Jonathan Vaughters gave a good rider representative viewpoint on the race radio issue this morning over at Velonews. I have to agree on some key points he had about cooperation between the riders in particular being an active voice in decisions concerning the race:
"...the effect we want is to provoke change. We don’t want any punch; we want proper governance, for the teams and riders to be considered, to have our opinion heard and to have the possibility of voting. We’re simply saying we’re not going to race in an event that is promoted by a governing body that’s very far from having a democratic process."
And not only being heard, but having an actual effect on the decisions made collectively once they're made:
"The teams and riders have reps on advisory boards, but they have no power into what’s passed into rules. I stand on CCP, though I am not sure anymore, because I think we might have gotten kicked off. At a meeting in Birmingham, when the decision was being made on the new ranking system for the teams, I asked that a vote be allowed, but there was no voting process allowed. Once the management committee of the UCI makes its decision, it does not need to take into account what the others think. Our representation is just on an advisory board. The riders, the teams and the race organizers have no direct voting on the rules and regulations outlining our sport."
Now having said all that I have to take an opposing side on his comments about how the "the best athlete on the best team with the best strategy with the best coaching" and that luck shouldn't play a roll. Cycling has been romanticized by many announcers as being a sport that reflects life. If it really reflects life, then all that you can do to prepare won't stop luck from smashing its hammer down on you or lifting you up on feathered wings to achieve a goal. His argument doesn't really ring true as a few of his quotes on luck reveal:
JV on bad luck:
JV on transitioning luck:
JV on good luck: