5 ms·

That's a strange metric to pick. The Tour de France is a team race, with lots of strategy involved. It most definitely isn't about getting the lowest time, only

by morei 6y ago

That's a strange metric to pick. The Tour de France is a team race, with lots of strategy involved. It most definitely isn't about getting the lowest time, only a lower time than the competitors (very much not the same thing!). e.g. It's common to see the entire peloton sit up and collectively agree to 'take it easy' for most of a stage to reserve energy for a sprint finish in the last 3 minutes. So the total race time is strongly affected by the mix of team strategies. It's also very much not a standard race year-to-year, with differing numbers of mountain stages versus flat stages, so the year-to-year times are completely incomparable. There may still be doping the sport of cycling, but the TdF total race times would be very weak evidence for it.

jhayward 6y ago
The TdF has many iconic sections, mostly climbs, some time trials. They don't change often. Times are compared from year to year not over the entire 21-day race, but section by section.
nl 6y ago
> the TdF total race times would be very weak evidence for it. Actually, the jump in TdF average speed (not total race time) during the early 1990s is fairly often attributed to EPO (and other drug) usage. The average speed in earlier events was lower because of the inconsistency - cyclists would ride much slower on days before (or after) a big stage, and this would drop the average speed for the entire race. EPO and other drugs improved recovery so cyclists would ride hard everyday. It's hard to know how true this is - it also corresponded to increased TV coverage for full stages, and more money in the sport. But the average speed jump after 1989 is significant.