100K ITT as 2nd last stage of TdF

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
42x16ss said:
Max Rockatansky said:
If it's like that...

That was an excellent long TT - both rouleurs and climbers did well on that, enough elevation to balance things out without gifting the whole race to the best TT'er immediately. Prudhomme desperately needs to speak to Zomegnan about route design, maybe between the two of them they could come up with something spectacular without going overkill.
He could also speak to Jean-Marie Leblanc. ;)



It's basically what I want in time trials. A design that requires everything that an allrounder needs to have. You have to work, think and act all the time. So great.
 
Re: Re:

Valv.Piti said:
Alexandre B. said:
tobydawq said:
Now that the differences in the mountains and other road stages are as small as they are, long ITTs will completely decide the races on their own.

And that is pretty obviously a bad thing, which I cannot fathom why so many posters on here don't agree with.
They disagree for a question of "balance".
I think the argument is that if you indeed include such long time trials the mountain stages will be raced differently and indeed more aggressively.
A questionable theory. Didn't happen in this year's flat ITT heavy Giro when Dumoulin was, what was it, 4+ minutes ahead? No one tried anything on Mortirolo or Stelvio. We saw the same **** racing as always.

Katusha tried something on Grappa, but that was well after crap gate, when Dumoulin didn't have much of an advantage anymore - a comparable situation with a GT with only one short flat ITT in it.
 
I disagree with the OP: Stage 20 wasn't boring. The mountains didn't decide the GC...stage 20 produced more gaps actually.

Stage 2, 100 km ITT. At this year's Tour, it would mean Froome with a 5 minute lead (at least) over all the other GC contenders. Game over. Talk about boring.

GTs have historically been designed to favor the home guys...not just Le Tour. Moser's Giro anyone? There lso is a big consideration given to who the contenders are. We may see more ITT soon to help Dumoulin challenge Froome. What organizers want is suspense, which boosts TV ratings. This year's Tour was a huge money maker. The average fans loved the design (no kidding). Suspense.

I like the "more ITT, smaller teams" option. It makes sense.
 
Aug 6, 2015
4,139
0
0
How can anyone like 10 flat stages with ZERO climbs inside the 50 km to the finish line. Of course the gaps will be smaller if we have 15 boring stages without any threat for any gc contender and the others 6 stages are 2 time trials and 4 mountains stages with 3000 (or less) meters of alttitude gain.
If we had 21 flat and boring stages, 150 riders will be with the same time, you don't get more suspense than that
 
Re:

portugal11 said:
How can anyone like 10 flat stages with ZERO climbs inside the 50 km to the finish line. Of course the gaps will be smaller if we have 15 boring stages without any threat for any gc contender and the others 6 stages are 2 time trials and 4 mountains stages with 3000 (or less) meters of alttitude gain.
If we had 21 flat and boring stages, 150 riders will be with the same time, you don't get more suspense than that
You are completely misrepresenting my post :) .

21 flat stages? Demare may win Le Tour, then...why not? :p . (joking)
 
42x16ss said:
Max Rockatansky said:
If it's like that...

That was an excellent long TT - both rouleurs and climbers did well on that, enough elevation to balance things out without gifting the whole race to the best TT'er immediately. Prudhomme desperately needs to speak to Zomegnan about route design, maybe between the two of them they could come up with something spectacular without going overkill.
Uh, while I suppose, the race wasn't gifted to the best TT'er immediately, Menchov was able to afford to pretty much follow the wheels for the rest of that Giro.
 
Aug 6, 2015
4,139
0
0
Re: Re:

Tonton said:
portugal11 said:
How can anyone like 10 flat stages with ZERO climbs inside the 50 km to the finish line. Of course the gaps will be smaller if we have 15 boring stages without any threat for any gc contender and the others 6 stages are 2 time trials and 4 mountains stages with 3000 (or less) meters of alttitude gain.
If we had 21 flat and boring stages, 150 riders will be with the same time, you don't get more suspense than that
You are completely misrepresenting my post :) .

21 flat stages? Demare may win Le Tour, then...why not? :p . (joking)
I understood what you said. What i don't understand is why on earth should someone like this tour.
 
Re: Re:

Alexandre B. said:
tobydawq said:
Now that the differences in the mountains and other road stages are as small as they are, long ITTs will completely decide the races on their own.

And that is pretty obviously a bad thing, which I cannot fathom why so many posters on here don't agree with.
They disagree for a question of "balance".
Well if you want balance you have a TTT, have a stage or two on cobbles or dirt - Then you have balance - But some on this forum are selective when it comes to balance - TobyD is right with his post - Gaps in the mountains are minimal compared to 15 or 20 years ago - This is why you have reduced TT km's
 
May 23, 2015
149
0
2,830
Not sure how it would work in cycling, but I think 30/50 km individual starts were the best thing in cross country skiing, as often there was so many changes between skiers. Some started fast but faded to the end, some were fast in the middle, but still faded a bit to the end and some started slow and came the end fast. Even after 40 km it was possible to catch minutes if someone faded badly. The downside was possible drafting of course. Anyway, in my opinion the longer ITT the better. It just needs a suitable amount of intermediate points (about 1 per 10-12 minutes) to follow the progress. And take the tv director from cross country skiing. The cycling directors don't know how to use intermediate points,
 
Aug 20, 2017
12
0
0
Tonton said:
Stage 2, 100 km ITT. At this year's Tour, it would mean Froome with a 5 minute lead (at least) over all the other GC contenders. Game over. Talk about boring.
Not second, but second last stage, so 20th stage in years without prolog.
 
Oct 10, 2015
2,059
0
0
Re:

yaco said:
Itt's should never be on the weekend as they are reserved for exciting stages. You reckon the 36km ITT was boring. Fail to see how 100km will be more interesting. Traditionally the 100km ITT was a two rider team.
What's exciting is a subjective thing, I find ITT's very interesting and enjoyable.
 
roundabout said:
42x16ss said:
Max Rockatansky said:
If it's like that...

That was an excellent long TT - both rouleurs and climbers did well on that, enough elevation to balance things out without gifting the whole race to the best TT'er immediately. Prudhomme desperately needs to speak to Zomegnan about route design, maybe between the two of them they could come up with something spectacular without going overkill.
Uh, while I suppose, the race wasn't gifted to the best TT'er immediately, Menchov was able to afford to pretty much follow the wheels for the rest of that Giro.
True, but climbers like Sastre were far closer to the top in that TT than they would have been if it was a pan flat 50km affair. Not being blown away immediately gave him the encouragement to try his hand, shown by his two stage wins.
 
Feb 25, 2015
78
0
0
I think that the GC would be more interesting if you've got contenders who have different strengths and weaknesses. The best recent example of this is probably the 2015 Vuelta. Dumoulin made big gains in the TTs and then tried to limit his losses in the mountains.

People are saying that if there were more TT kilometers, Froome would simply crush the competition. But if there would have been like 200km of TT in recent grand tours, we would have had GC contenders that we do not consider as such at the moment. People like Cancellara, Martin and Kiryienka.

Here is my ideal finish to the TdF: Have a significant ( 40 to 50k) TT on the final day that finishes on the Champs-Élysées. This would give every single ride a hero's salute for making it to Paris. Then have the women's crit. After that have the men's crit to finish it off. Have one or two neutralized laps around the Champs-Élysées circuit so everyone can do their silly stuff, but don't let it be that boring and drawn out parade to Paris that we get these days.
 
Aug 6, 2015
4,139
0
0
Re:

Tarnum said:
I think that the GC would be more interesting if you've got contenders who have different strengths and weaknesses. The best recent example of this is probably the 2015 Vuelta. Dumoulin made big gains in the TTs and then tried to limit his losses in the mountains.

People are saying that if there were more TT kilometers, Froome would simply crush the competition. But if there would have been like 200km of TT in recent grand tours, we would have had GC contenders that we do not consider as such at the moment. People like Cancellara, Martin and Kiryienka.

Here is my ideal finish to the TdF: Have a significant ( 40 to 50k) TT on the final day that finishes on the Champs-Élysées. This would give every single ride a hero's salute for making it to Paris. Then have the women's crit. After that have the men's crit to finish it off. Have one or two neutralized laps around the Champs-Élysées circuit so everyone can do their silly stuff, but don't let it be that boring and drawn out parade to Paris that we get these days.
I hate that useless sprint in the champs-élysees. I really don't know why sprinters are rated so highly. They should get 5/6 stages and that's it. I would love to see a "roubaix-paris", that would be insane!! A time trial would be ok too.
 
Re: Re:

18-Valve. (pithy) said:
A questionable theory. Didn't happen in this year's flat ITT heavy Giro when Dumoulin was, what was it, 4+ minutes ahead? No one tried anything on Mortirolo or Stelvio. We saw the same **** racing as always.
The Giro wasn't ITT-heavy. It had 70 km of ITT; that is modest and barely on the low end of what we critics would consider desirable.

Still, that's one year, and it was very weird to watch. We've seen what no or few ITTing does to races countless times.
 
Re:

wwabbit said:
Individual Hammer Chase on the last stage of the Tour de France!
That was something I would like to see (not in the Tour, not associated with that hammer festival, but in a small stage race). The riders start the last stage distanced by their GC time prior to that stage, the first to cross the line is the winner of the GC.
 
Aug 13, 2016
49
1
2,585
Re: Re:

Ricco' said:
wwabbit said:
Individual Hammer Chase on the last stage of the Tour de France!
That was something I would like to see (not in the Tour, not associated with that hammer festival, but in a small stage race). The riders start the last stage distanced by their GC time prior to that stage, the first to cross the line is the winner of the GC.
This happened in La Course this year, haven't seen the race though.
 
Re:

Tarnum said:
People are saying that if there were more TT kilometers, Froome would simply crush the competition. But if there would have been like 200km of TT in recent grand tours, we would have had GC contenders that we do not consider as such at the moment. People like Cancellara, Martin and Kiryienka.
There would still be mountains and Froome would crush those guys in mountain stages, so either way, you still end up with Froome winning, you just alter who can contend for the other podium spots.

Guys like Herrera, Van Impe, Rooks etc must look at modern GT routes and think "I could've smoked Roche/Lemond/Hinault/Thevenet on a course like that..."
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY