Revised KOM - a proposal

[JRMDC]

Given lots of complaints over the years about Virenque, and the recent mention in another thread about Rasmussen sandbagging the first TT so that he could break away later to pile up KOM point, here is my alternative proposal.

Take all the climbs of Cat 2,1,HC, time each rider's ascent on that segment of the stage only. Calculate aggregate time or aggregate points until the end of the Tour.

Maybe not so original, I suspect. I like the points version better because there is a bit more strategy, with perhaps teams asking individual climbers to bust out on particular days to deny points to opponents (on days when their primary KOM rider is tired, say), much like a team might prevent another team from picking up sprint points.

Anyway, there it is.

 

[JRMDC]

Oh well, no one took an interest in this idea. Another thought, anyway. To operationalize this, make it accessible for fans, perhaps a scoreboard at the top of each climb, listing the top 5 or 10 times on the climb and perhaps the standings up to that point in the Tour.

The idea would be that anyone in the lead group, say, a Landis or a Mancebo, might choose to attack on an intermediate climb, even if there is a break up the road. So you wouldn't go over the first cat 2 like everyone is on cruise control.

Maybe Vino might focus on this, or Heras (if in better form). What do you think?

Given lots of complaints over the years about Virenque, and the recent mention in another thread about Rasmussen sandbagging the first TT so that he could break away later to pile up KOM points, here is my alternative proposal.

Take all the climbs of Cat 2,1,HC, time each rider's ascent on that segment of the stage only. Calculate aggregate time or aggregate points until the end of the Tour.

Maybe not so original, I suspect. I like the points version better because there is a bit more strategy, with perhaps teams asking individual climbers to bust out on particular days to deny points to opponents (on days when their primary KOM rider is tired, say), much like a team might prevent another team from picking up sprint points.

Anyway, there it is.

 

[DiabloScott]

Oh well, no one took an interest in this idea. Another thought, anyway. To operationalize this, make it accessible for fans, perhaps a scoreboard at the top of each climb, listing the top 5 or 10 times on the climb and perhaps the standings up to that point in the Tour.

The idea would be that anyone in the lead group, say, a Landis or a Mancebo, might choose to attack on an intermediate climb, even if there is a break up the road. So you wouldn't go over the first cat 2 like everyone is on cruise control.

Maybe Vino might focus on this, or Heras (if in better form). What do you think?

I think all they really need to do is give much heavier weighting to summit finishes, and much lighter weighting to intermediate mountains (and NONE for little pimples in ITT's - what BS!). That way there would be little motivation to go on a solo break knowing you wouldn't make it to the finish. Plus, the best climbers would be saving themselves for the finish and attacking the GC riders which would make for more interesting races.

All these other ideas would be too complex even for the riders themselves to figure out how to win.

 

[JRMDC]

Well, I guess what I am saying is that I want the KOM to reflect climbing performance more directly, hence timed climbs. And I want an early Cat 1 to be raced more vigorously.

As to a particular point you made, the pure climbers already have an incentive to save themselves for the finish, in order to win a stage. Why increasing points on summit finished gives GC contenders a greater reason to contest the final climb is completely unclear. If the points on the final climb were 100, would Armstrong/Basso/Ullrich care any more if Piepoli attacks? I don't think so.

I think all they really need to do is give much heavier weighting to summit finishes, and much lighter weighting to intermediate mountains (and NONE for little pimples in ITT's - what BS!). That way there would be little motivation to go on a solo break knowing you wouldn't make it to the finish. Plus, the best climbers would be saving themselves for the finish and attacking the GC riders which would make for more interesting races.

All these other ideas would be too complex even for the riders themselves to figure out how to win.

 

[DiabloScott]

Well, I guess what I am saying is that I want the KOM to reflect climbing performance more directly, hence timed climbs. And I want an early Cat 1 to be raced more vigorously.

As to a particular point you made, the pure climbers already have an incentive to save themselves for the finish, in order to win a stage. Why increasing points on summit finished gives GC contenders a greater reason to contest the final climb is completely unclear. If the points on the final climb were 100, would Armstrong/Basso/Ullrich care any more if Piepoli attacks? I don't think so.

I don't think a Grand Tour is the place to define who is the best pro climber in the UCI - but I do think it's a good place to pit pure climbers vs. GC contenders. This contest of Rasmussen vs Ullrich and Basso has made TdF2005 much more interesting than years when RVirenque was the Spotted ****. When the climber's winner is 2 hours down on GC something's wrong.

Save the Best Climber In The World award for a race that only climbers enter.