Wrong if the leader gets dropped early on in a quiet stage, but absolutely true if they get dropped during a more difficult racing situation. I can think of numerous instances where the entire team has gone back to get the boss - it's an act of desperation, but it does happen, particularly at times when there are multiple groups on the road and the team cars aren't where you'd want them to be. It really isn't uncommon for two or three riders to go back if the boss loses a lot of time in a crash or a mechanical.
Perhaps more to the point, this general situation (needing to deliver the boss to the front in the most efficient way possible) is something that sprinter-led teams will do towards the end of practically every flat stage, in the form of a lead-out. The aerodynamics and tactics are slightly different than when recovering a dropped leader, but it's the same basic approach of using a pace line.
There is no single answer.
I was thinking about how this might be useful on the attack. Visma had several super domestiques remaining at the end of the tour (Jorgensen, Kuss, Simon Yates) and UAE had lost its top lieutenant. Could they have made a 2x2 train for Vingegaard? Well, maybe, but Pogacar would’ve just hopped on board. So not sure we would see this either.
Amateur rides with no cars and a wider divergence in cyclist abilities, maybe this is more useful.
idoubtit•3h ago
I doubt this practical value exists. The paper completely forgets one important element¹: having a single rider at the front saves the energy of the teammates. If a team was to put two riders upfront and then the chase takes more time than expected, they have no backup. And even if the strategy was to succeed and the leader gets back into the peloton, he/she will have two tired teammates instead of one, which means a reduced help for the remaining of the stage.
I also suppose pro teams already know all of this, even if they didn't have the precise benchmarks of this paper. It's just unpractical most of the time. For a diamond shape, the aerodynamic gain is pretty obvious, but with a high price to pay in order to protect a rider.
As a side note, the paper authors should learn about PDF metadata. It's quite ugly that the file's title is "Microsoft Word - 2025_Preprint_Formations_V2".
[¹]: Except when they quote a cycling specialist about the goal to "reduce the leader's effort without sacrificing too many team members".
jansan•3h ago
consp•1h ago
Half of it, when in echelon form during crosswinds. Which is pretty much the only situation where any of this will work in practice since as mentioned elsewhere many times you don't burn all your people at once. Energy isn't endless.
jdietrich•1h ago
Also (as mentioned briefly in the paper), longer pace lines result in reduced drag for the rider at the front. This can seem counter-intuitive, but it's basic streamlining - the following riders fill in the low-pressure region behind the lead rider, reducing the amount of flow separation. Riding two-abreast is actually slower than riding individually.
A really efficient pace line looks like a team pursuit, with the rider on the front doing very short stints before peeling off and joining the back of the line. This is hugely important for physiological reasons, because it allows the lead rider to briefly exceed their aerobic threshold and then recover.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016761051...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pSq_JvD9w0g
lostlogin•1h ago
prmoustache•29m ago