Giro d'Italia 2023 Giro D’Italia Route Rumors

Page 9 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
How did 2018, 2019 and 2020 (and most years really) not show an idea of what it could want to be? Big mountain stages with hard passes. ITTs that matter. I don't see an annual Strade stage as the least bit better than that.

The Giro prioritises the weekend stages, so when even the penultimate weekend counts as backloaded, your demand is a harder first week. But we had a hard Blockhaus stage on stage 9 this year, but that was not enough?!

The only problem of 2021 and 2022 (and really only the latter) was being too skewed towards MTFs and favouring the best climber to wait for the last climb of the race.
 
Last edited:
The Giro meanwhile doesn't seem to have much of an idea what it wants to be. Why isn't it a thing that there is an annual gravel stage and an annual murito madness stage? Why do we have to cross our fingers for a single decent medium mountain stage every year? The Giro could absolutely say, we won't do tons of stages in the Alps but instead we do 3 just three but those will be seriously big. Something like that is what I would hope for
Medium mountain stages should also be fairly easy. They don't even need new stage finishes compared to the later years. There are good options spread across much of Italy here. Finish in Torino, Genova, Como, somewhere in Friuli, Tuscany like Sestola, and Emilio Romagna, Marche, Abruzzo, etc.

More unsure about sterrato and murito stages. Are the first limited to Tuscany and the latter to parts of Marche and Abruzzo?
 
Medium mountain stages should also be fairly easy. They don't even need new stage finishes compared to the later years. There are good options spread across much of Italy here. Finish in Torino, Genova, Como, somewhere in Friuli, Tuscany like Sestola, and Emilio Romagna, Marche, Abruzzo, etc.

More unsure about sterrato and murito stages. Are the first limited to Tuscany and the latter to parts of Marche and Abruzzo?
How would you do Sestola significantly better than what we have been served so far (which apparently wasn't good enough)? Torino, Friuli and Como would all be "backloaded".
 
Reactions: YavorD
How would you do Sestola significantly better than what we have been served so far (which apparently wasn't good enough)? Torino, Friuli and Como would all be "backloaded".
Sestola after a 220 km stage and a couple of loops of Colle Passerino would potentially create big gaps.

And neither Torino, Como or Fruli must be done in the last week. Variety is good and I would much prefer a stage like this in the second week to a Oropa or Pratonevoso finish.

Let's say week 2 is in Piemonte and Aosta before heading to Veneto/Trentino for week 3:
Stage 14: Torino medium mountain stage
Stage 15: Easier stage in northern Piemonte
Stage 16: Big mountain stage in Aosta

Or vice versa. The last week is in Piemonte and Aosta:
Stage 13: Big Friuli medium mountain stage
Stage 14: Easier stage to approach the higher mountains in Veneto/Trentino
Stage 15 and 16: Two big mountain stages.
 
Last edited:
Reactions: Sandisfan
How did 2018, 2019 and 2020 (and most years really) not show an idea of what it could want to be? Big mountain stages with hard passes. ITTs that matter. I don't see an annual Strade stage as the least bit better than that.

The Giro prioritises the weekend stages, so when even the penultimate weekend counts as backloaded, your demand is a harder first week. But we had a hard Blockhaus stage on stage 9 this year, but that was not enough?!

The only problem of 2021 and 2022 (and really only the latter) was being too skewed towards MTFs and favouring the best climber to wait for the last climb of the race.
Oh I actually think 2018 is a really good example of how it should be done. It had most of what I'm advocating for. One of the early mtf's was garbage but it had good medium mountain stages, a murito stage, TT's and although there were 5 Alps stages (does Prato Nevoso actually qualify as Alps?) one of them was a medium mountain stage and the one to Prato Nevoso was extrmely weak leaving us with 3 proper mountain stages from stage 14 to stage 20.

I also would have been fine with the 2019 route if the first half wasn't that horrendously designed. I did like the approach from then and 2020 to make some absolute killer stages. My problem is that the last two years had a mixture of being backloaded and no real queen stages (tbf that was partly the weather's fault in 2021). It's that I feel like Giro routes have a problem and instead of fixing it the routes are going further into that direction.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
Osimo. But I think Tortoreto in 2020 was better, even if it didn't lead to GC gaps.
Okay, I see now that there were a short and steep climb about 30 km from the finish in Osimo on that stage. Can't really remember that. Agree on the Tortoreto stage.

I think murito and sterrato stages should be used more frequently, but it's probably difficult to use it every year. The main focus should be to have a good overall design, pump up the medium mountain stages and include at least one big/small climb combo each version. There are really too many opportunities of the latter not to take advantage of that.

This should/could be done at the expense of mono climb MTFs (especially in the last half) and underwhelming MTFs in the last 8-10 days. The Sega di Ala stage last year and Lavarone this year was okay design. MTFs like Oropa, Pratonevoso and Alpe di Mera last year should be avoided.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
We've had plenty of medium mountain stages in the Giro. When they are in the first week, they are never raced like Torino this year. So the best we can hope for are the typical Sestola stages, similar also to what we had in 2015. And that is fine.

The mid-race ITT is what has been lacking the past two years, plus better and well placed mountain stages.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
We've had plenty of medium mountain stages in the Giro. When they are in the first week, they are never raced like Torino this year.
Not as well designed as the Torino stage this year or as tough as the L'Aquila stage in 2010.

Better mountain stages would help, but it's not the number of mountain stages that has been the problem. There could actually be fewer MTFs and stages in the high mountains, but still at better route overall. And if they don't do at least half the Giro in the northernmost regions, the potential for better (high) mountain stages are limited. Then better, longer and tougher medium mountain stages would be better.

If they did the entire northern part each year, the need for bigger medium mountain stages wouldn't be there. Then you could have 2 or 3 mountain stages in Piemonte/Aosta in week 2 at least one of these a big mountain stage, and at least 3 in Veneto/Trentino/Lombardia the last week, of which 2 should be big mountain stages. Or vice versa.
 
Last edited:
Reactions: Sandisfan
Wouldn't call them beasts but they're solid climbs. Appenines don't really need the super big ones if you're gonna end up in any of the Alpine regions by stage 12 anyway. Plus there is always Blockhaus that you can use as a pass.

Anyway I have a new obsession that is never happening. Monte Valloni, joins the main Terminillo road right above the traditional MTF. It's gravel after km 7

I've ridden and raced up Terminillo several times, but don't know it. Now you've given me something new to try (when I get back in shape). Cheers!
 
Taking the rumour for true (it's not a big stretch, the 3 ITTs were already in my previous draft...), the first ITT + the last (should be 20 kms) makes it already 38 km... which means the second ITT won't go over 32 kms. 25-30 most likely.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan

ASK THE COMMUNITY