The overuse of low-gradient climbs and soft medium mountain stages (in the third week) is great for Evenepoel. Pog may like it too, if he races. Regardless of who shows up, I think it will inspire some good racing.
After we suffer through the terribly boring stages in the Netherlands, Stages 4 to 10 are OK for GT start.
Medium mountain stages can be good if they're difficult throughout most here leave no chance for anything to happen until the final climb. After Stage 10, you got 2 unwatchable stages (ITT and sprint). Then...
-> Stage 12 is a waste of a mountain stage, lucky if we get any action before the last 3 km. Then sprint/break stage.
-> Stage 14 and Stage 15: See Stage 12. Then another break/reduced sprint.
-> Stage 17: See Stage 12.
-> Stage 18: At least is has 2 mountains, but still no likely action until mid-way up the finishing climb.
-> Stage 19: Host-finishing municipality paid a premium for max exposure? Break or 30-rider sprint.
-> Stage 20: OK medium mountain stage. Best stage of the last 2 weeks, which says a lot about the horribleness of the route.
Good pacing of stages along the three weeks is not enough for making a good route. This Vuelta fails miserably at individual stage design. There are too many stages where they deliberately avoid the best route to the chosen stage finish. The downgraded Sierra Nevada is just an in-your-face example of "we can do better but we won't" for those who missed the rest.
Anyone who was read interviews with those involved in the Vuelta route or individual stage design is aware of every actor's ideas on the subject.
Guillén doesn't need external pressure for this change. I can make the bold prediction that he's done it to keep in his sleeve the card of the Hazallanas + A-4025 side and come back in a few years hyping "a new harder side to Sierra Nevada"