2021 Giro Route Rumours

Page 10 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Yes, let's have the inventive alternative of two TTs and a final parade...
Little I can do if you fail to see that three ITT's is unnecessary in a GT, while having two on the weekends does little for eyeballs watching the stage - Gee if there were two flat stages on weekends there will be an uproar - The sooner Vegni moves on the better, so that we can see some more inventive course designs at the Giro.
 
Sep 18, 2020
43
23
130
Little I can do if you fail to see that three ITT's is unnecessary in a GT, while having two on the weekends does little for eyeballs watching the stage - Gee if there were two flat stages on weekends there will be an uproar - The sooner Vegni moves on the better, so that we can see some more inventive course designs at the Giro.
ITT is the best thing that you can get on the first and last stage and in general splitting tt kilometres and placing time triles all over a race can improve pacing. In addition not everyone dislikes to watch them. Even though I usually support mountain goats ovet time trailer I actually really enjoy them. To me they are way more entertaining than sprint or random stage with breakaway fighting for the win 15 minutes ahead of a peleton, which is completely not interested in racing.
 
I don't mind MTFs as much as several other on this forum. I think that there should be at least 3-4 high MTFs in a GT, but a design with a really tough climb as the second last climb followed by a signicantly easier climb to the stage finish is IMO far superior to the "standard" tough MTF. Mortirolo-Aprica and Finestre-Sestriere are the two most obvious, but several other options exist.

For the Giro, I'm suprised that they never use the bigger towns in Trentino in combination with a descent finish. Both Trento, Rovereto and especially Bolzano offer good opportunities to create a tough (and long) mountain stage with a descent finish to a bigger town in the region. Via Bondone to Trento, Bordala or Serrada to Rovereto or Nigra/Obergummer or Il Salto to Bolzano.
 
I don't mind MTFs as much as several other on this forum. I think that there should be at least 3-4 high MTFs in a GT, but a design with a really tough climb as the second last climb followed by a signicantly easier climb to the stage finish is IMO far superior to the "standard" tough MTF. Mortirolo-Aprica and Finestre-Sestriere are the two most obvious, but several other options exist.

For the Giro, I'm suprised that they never use the bigger towns in Trentino in combination with a descent finish. Both Trento, Rovereto and especially Bolzano offer good opportunities to create a tough (and long) mountain stage with a descent finish to a bigger town in the region. Via Bondone to Trento, Bordala or Serrada to Rovereto or Nigra/Obergummer or Il Salto to Bolzano.
I don't think people mind MTFs, it's just that 3-4 of them is optimal for a route, and a lot of the time organisers just go "it's a mountain stage, put a mountaintop finish" and leave it at that. You ideally want a range of mountain stages, some which are MTFs on mammoths that will be decisive in and of themselves (Blockhaus, Montecampione, Zoncolan, Monte Bondone) or where there's only one climb but it's a mammoth that will be decisive in and of itself (Monte Grappa 2010 for example), some of which are MTFs that are on an easier climb after a tougher one or after multiple climbs (Aprica after Mortirolo, Tonale after Gavia, Torre di Fraele after Stelvio, Abetone after San Pellegrino in Alpe) and some of which are up and down all day with either a less steep MTF or with a descent finish (regular Dolomiti odysseys). I agree with you that there need to be a few MTFs in a GT, the frustration and anti-MTF sentiment lately has been more to do with overkill and the number of Unipuerto stages or stages where the earlier climbing is rendered meaningless to the outcome by insisting on finishing on the hardest climb or making the last climb steep enough to dissuade anybody doing anything beforehand even when they are given the chance to.

Sometimes a stage can surprise us like that, though (extending the old Finestre-Sestrieres double as far as Jafferau could have run the risk of making Finestre a soft-pedalled mid-stage grinder, but it worked like a dream with the way the race was set up at that point with Froome needing enough time to force him to go long, and Yates having run himself ragged to gain that time).

And, of course, if the mountain stages are designed well enough, the course can easily withstand a bit more time trial mileage to force the riders to race them.
 
Last edited:
I don't think people mind MTFs, it's just that 3-4 of them is optimal for a route, and a lot of the time organisers just go "it's a mountain stage, put a mountaintop finish" and leave it at that. You ideally want a range of mountain stages, some which are MTFs on mammoths that will be decisive in and of themselves (Blockhaus, Montecampione, Zoncolan, Monte Bondone) or where there's only one climb but it's a mammoth that will be decisive in and of itself (Monte Grappa 2010 for example), some of which are MTFs that are on an easier climb after a tougher one or after multiple climbs (Aprica after Mortirolo, Tonale after Gavia, Torre di Fraele after Stelvio, Abetone after San Pellegrino in Alpe) and some of which are up and down all day with either a less steep MTF or with a descent finish (regular Dolomiti odysseys). I agree with you that there need to be a few MTFs in a GT, the frustration and anti-MTF sentiment lately has been more to do with overkill and the number of Unipuerto stages or stages where the earlier climbing is rendered meaningless to the outcome by insisting on finishing on the hardest climb or making the last climb steep enough to dissuade anybody doing anything beforehand even when they are given the chance to.
Nah, I think there have been a narrative among some here on the forum that descent finishes in many cases are preferred over MTFs. In certain and few cases I agree. Mostly I prefer a MTF. There are really not very many locations well suited for descent finishes. I mentioned a few in Trentino, and there are some other in Italy. In France there are fewer options.

Anyway, I agree with you that the main problem is stage/route design. For the Giro we've sometimes seen really backloaded routes, like 2014, but the later years I think that a couple of the main problems have been too less use of the Apenninnes in the first 10-12 days, especially the norrthern part in Marche, Emilia Romagna and Toscana. In addition to far too many easy MTFs which in addition doesn't connect well to other climbs. Like Oropa, Pratonevoso, San Martino di Castrozza and Madonna di Campiglio.

In the Tour there have been too much focus on new and steep climbs, and not enough focus on good stage design. Although I like most of the new additons like Loze, Portet, Prat d'Alibs and Grand Colombier (Belles Filles is an exception, not to keen about that one) these should come in addition to better designed stages. Now they just come instead of, and dwarfing much of the other mountain stages.
 
Nah, I think there have been a narrative among some here on the forum that descent finishes in many cases are preferred over MTFs. In certain and few cases I agree. Mostly I prefer a MTF. There are really not very many locations well suited for descent finishes. I mentioned a few in Trentino, and there are some other in Italy. In France there are fewer options.

Anyway, I agree with you that the main problem is stage/route design. For the Giro we've sometimes seen really backloaded routes, like 2014, but the later years I think that a couple of the main problems have been too less use of the Apenninnes in the first 10-12 days, especially the norrthern part in Marche, Emilia Romagna and Toscana. In addition to far too many easy MTFs which in addition doesn't connect well to other climbs. Like Oropa, Pratonevoso, San Martino di Castrozza and Madonna di Campiglio.

In the Tour there have been too much focus on new and steep climbs, and not enough focus on good stage design. Although I like most of the new additons like Loze, Portet, Prat d'Alibs and Grand Colombier (Belles Filles is an exception, not to keen about that one) these should come in addition to better designed stages. Now they just come instead of, and dwarfing much of the other mountain stages.
I think it's more that recent history has seen an oversaturation of MTFs leading to a decrease in quality of the racing and sometimes descent finishes being semi neutralized simply because why attack when tomorrow is HC MTF.

I think different climbs function better as MTF vs as passes, etc. And balance and placement is key. I think MTFs are raced more reliably but descent finishes tend to be more split between early attacks and nothing.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
I doubt that we'll see Tonale after Gavia in a long time, the Gavia descent down to Ponte di Legno is too dangerous for Vegni (it is a pretty dangerous descent and if you crash on that one you're lucky to come out of it alive).
My main thought when struggling up the south side of Gavia from Ponte di Legno is that I wouldn't want to be descending this! The north side descent is pretty straightforward in comparison. Gavia south is a super hard climb, shame we don't see it more often in a decisive role or it ends up being cancelled due to weather...
 
My main thought when struggling up the south side of Gavia from Ponte di Legno is that I wouldn't want to be descending this! The north side descent is pretty straightforward in comparison. Gavia south is a super hard climb, shame we don't see it more often in a decisive role or it ends up being cancelled due to weather...
On the other hand.

Basso wasn't dropped on that descent, soooooo
 
Reactions: Tour_de_Calvados
Yeah, but if you crash on that descent and go off the road you're done, you'd need a ton of luck to survive it.
Gavia from north with the flatter final section would make for an interesing mtf.
It's not great and in general there's not a single way in which Gavia north is somewhere you really want to go unless probabl coming directly off Stelvio/Umbrail. Otherwise, Mortirolo is always better.
 

:oops::D

Does anybody know where this Sicily stuff comes from? It seems strange as it looks like they won't be there this time. So why hand in an official application for that arrival?

Etna from sealevel would become the highest point in GC history an undoubtedly the hardest climb as well. Wonder if this will happen one day...
 

:oops::D

Does anybody know where this Sicily stuff comes from? It seems strange as it looks like they won't be there this time. So why hand in an official application for that arrival?

Etna from sealevel would become the highest point in GC history an undoubtedly the hardest climb as well. Wonder if this will happen one day...
It isn't realistic, you could use the unpaved, wide road that goes up to the ski station above Rifugio Sapienza at almost 2,500m of altitude.
It's a wide, unpaved road and you add 4.5km at 11% to the Rifugio Sapienza ascent, that would put the climb in the Col de la Loze league.
 
It isn't realistic, you could use the unpaved, wide road that goes up to the ski station above Rifugio Sapienza at almost 2,500m of altitude.
It's a wide, unpaved road and you add 4.5km at 11% to the Rifugio Sapienza ascent, that would put the climb in the Col de la Loze league.
Would be interesting, but not necessary at all. Would rather see them using some of the already steep (and paved) climbs that already is plausible to use. The combo of San Pellegrino in Alpe-Abetone is a clear first choice. A Colle delle Dragone MTF would also be interesting.
 
Would be interesting, but not necessary at all. Would rather see them using some of the already steep (and paved) climbs that already is plausible to use. The combo of San Pellegrino in Alpe-Abetone is a clear first choice. A Colle delle Dragone MTF would also be interesting.
I agree with you, I'm just saying that there's pretty much only one legit option if you want to go higher up on Etna.
San Pellegrino in Alpe-Abetone would be sooo good, we haven't seen that one since 2000...
 
I agree with you, I'm just saying that there's pretty much only one legit option if you want to go higher up on Etna.
San Pellegrino in Alpe-Abetone would be sooo good, we haven't seen that one since 2000...
Actually the article is talking about the climb to the Observatory, on the northern side from Piano Provenzana. The one you said is on the southern side.
The northern would add ~9 km at over 11% of sterrato on top of the climb to Piano Provenzana raced recently. Apparently they are really trying to make it happen.
Is it theoretically possible? Yes I guess
It is happening in 2021? Lol no
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
Actually the article is talking about the climb to the Observatory, on the northern side from Piano Provenzana. The one you said is on the southern side.
The northern would add ~9 km at over 11% of sterrato on top of the climb to Piano Provenzana raced recently. Apparently they are really trying to make it happen.
Is it theoretically possible? Yes I guess
It is happening in 2021? Lol no
I know, but isn't the road on the northern side much worse that the one on the southern side, above Rifugio Sapienza. It's a rather wide, unpaved road (you can't really call it sterrato if it's just vulcanic ashes) and there's the ski station at the top with enough space to hold a MTF, if you want to go further up it's IMO the best option.
 
I know, but isn't the road on the northern side much worse that the one on the southern side, above Rifugio Sapienza. It's a rather wide, unpaved road (you can't really call it sterrato if it's just vulcanic ashes) and there's the ski station at the top with enough space to hold a MTF, if you want to go further up it's IMO the best option.
well I've never been there personally, but from satellite pics the northern road seems quite wide too. And the article claims they already made an official recon with pro riders which went well so I assume there aren't big problems there.
As for the sterrato, they do mention that it can be ridden basically only with a gravel bike.
 
A local article claims that there's gonna be a stage in Abruzzo, either an ITT on the coast or a MTF on Blockhaus from Roccamorice. It's weird that the two options are so different from each other, but still...
I would expect it to be on stage 9.

1: Torino ITT
2: ??? - Verbania
3: Borgomanero? - Alba?
4: ??? - ??? (Emilia)
5: ??? - Pontedera?
6: Sesto Fiorentino - Gaiole in Chianti OR Montalcino
7: ??? - Monte Compatri
8: ??? - ??? (Campania?)
9: ??? - Blockhaus?
rest
10: ??? - ???
11: Foligno - Perugia ITT
12: ??? - Ravenna
13: Ravenna? - Mantova?
14: ??? - Montecampione
15: ??? - Montespluga?
rest
16: ??? - ??? (Trentino)
17: ??? - ??? (Südtirol?)
18: ??? - Zoncolan
19: Grado - Gorizia
20: Palmanova? - Tre Cime di Lavaredo
21: Verona ITT
 
The 3rd week doesn't make any sense to me, going from Trentino/South Tyrol down to the Zoncolan, then the Gorizia stage before going back up to Tre Cime.
Tre Crime-Zoncolan-Gorizia would be more reasonable, but are we sure it's gonna happen in the 3rd week?
Because Grado-Gorizia on stage 14, Zoncolan on stage 15, Tre Cime on stage 16 and the Lombardia mountain stages late in the 3rd week would IMO make more sense (are there actually any legit rumours about Montecampione?).
 
The 3rd week doesn't make any sense to me, going from Trentino/South Tyrol down to the Zoncolan, then the Gorizia stage before going back up to Tre Cime.
Tre Crime-Zoncolan-Gorizia would be more reasonable, but are we sure it's gonna happen in the 3rd week?
Because Grado-Gorizia on stage 14, Zoncolan on stage 15, Tre Cime on stage 16 and the Lombardia mountain stages late in the 3rd week would IMO make more sense (are there actually any legit rumours about Montecampione?).
the Montecampione rumour comes from local articles claiming first that the inauguration of a Pantani statue there was being delayed due to the Giro 2021, and then that the inauguration would happen on Sat May 22nd
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
Sep 17, 2016
118
9
2,845
Love the idea of Blockhaus on stage 9. Ideally I would want three peaks with mountain in stage 8,9, 14,15, 19, 20...

I hope a stage with Tre Cime will involve a lot of climbing beforehand. For an instance Giau?

What is the nature of that Grado - Gorizia stage? Medium mountain?

It seems to me the third week could be a bit overloaded with mountain stages.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY