There seems to be a lot of confusion in this article, failing to properly distinguish the "supertuck" (sitting on the top tube), from the normal "tuck" (sitting on the seat).
There's no particular problem braking in the supertuck. And it's not what caused the crash in the linked video.
24
Making cycling/the TDF approachable to non afficionados is one thing - and laudable - but this article really seems to suggest that the author knows very little about cycling. Why is the times having someone who doesn't know anything about cycling or the Tour covering cycling and the Tour? C'mon.
30
The author asserts, "Flying down the mountain, Gilbert rounded a corner into a turn that was sharper than he realized. In the second it took him to slip back atop his seat and hit the brakes, he ran out of road ..."
But the video plainly shows the rider came out of his tuck at :01. That's before he enters the *previous* corner. He is untucked and in his saddle all the way through the right-hander, a short straight, and the left-hander where he crashes, a full five seconds before losing control.
The description is wrong and requires correction.
23
It's too bad this article isn't about the Tour more generally, because this year's Tour is one of the best in years, with six riders under two minutes with on four stages to go, two of them in the high alps.
Not just an amazing race, but it proves cycling can be every bit as exciting without the doping as it was during the days of doped-up Lance Armstrong.
30
Where did The Times find this writer?
"...hugging the top cylinder of his bike..." It's a tube. The top tube.
"...your red blood cells leak oxygen..." Well, yeah, they are supposed to do that. How do you think oxygen gets to your body's tissues?
"Instead I found a mountain tailgate party..." If anything confirms the writer's lack of knowledge of the topics touched on in this piece, this is it. A couple of seconds' of research would have found him plenty of video of the scenes at the tops of the great passes on the Tour.
Or perhaps the author did look at video and not understand what it depicted. That is certainly the case with the video of Gilbert crashing. He was out of the tuck position plenty soon before his crash. Gilbert appeared to be surprised by the curve and braked poorly – his rear wheel skids, throwing him out of control.
63
@bill
Agreed. Shocking ignorance on all counts.
10
@bill
Indeed, I looked at the video and asked, what was the author of this article thinking? He was out of the super tuck position well before the crash and it was other factors that caused the crash, just as @bill says.
Meantime, this year's Tour is very exciting and with only three important mountain stages to go very, very close. It's by no means certain which of about 5 people will win it.
12
@bill Amen Bill! I decided to respond just to say that Gilbert was out of the tuck plenty before his crash, i.e. the issue wasn't the super tuck, the issue was Gilbert's misjudging of the corner, no matter his position on the bike!
Plus there's scientific evidence of a version of the super tuck being faster: https://www.velonews.com/2017/05/news/study-froomes-super-tuck-actually-isnt-faster_437636
4
It’s two weeks (of three) in to the worlds most watched sporting event and, better late than never, we’re offered this laughably naive look at one tiny element of this complex sport. The “super tuck” allows descending cyclists to dramatically reduce “frontal area” increasing speed at the cost of some control. It’s not for rookies but neither is Le Tour.
Le Tour de France is the greatest of all professional open road bicycle races and a survivor of a time when auto and motorcycles races were also waged on the open roads with spectators inches away. It’s been mostly to reduce spectator risk that motor sports have been moved off the open road.
In Le Tour racers ride over thousands of miles of regular French roads full of medians, signs, cars, motorcycles, spectators and especially other competitors. The “super tuck” is the least of their problems.
23
I have done 54 mph on a steep hill in northwest Massachusetts in this tuck. It is faster, reduced frontal area. It is not more dangerous outside of the increased speed. My butt is under my saddle, my knees grip the frame, you have better vision as it is easier to lift your head up in this position, and you hands are fully on the brake levers for as much braking power as you can handle. I might argue that with a lower center of gravity you are less likely to go over the handle bars in straight ahead braking.
18
@Ted Dowey
You might argue that the center of gravity is more forward, putting less weight on the rear wheel, which would make it more likely to go over the front wheel under braking.
6
@David
I would argue that it is the moment arm over the front wheels, so lower is better. Regardless its fun to go fast.
6
Let’s just say this. Lot’s of things we do in life are bounded by risks and rewards. Both typically pull in the same direction. More risks, more rewards. What restrains us is fear and punishment. It’s an individual’s responsibility to judge for him/herself the preferred balance.
As a cyclist I can say that speedy downhills are fun; nice reward for some level of risk.
7
I was excited to see the Times finally give some attention to Cycling. Americans largely don’t understand, so the opportunity is wide. There is fantastic strategy rivaling chess masters, engineering marvels, and the athletes who compete in the worlds single most difficult endurance event. This article unfortunately plays to the fear of the unknown and focuses on a minor part of what the sport - the crash. The author clearly doesn’t understand cycling. The equivalent of getting to interview Chef Thomas Keller, and then asking if he’s worried about getting cut by knives or burned by a hot pan. Times, you can do so much better.
71
I'm surprised there's no discussion of the Superman position, where the cyclist is a flat plank balances on the seat, with their feet extended back - has the technique maybe been outlawed? Search Youtube for "The Superman's Return - Michael Guerra is back on bike to fight road cyclists' crimes" to see it in action.
4
I did that once, unintentionally. Going downhill on Coast Highway in Malibu, I hit a bump so jarringly hard it caused my upper body to shift forward onto the handlebars, my hands to come off the bars and shoes to unclip from the pedals while my lower abdomen mounted onto the seat. I stabilized the handlebar with my chest and was able work my body and hands back to regain control without going down. My mates behind me saw it all to their and my amazement.
5
Michael - the riders can go well over 45 mph. That’s not hard especially on some of the long descents. At those speeds and higher you can’t go faster by pedaling as your gears aren’t large enough. The aerodynamic drag also doesn’t increase linearly - so as you go faster the wind resistance goes up by your velocity squared. Deceasing your frontal area and coefficient of drag is a great way to go faster. The “deep dive” on bicycling.com didn’t really compare apples to apples. They mention “if it’s a position you can pedal, the benefits are often the same” again your not going to be adding speed by pedaling if you’re already doing 45 MPH. In a 53x11 you need to do 120 RPM to just do 45 MPH - if gravity is already keeping you there to go faster you need to reduce you coefficient of drag and frontal area.
Also if you didn’t realize the Tourmalet would have a lot of fans - I’m guessing you’re new to cycling. Various forms of tucking have been around for decades - this version isn’t the craziest. You can steer and brake, taking a sharp turn at too high of a speed can require hard braking - which would necessitate shifting your weight back, but riders have crashed going too fast even while on the saddle. Crashing is a part of bike racing - risks are taken for speed.
44
@Rob
You can add speed by pedaling especially if you are on a race bike. Not all gear sets and big rings are the same.
65mph is not hard to reach on long hills.
1
@Rob I would have much preferred an article about the social aspect of the Tour. What amazed me when I went, like it did this reporter, is that the Tour isn't just a sporting event--it's the Superbowl and Fourth of July rolled into one, with literally EVERYONE along the race route coming out to support, and days-long festivities building up to the few minutes when the riders pass.
It's an amazing show, but an even more fun party. Most Americans have no idea about how truly great it is.
14
@Todd Very much agree and I've tried to touch on that aspect in every story. In first piece quoted a director to that effect. It's an astonishing turnout ...
4
yeah, it's great to see riders using it on my local club rides. you can bet my hands are close to the brakes when that happens.
8
Gave up on group rides years ago, riddled with accidents and egos that have more air in them than my tires.
11
agreed the 'super tuck' is unnecessarily dangerous but the video is clear that Gilbert was NOT in the super tuck when he had his accident he simply was going to fast and miscalculated the turn
20
Yes you can brake in that position.
You can steer the same way you steer a motorcycle by counter steering.
I prefer to slide off the back of the seat it works much better.
7
The problem with the super tuck is not the inability to apply the brakes, but the limited ability to steer precisely. The photo clearly shows the rider's fingers easily able to reach the brakes.
8
I remember well the time as a kid that I panic braked and hit the front brake too hard... the sense of doom that came as the rear wheel left the pavement!
I suspect that having all weight forward would result in effectively no braking from the rear wheel (no weight back there = no traction = no braking). Meanwhile, all that weight out in front of the front wheel means that anything more than a featherweight touch of the brake lever would send the rider a** over teacup and turn him into a 45 mph, spandex clad, bike-less projectile.
As I learned long ago, being able to reach the brakes doesn’t always mean coming to a safe and pain-free stop.
4
@J Oberst Thank you! That indeed is the point. And with due respect, truly, to the many knowledgeable cyclists here, the supertuck is very much a conversation among these cyclists, who are the best in the world. And they are not nearly as sanguine about it as the fast flyers here.
Finally, Gilbert and his fellow cyclists describe that crack up as the result of the supertuck. Yes he pulled out of it but it was the lack of control and then the attempt to over correct that sent him flying. If you disagree, c'est bon, and I invite all to email Gilbert and Martin et al
9