized climb
2006Stage 20: 55km, no categorized climb
Stage 7: 52km, no categorized climb
Stage 19: 57km, no categorized climb
2007Stage 19: 57km, no categorized climb
Stage 13: 54km, one Cat 4
Stage 19: 55.5km, no categorized climb
To summarize the last 10 years of TdF time trials, we've had two mountain TTs, two Cat 3 climbs, and two Cat 4 climbs. That's six, count'em, six, categorized climbs in ten years. Four years (2000, 2003, 2005, 2006) had NO categorized climb. No TT (actually, no YEAR) had more than one categorized climb, and with the exception of the two mountain TTs, no TT had a climb more difficult than Cat 3. Stage 19: 55.5km, no categorized climb
I think the above numbers prove my point that the TdF TTs are too specialized, where climbing is concerned. You're either doing a mountain TT, which is ALL climbing, or a flat TT, with practically no climbing. I think it would be an improvement if TdF TTs had a more varied mix of climbing, descending, and flat terrain.
#69
raodmaster shaman
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: G-ville
Posts: 1,431
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
You seem to be missing that the TT's are largely there to balance out the climbing stages. It doesnt matter weather it comes in a TT or a road stage, the climbers will get their time on the hills. Its not like they don't climb in the TDF, its just not in TT's.
The tour organizers like to play to the extremes, and that makes it more interesting--not to mention gives a variety of riders (not just GC men) the chance to win, which is VERY important to sponsors. The day's stage will either be all about climbing, or all about flat speed (generalizing) but over the coarse of the entire tour, the best rider WILL have to excel at all the disciplines you mentioned.
What would be the point of distilling an entire tour into one day? If that is what you are looking for, watch a spring classic. If you want the drama to unfold over 3 weeks, with lots of ups and downs (not just on the TT course) watch the TDF. No one stage is decisive, but every stage counts.
The tour organizers like to play to the extremes, and that makes it more interesting--not to mention gives a variety of riders (not just GC men) the chance to win, which is VERY important to sponsors. The day's stage will either be all about climbing, or all about flat speed (generalizing) but over the coarse of the entire tour, the best rider WILL have to excel at all the disciplines you mentioned.
What would be the point of distilling an entire tour into one day? If that is what you are looking for, watch a spring classic. If you want the drama to unfold over 3 weeks, with lots of ups and downs (not just on the TT course) watch the TDF. No one stage is decisive, but every stage counts.
Last edited by roadgator; 11-27-07 at 10:50 PM.
#71
as I used to be
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Tulsa, OK
Posts: 653
Bikes: 2006 Lemond Tourmalet triple
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
If they substituted a mixed-terrain TT for, say the last flat stage before the mountains, it would preserve the current flat/mountain balance and would only penalize those riders who were too specialized to be true GC contenders.
The tour organizers like to play to the extremes, and that makes it more interesting--not to mention gives a variety of riders (not just GC men) the chance to win, which is VERY important to sponsors. The day's stage will either be all about climbing, or all about flat speed (generalizing) but over the coarse of the entire tour, the best rider WILL have to excel at all the disciplines you mentioned.
What would be the point of distilling an entire tour into one day? If that is what you are looking for, watch a spring classic. If you want the drama to unfold over 3 weeks, with lots of ups and downs (not just on the TT course) watch the TDF. No one stage is decisive, but every stage counts.
#72
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Blacksburg, VA
Posts: 4,850
Bikes: Yeti ASRc, Focus Raven 29er, Flyxii FR316
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Apparently you missed the last TT in most the GT's for the last 5 years or so. Damn near everyone at the top was a GC guy.
Gee, I wonder how that works?
Gee, I wonder how that works?
#73
Cat WTF
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 1,296
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
#74
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Blacksburg, VA
Posts: 4,850
Bikes: Yeti ASRc, Focus Raven 29er, Flyxii FR316
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Methinks the OP has watched very few bike races, probably does not race himself, and those two add up to produce his profound lack of bicycle racing tactical knowledge.
#75
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 5,866
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
2 Posts
But the fact is that the GC men usually don't win stages anymore. The Tour has become like a big chess game, with GC men satisfied to just put a few seconds into their competitors. If he didn't wear a bright, yellow jersey, you'd have a hell of a time picking the GC leader out of the peloton (and if he rode for Saunier-Duval, you'd never find the SOB ). Seriously, we got stages for the sprinters. We got stages for the climbers. We got stages for the fat boys who can't climb. We ought to have a stage for the all-rounders, too.
Wouldn't surprise me if those 2 have more Non-Mountian non-TT stage wins since WW II than all other Tour winners (for the years they won). There are a few guys who were G.C. contenders who picked up flat stage wins when trying to get back time, but never got back enough to win.