Our live blog can sometimes be a bit sluggish to load… if it’s really testing your patience, try refreshing the page.
- News

Live blog: Climb for Costa update, Froome and Uran hit the dancefloor, catching the bus Dafne Fixed style + more

Help us to bring you the best cycling content
If you’ve enjoyed this article, then please consider subscribing to road.cc from as little as £1.99. Our mission is to bring you all the news that’s relevant to you as a cyclist, independent reviews, impartial buying advice and more. Your subscription will help us to do more.
18 Comments
Read more...
Read more...
Read more...
Latest Comments
I watched it in thé Dauphiné but didn't get that feeling.
Incoming Betteridge's Law here ("No"). I don't know if this becomes a "thing" but let's say it did: Pro: see round corners etc. And and increasing number of bikes (not just ebikes) have batteries / wireless / other tech anyway... Con: could easily become yet another way to relocate responsibility for safety from drivers, without substantially or reliably improving safety for others. Why? Not guaranteed (both your system AND all the other road users' systems need to be exist / be working / be enabled). How well does the bike interface work anyway (vibration could be masked by road noise; does everyone have both hands on the handlebars at all times? If it becomes prevalent it's easy to see the police / lawyers reaching for "bicycle didn't have (the latest version of) this thus the cyclist was irresponsible / brought it on themselves". For those who are "chips-with-everything" / "Internet-of-everything"-skeptical (that boat has sailed...) this would be yet another driver for "you used to buy a bike now you buy another smartphone".
100% agree, I have Assos and they work a lot better for me, yes they’re more expensive but a lot comfier and last a lot longer. So cost per ride Assos win hands down over Le Col.
@mikecassie I bought a pair that lasted 2 rides before the stitching wore through. I complained about this and they basically said sorry, its your saddle, no one else has this issue. I've got various pairs of Assos bib shorts that have lasted me years with zero issues. They were just awfully designs. The stitching was loose and right over the location where your leg would interface with the saddle if there was going to be any friction. Looking at my assos bibs, all the seams are placed where your movement isn't going to cause problems and all of them are tight to the point of being recessed to make sure that any rubbing isn't on an exposed thread. Le Col offered me 20% off a new pair of their bibs which I politely declined as I didn't think 2 short rides was worth paying 80% of RRP for.
@darnac I know cycling is a team sport to a considerable degree but I have always thought that taking the time on the fourth rider gives too much advantage to the richest teams, the ones who can afford to have three or more Galácticos backing up their leader. Having individual times for each rider seems to me closer to the spirit of the race, i.e. the man who goes round the whole parcours in the lowest time wins. With the old system you could end up with a somewhat absurd situation where rider A actually rode the Tour a minute quicker than their rivals but rider B takes the title because their fourth man in the TTT finished 1.01 ahead of rider A's fourth man. Besides, having watched this format in the Dauphiné, it definitely does make it more exciting and at a time when the standard moan is that with one rider, or two at most, dominant the racing has become too boring that's not really a bad thing.
@nick_stokie Pretty impossible to hide that in the last km of the Tour with maybe 100 cameras on them not to mention everyone's phones.
The "same time in the last kilometre" rule feels exploitable if a team was cunning. Given the last section is uphill then full team effort to the 1km red kite before the most powerful rider does the last 1km solo. If the others were to sit up and coast in they would get a slower individual time. If they had a 'soft' crash into each other or a mechanical (who verifies this?) then then get the better finish time of the more powerful rider. Not very sporting but...
Well you wouldn't want your tyres to be unstable, would you?
I get thé feeling that thé over-riding motivation for changing thé format is to mâke it more 'exciting' on TV
“Instead of moving us closer to reopening, it locks in years more of congestion across south-west London. This will do further harm to residents and businesses and put even more strain on local transport networks." Wandsworth council demonstrating the delusion and fallacy that transport = motor vehicles and only motor vehicles. But there is a cure! The Dutch did it fifty years ago at their DfT equivalent HQ, by cutting the car parking by half and prioritising alternatives. The chances of Wandsworth doing anything to affect the petrolhead councillors would appear to be less than England winning the world cup.
18 thoughts on “Live blog: Climb for Costa update, Froome and Uran hit the dancefloor, catching the bus Dafne Fixed style + more”
Given their pricing I think
Given their pricing I think the idea is a DOA. £1 unlock + 20p a minute. £5 for a small journey – bargain!
Just get a bike.
Those e scooters were
Those e scooters were featured on BBC R4 news yesterday, quite an extended piece, detailing all the environmental benefits etc; longer than they have spent discussing the overwhelming greater benefits of cycling in the past thirty years. The BBC apparently has a blanket ban on even mentioning the incredible benefits of cycling, and the recent phone in on the You and Yours prog barely mentioned them, only when callers said how good they had been.
Given the overwhelming benefits of cycling, congestion, pollution, health, obesity etc, one might think that it would be front and centre of any item about those subjects, but it is never mentioned by the BBC. If anything else had half the benefits of cycling, they would be all over it 24/7/365.
The rest of the media is barely any better.
Crocs yes, but where are the
Crocs yes, but where are the pink pyjamas?!!!
Cue the usual late middle
Cue the usual late middle aged men braying about what people should be doing.
One less person on a toxic fume emitting mode of transport is good by me. I have no problem with the scooterers I’ve come across on the roads. Leave your crab in a bucket mentality alone and mob up with potential allies against the death cage lobby instead.
roadmanshaq wrote:
Which scooterers were these, considering they are illegal to use on the road?
Wait until someone kills an OAP on the pavement then you can talk about ‘death scoots’ instead of ‘death cages’ . There’s nothing fundamentally dangerous about cars…..unless you don’t control them properly. Same difference.
You’ll never win against the ‘death cage’ lobby anyway. It’s a multi-billion pound industry. Scooters….not so much.
It think the most telling part of scootering is you look like a bellend. Maybe if you’re one of radical kids that pop barspins and 360 on normal manual ones. Being a cyclist puts you into a lower social grouping so god knows what using a scooter does to you unless you’re a hipster.
Yorkshire wallet wrote:
What a load of garbage. Cars and other motor vehicles kill thousands a year via fumes and particulates alone. You’re just completely ignorant of basic environmental health and there is no point continuing a chat with someone so clearly proud of being a blustering, anti intellectual fool.
roadmanshaq wrote:
Considering that one of the complaints often used against cyclists is “bl00dy stupid adults playing on their toys”, with a failure to see bicycles as a valid form of non “toxic fume emitting mode of transport” and with a commensurate loss of status as a road user, exactly how far down the ladder do you think using an e-scooter will put you?
And, as YW rightly says, how long until some e-scooterer knocks someone down (whether or not its their fault) and the Tabloid Hounds are let loose on them…??
brooksby wrote:
Thinking that you’re ever going to win the public argument by appeasement is the worst fallacy there is. The suffragettes and civil Rights movement didn’t get their way by meekly soliciting the media’s OK and only a fool would think that method would work re rididng our society of the tyranny of the death cage.
roadmanshaq wrote:
Considering that one of the complaints often used against cyclists is “bl00dy stupid adults playing on their toys”, with a failure to see bicycles as a valid form of non “toxic fume emitting mode of transport” and with a commensurate loss of status as a road user, exactly how far down the ladder do you think using an e-scooter will put you?
And, as YW rightly says, how long until some e-scooterer knocks someone down (whether or not its their fault) and the Tabloid Hounds are let loose on them…??
— roadmanshaq Thinking that you’re ever going to win the public argument by appeasement is the worst fallacy there is. The suffragettes and civil Rights movement didn’t get their way by meekly soliciting the media’s OK and only a fool would think that method would work re rididng our society of the tyranny of the death cage.— brooksby
Excuse me?
My point, I think, was that many people already think that cycling is too dangerous and wouldn’t dream of cycling in with motor traffic, so how many people do you think would want to mix it with motor traffic on a scooter (even one with a LiOn battery for a motor)?
My other point was that cyclists=”evil runners down of poor pedestrians” in some corners of the media, and that all that vitriol would come crashing down on e-scooterists too as soon as there was the slightest hint of “Oh, well they nearly run me down, they did!”.
And as a final point, though I do take on board that we need to get people out of their cars, I’m still umming about e-bikes at present (got buzzed by one on my non-electric bike recently) so e-scooters are for me a bit of a step too far.
Final, final point, is that I’m really not sure that campaigning for cycling infrastructure or for alternatives to the motor car is truly comparable to the suffragettes or the civil rights movement. I understand the analogy, but…
brooksby wrote:
— brooksbyGiven that you exhibit complete ignorance of the harm caused by motor vehicles in pollution and maiming of normal people in their thousands, every year, I will not sweat your small minded Benedict Arnold chasing down of ebike riders and scooterers.
Get your priorities right.
roadmanshaq wrote:
Don’t be a middle aged brayer telling people what to do, mob up with the potential allies against the death cage lobby instead, and then tell people what to do.
These scooters have been
These scooters have been noted to have been left in really awkward places where they’ve been deployed in the states – partially blocking pavements, right next to crossings, and on street corners, for a few examples.
At least with these, they’re going to be a shape and size where I can easily chuck them out of my path if they’re in the way of my wheelchair – Obikes etc are way too bloody heavy, I usually end up just shoving them aside.
I have no problem with them in principle – anything to help bridge that last-mile gap and coax people out of cars – but like bloody sodding sandwich boards, if they’re taking up pavement in such a way as to present a navigational hazard to MI and VI pedestrians, then they shouldn’t be there and should be removed, before somebody either gets hurt or, ehem, accidentally damages them with their wheelchair.
Plenty of people in London on
Plenty of people in London on scooters of all sorts, skates, rollerblades, skateboards and even electric skateboards, all just getting on with it. Law needed to change ages ago. Anything that gets people out of their short-distance car journeys.
General Motors competition –
General Motors competition – I name this bike, “Fugly”

I think they need seatbelts,
I think they need seatbelts, airbags, numberplates, riders to wear helmets and Sa-vile’s wardrobe… then yes.
Actually, having not seen them i may be wrong, but the thing that would concern me is the wheels. Are they big enough to tackle the average pavement…
“GM are branching out and
“GM are branching out and have developed a folding e-bike… and presumably after a creative block in the boardroom they’re now asking members of the public to give them a hand naming it.”
Has “Too lazy to walk” been taken?
I do not think brooksby is
I do not think brooksby is ignorant of any of the things that you accuse him of there, perhaps you should read some of his other posts.
I also don’t think that the legality for escooters sits anywhere close to votes for women or the removal of the Jim Crow laws.
Segways never managed to be legal, nor did the hoverboard craze, these escooter people had better have very deep pockets, the Tory party don’t come very cheap.
Yes because you’re a fool –
Yes because you’re a fool – he literally claimed ‘cars do no harm’ in this same page ignoring the deaths and injuries caused by air pollution.
I have a right to not choke on toxic fumes and die a premature death, how about you start sticking up for yourself instead of rolling over for the death cagers like a tame dog. Scooterers are allies against the institutional ruination of our breathing gases.