Who will wear #1

frenchyge

Does anyone know who will wear #1 in next year's TdF? What are the rules on that, does it stay with Discovery, go to CSC?

That'd be a lot of pressure for Basso to have to begin with.

Ullefan

The rule is that the yellow jersey's team is automatically picked to ride the tour. They will occupy numbers 1-9 so I imagine whoever is designated the team leader will wear #1.

Here's a thought: why doesn't anyone wear #10,20,30, etc? So that it's easy to recongise each team member, i.e. 1-9 and each team is slotted into 10, 20, 30 etc?

wilmar13

Isn't it just as easy to look for 1, 11, 21, 31 etc. or did I misunderstand what you meant?

Ullefan

You misundertood, nevermind.

musette

What Ullefan said would be consistent with the observation that:

Last year, Kloden was second (T-Mobile).
This year, it was not Kloden who wore 11, but JU. That means that the x1 (including presumably 1) is not "tagged" to the rider, but to the team that the second-placed rider was on (T-Mobile).

mr tibbs

it'll be dsc's captain--my pick is popovych.

frenchyge

During one stage they showed the T-mobile rider who was wearing unlucky #13 (upside down so as to appear to be #31, as is tradition). I forget who it was (Kessler maybe?) but they said that he'd once commented that he wished his last name started with a 'Z' so he would be #19 instead. It's as if the remaining, non-leader, numbers get assigned alphabetically, at least on T-mobile.

Do the teams have any freedom on how numbers are assigned, or is it always 'x1' for the leader and then alphabetically after that? What about the 'multi-leader' teams like Phonak? I wonder if they draw straws for the #61 or whatever first digit they get.

Does anyone know the last time the defending champ did not start the next year's TdF? That can't happen too much.

musette

The last time the defending champ didn't start the TdF was Pantani (winner in '98), was '99, since (1) LA started winning in '99 and he has won since, and (2) Pantani defeated JU in '98, after JU's win in '97.

frenchyge

Sure Lance won in '99, but didn't he beat Pantani to do it? I'm pretty sure that means that the defending champ (Pantani) *started the TdF* in '99.

Or maybe you're right and Pantani came back in 2000?

musette

I'm pretty sure I'm right.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/results/...our99teams.html (see team results; cyclingnews also has prologue results)

Pantani battled with LA in '00, including when they had the Mt Ventoux "gifts or not" debacle. When LA began the tour, it was Alex Zulle, Escartin, etc., and not Pantani, who were considered favorites.

frenchyge

Ok, that's right. '99 was considered a fluke since Pantini and a few of the other "Big Boys" didn't come out to play that year. Guess it's hard to recognize greatness sometimes without the proper backdrop.

musette

Here's an interesting deviation from the "alphabetical after the leader is x1" situation for USPS 2003. It means that, as to the numbers after x1, there is still flexibility even though the convention is alphabetical after the leader.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/road/2003/tour03/?id=teams

"US Postal-Berry Floor
1 Lance Armstrong (USA)
2 Roberto Heras (Spa)
3 Manuel Beltran (Spa)
4 Vjatceslav Ekimov (Rus)
5 George Hincapie (USA)
6 Floyd Landis (USA)
7 Pavel Padrnos (Cze)
8 Victor Hugo Peña (Col)
9 José Luis Rubiera (Spa)"

Here, even though Heras should be alphabetically after Beltran and Ekimov and should be a #4, he is at #2.

Interestingly, in 2002, Heras' first year with USPS (and also Chechu's), he was in alphabetical order:

http://www.cycling4all.com/

whiteboytrash

Basso will be wearing #1 next year as the first runner-up....... these are the rules. Sorry.