2021 Giro Route Rumours

[gavia88]

but of course I would like to see it. Time trail stage 2 + Fauniera stage 3 would make it a very interesting race to follow from the beginning

 

[Red Rick]

or it just end-up like stage 2 in last year's tour over the Turini, average break-away, easy to keep control, no GC action at all.

But if that happens CN will be more entertaining than TdF route reveal day.

 

[OlavEH]

What's the similarity between 2013 Ventoux, 2015 PSM, 2017 Blockhaus, 2017 Oropa, 2018 Rabassa, 2019 Iseran? The best predictor for huge gaps on a MTF is generally a very fast paced flat before and a very fast first third of the climb.

Did you mean here that all these stages created big gaps? I wouldn't say that Oropa in 2017 with 12 riders within 1 minute was this kind of stage. And regarding the first three stages you mentioned, all these had one thing in common; one of the two best climbers the last decade in peak (or close to peak) shape. I would say that is a far more important factor than anything else.

In general, I find it hard to predict how big gaps you get from mountain stages. A lot of us here in the forum had waited for a Mont du Chat mountain stage with a downhill finish for many years, but when it finally came in 2017, it didn't create the firerworks of a stage that we expected.

And a climb like Formigal is usually not a stage profile that get us excited, but both the 2016 and 2020 stage here were great, much due to unforseen cicumstances. Usually these kind of stages would be soft-pedalled and end up in attacks the last couple of kms.

The must secure way to creat big gaps is a massive climb earlier on the stage (usually the penultimate climb) before an easier finish. Stelvio last year, almost all versions with Mortirolo/Finestre, Esichie/Sampeyre in 2003, etc. But there aren't too many opportunities to create these kind of stages. Usually you could have one or two in each version of the Giro, not much more. In the Tour there are fewer possible options.

That is also why I am against a massive amount om time trialing, like some seem to desire. 100+ km should be totally out of the question. A guy like Dumoulin in peak shape would be able to gain perhaps 6-7 minutes on a medium time trialer like Bernal with that so many TT kms. And you need a shitload of mountains to compensate for that. So many height meters and tough mountain stages that it is totally unrealistic. My favorite option is a short ITT of 10-15 km at stage 1 and a longer one of 40-50 km somewhere (early) in the second week. Not much more than that. That would tip the scale too much in favor of diesel engine climbers when these are in top form.

 

[Red Rick]

Did you mean here that all these stages created big gaps? I wouldn't say that Oropa in 2017 with 12 riders within 1 minute was this kind of stage. And regarding the first three stages you mentioned, all these had one thing in common; one of the two best climbers the last decade in peak (or close to peak) shape. I would say that is a far more important factor than anything else.

In general, I find it hard to predict how big gaps you get from mountain stages. A lot of us here in the forum had waited for a Mont du Chat mountain stage with a downhill finish for many years, but when it finally came in 2017, it didn't create the firerworks of a stage that we expected.

And a climb like Formigal is usually not a stage profile that get us excited, but both the 2016 and 2020 stage here were great, much due to unforseen cicumstances. Usually these kind of stages would be soft-pedalled and end up in attacks the last couple of kms.

The must secure way to creat big gaps is a massive climb earlier on the stage (usually the penultimate climb) before an easier finish. Stelvio last year, almost all versions with Mortirolo/Finestre, Esichie/Sampeyre in 2003, etc. But there aren't too many opportunities to create these kind of stages. Usually you could have one or two in each version of the Giro, not much more. In the Tour there are fewer possible options.

That is also why I am against a massive amount om time trialing, like some seem to desire. 100+ km should be totally out of the question. A guy like Dumoulin in peak shape would be able to gain perhaps 6-7 minutes on a medium time trialer like Bernal with that so many TT kms. And you need a shitload of mountains to compensate for that. So many height meters and tough mountain stages that it is totally unrealistic. My favorite option is a short ITT of 10-15 km at stage 1 and a longer one of 40-50 km somewhere (early) in the second week. Not much more than that. That would tip the scale too much in favor of diesel engine climbers when these are in top form.

Oropa had really big gaps for what it is. It's not just about having yer peak climber, it's a specific thing that massively inflates gaps a lot of the times.

 

[Eshnar]

in case you guys are still interested in route rumours...
yesterday the finish of Madesimo has been confirmed to actually be at Alpe Motta, quite a bit above the actual town. It has also been somewhat confirmed that the Giro will pass through Switzerland (at least through the Ticino canton, which does not necessarily mean they would do S.Bernardino and Splügen, but nothing else would make sense...). It seems the race should also pass in Campodolcino, which is below Madesimo, so the most sensible route should be S.Bernardino - Splügen - descent to Campodolcino via Isola - climb back to Madesimo and all the way to Alpe Motta.

 

[gavia88]

in case you guys are still interested in route rumours...
yesterday the finish of Madesimo has been confirmed to actually be at Alpe Motta, quite a bit above the actual town. It has also been somewhat confirmed that the Giro will pass through Switzerland (at least through the Ticino canton, which does not necessarily mean they would do S.Bernardino and Splügen, but nothing else would make sense...). It seems the race should also pass in Campodolcino, which is below Madesimo, so the most sensible route should be S.Bernardino - Splügen - descent to Campodolcino via Isola - climb back to Madesimo and all the way to Alpe Motta.

not a moster stage, but very decent. St. Bernardino is a very dificult climb and the final climb should be around 8-9km at 9%?

 

[Eshnar]

not a moster stage, but very decent. St. Bernardino is a very dificult climb and the final climb should be around 8-9km at 9%?

yes, maybe a bit shorter, depending on where the finish actually is

 

[OlavEH]

yesterday the finish of Madesimo has been confirmed to actually be at Alpe Motta, quite a bit above the actual town. It has also been somewhat confirmed that the Giro will pass through Switzerland (at least through the Ticino canton, which does not necessarily mean they would do S.Bernardino and Splügen, but nothing else would make sense...). It seems the race should also pass in Campodolcino, which is below Madesimo, so the most sensible route should be S.Bernardino - Splügen - descent to Campodolcino via Isola - climb back to Madesimo and all the way to Alpe Motta.

Sounds good. Google maps gives me something like 3,5 km, 7 % from Madesimo to Alpe Motta. Sounds like a descent finish after San Bernandino and Splügen.
Edit: I now see that there are several options for Alpe Motta.

And this would be on stage 20? On 29th of May? I have actually a hotel reservation in Locarno from 20 to 28th of May for a week of hiking in the area. I might need to change those dates......

 

[Eshnar]

Sounds good. Google maps gives me something like 3,5 km, 7 % from Madesimo to Alpe Motta. Sounds like a descent finish after San Bernandino and Splügen.

And this would be on stage 20? On 29th of May? I have actually a hotel reservation in Locarno from 20 to 28th of May for a week of hiking in the area. I might need to change those dates......

yes, May 29th.
Not sure which road you checked. To me it looks steeper (8-9%), and to that stretch you have to add the road from Campodolcino to Madesimo, which is 4-5 km at a similar gradient.

 

[Mayomaniac]

The finish has t be somewhere in Motta near the ski station where you have parking lots, otherwise you won't have the space for hosting a Giro finish.
So a short, rather steep uphill finish after a hard stage.

 

[Red Rick]

The finish has t be somewhere in Motta near the ski station where you have parking lots, otherwise you won't have the space for hosting a Giro finish.
So a short, rather steep uphill finish after a hard stage.

Are you signalling Astana will win this stage?

 

[Mayomaniac]

Are you signalling Astana will win this stage?

No, Aru with a mustache will win this stage.

 

[Netserk]

RideWithGPS has the last ascent at 7.6 km @ 9.3 %

 

[Eshnar]

RideWithGPS has the last ascent at 7.6 km @ 9.3 %

yes that is exactly the route I meant.

 

[gregrowlerson]

in case you guys are still interested in route rumours...
yesterday the finish of Madesimo has been confirmed to actually be at Alpe Motta, quite a bit above the actual town. It has also been somewhat confirmed that the Giro will pass through Switzerland (at least through the Ticino canton, which does not necessarily mean they would do S.Bernardino and Splügen, but nothing else would make sense...). It seems the race should also pass in Campodolcino, which is below Madesimo, so the most sensible route should be S.Bernardino - Splügen - descent to Campodolcino via Isola - climb back to Madesimo and all the way to Alpe Motta.

I think you're in the wrong thread mate. Unless some of these words are Italian for individual time trialling.

 

[Netserk]

I'd prefer it without the detour, but it's still fairly fine. Of actually ridden final mountain stages in the Giro, it is the best or as good as any other since 2016.

 

[OlavEH]

Google Maps

Find local businesses, view maps and get driving directions in Google Maps.

www.google.com

Not sure which road you checked. To me it looks steeper (8-9%), and to that stretch you have to add the road from Campodolcino to Madesimo, which is 4-5 km at a similar gradient.

Ah, I didn't notice the part you wrote about descending all the way to Campodolcino via Isola, and just used the climb from turning off the main road through the tunnel and to Motta di Sotto. Would actually preferred that solution instead.......

 

[Red Rick]

I'd prefer it without the detour, but it's still fairly fine. Of actually ridden final mountain stages in the Giro, it is the best or as good as any other since 2016.

I have no idea what the profile would look like?

 

[Devil's Elbow]

I have no idea what the profile would look like?

https://twitter.com/x/status/1353779215192227841

Lees than ideal, unfortunately.

 

[OlavEH]

Lees than ideal, unfortunately.

All of La Flamme Rouge's possible route design for mountain stages were fairly similar. Three big climbs at the end of the stage, but not much else. These applied to the Madesimo, Cortina and Sega di Ala stages. 3000 height meters are the new 4000 height meters.......

 

[Mayomaniac]

All of La Flamme Rouge's possible route design for mountain stages were fairly similar. Three big climbs at the end of the stage, but not much else. These applied to the Madesimo, Cortina and Alpe di Sega stages. 3000 height meters are the new 4000 height meters.......

I wouldn't really trust LFR, it's just what they think that the route might look like, they often come up with the blandest cookie cutter designs that one could imagine.

 

[OlavEH]

I wouldn't really trust LFR, it's just what they think that the route might look like, they often come up with the blandest cookie cutter designs that one could imagine.

I know. But there are some limitations if you assume start and finish towns. Especially the Cortina and Sega di Ala stages will be very long if you add extra climbs in addition to those viewed in LFR's design, ~220 km, given start in Sacile and Canazei. It is definitely possible, but I doubt we'll see two stages of that type. But, I will be gladly suprised if that happens.

 

[Red Rick]

Starting to look like Vuelta d'Italia to me.

 

[roundabout]

I wouldn't really trust LFR, it's just what they think that the route might look like, they often come up with the blandest cookie cutter designs that one could imagine.

I would generally say that they try to be realistic. A bit bland, true, but I like their work.

Normally I would have been a bit disappointed with the rumored route, but given the circumstances, it's ok.

 

[Devil's Elbow]

I wouldn't really trust LFR, it's just what they think that the route might look like, they often come up with the blandest cookie cutter designs that one could imagine.

I know, but this is actually the profile you get with climbing from Campodolcino to Motta di Sotto. At least from San Bernardino onwards, that is.