John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
> On 5 Apr 2005 00:03:43 -0700, "Tom" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> > Sort of, but not really. A lot of these shorter stage races end
up
> > getting decided on day 1 when
> > they complete the first TT, or prologue,
> > or whatever you want to call it.
>
> > How come we can't have a 40 or 50k
> >TT for these guys??
>
> Because they're boring.
>
> > This would put some separation in there.
>
> Err, there is already enough separation with a short TT to make it
> decisive, so now you want more? I don't get it.
>
> JT
>
> ****************************
> Remove "remove" to reply
> Visit http://www.jt10000.com
> ****************************
Long TTs are boring for who? These are stage races aren't they? It
would be decent to make them longer, if they could, but I do realize
that there are limitations as to what they can do, and what kind of
support that they can drum up that it would take to do a long ITT.
They can do a long ITT at the Tour of Georgia because they have the
volunteers to be able to do that. I think it would be harder for
smaller stage races in the US, I think it would be kind of cool, but
probably not feasible. As far as there being more separation, would
that be a bad thing? I think team tactics would come into play in the
latter stages a lot more then if that were the case.
Tom