2023 Tour de France route rumors

Page 12 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
To be fair, that depends on which Vingegaard shows up. Does the Vingegaard of 2020 show up, the one who lost 6 minutes to Roglic in an ITT, the 2019 Vingegaard who finished 7th in a ITT in the Tour of Denmark or does the 2022 Vingegaard show up, the one who looked like he could beat a Formula 1 car in a time trial? Because Remco would like his chances of putting 4-5 minutes into a pre-2021 Vingegaard.
Considering he did great TTs in the Tour in both 2021 and 2022, I find it hard to imagine that an in form Vingegaard would perform so bad in a TT in the Tour. And if he would, I doubt he would be good enough to be competitive in the mountains anyway.
 
Oh for sure, nobody, not Remco, not anyone is putting serious time into 2021 or 2022 Vingegaard. However, Remco, Pog, basically any elite time trialist would put minutes (did put minutes) into a pre 2021 Vingegaard. Didn't he finish outside the top 20 in the 2019 National Time Trial Championships of Denmark? Did he ever crack a top 5 in a TT before his 2021?
That's possible. Not sure about it. But kind of a moot point as they aren't riding against a pre 2021 Vingegaard.
 
Reactions: pman
Not at all a prediction but more a wish list. For the 2023 Tour- do the Pyrenees early, the Thursday, Friday and Saturday before the rest day. Then do a 20 K individual time trial around Toulouse. Throw in another 20 K time trial a week later. Two ITTs, none of which fall at the end of the race, in-between the two major mountain chains. Plus I really want an excuse to see a Toulouse stage that isn't a sprint. Make it happen Christian Prudhomm. :)
Thanks for kicking off this timeless debate again mate.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
For the Tour I'd go something like:

50-55 km mostly flat ITT, just before the first major mountain block (around stage 7).
MTT, on one of those 18 km @ 6% tempo climbs where it's hard to create action from on an actual road stage, but would be a great one on one battle against the clock. Possibly this can be the first stage of the final major mountain block (somewhere around stage 15-18), with harder MTF the day after, and multi mountain (harder stage, easier finish) stage two days later (MTT, Alp D'Huez, Ju Plaix etc).

Sometimes a prologue, sometimes not.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
Should start with a prologue, then something like a stage 3-4 TTT.

A stage 7-10 ITT that is VERY long, before we go into the mountains most years. Let's see Vingegaard and Pog about 4-5 minutes behind Remco heading into the mountains. Make them race even harder than the did this year. We'd again have proper mountain stages,

Even the first Pyrenean stage in 1986, one we'd decry as worse than a Peshceux Special, had MASSIVE time gaps, because the racing started on the first climb.

Then either between mountain ranges, or after the mountains, do the second long ITT
Oh, Jeez :rolleyes:
 
I get the complaint about lack of TT Kms in comparison to earlier years, even as recent as the Armstrong era, but looking back, it's been a reduction in KMs on all ends.

What I mean is that we've seen this massive reduction in TTs, but we've also seen that in the difficulty of the actual mountain stages. In the 1980s when there were usually 100 km of TT (plus a TTT), there were 23 or 24 stages. We'd have the Alps, Pyrenees, and usually a final climb up the Puy du Dome. Those mtn stages were mammoth. Look at the 1986 TDF, the stage to Superbagneres won by LeMond featured an HC final which was preceded by the Tourmalet, the Aspin, and the Peyresourde. Today, Prudhomme would just axe Superbagneres so he could have another finish at Peyregudes.

The problem with forcing the climbers to attack after massive gains in the TTs is that we don't have enough MTNs in use like we did in those days.

Today, a 2 minute advantage is considered a huge gap. Back in the 1980s, that was nothing because the race was so much longer and the Mtn stages were for the most part, more difficult. Plus you add in race radios and such and today is a different beast altogether.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
also the other biggest difference between the tours now and then, and one I can't help but see as a positive, or at least necessary in our era is that it's very rare for a GT to have more than two pure sprint days in a row. even last year's tour which made the trek from Brittany to the Alpes broke up three flat days with a time trial.
 
Vuelta has nailed the ITT - Have a flat 30 or 40 KM ITT in stage 10 - You back this up with two high mountain stages in week one will set a pecking order - Then make sure you have 4 more high mountain stages in week two and three.
 
The races were much better balanced, instead of only allowing the flyweight climbers a chance to win

A rider like Pantani would be nearly unbeatable on today's routes (except maybe to Lance himself and only if Lance was in top form), even though he was not even close to being the best all around rider
Pantani had some massive clinic issues. Not a good example. No one has even been close to flying up the most difficult climbs like he was.

And there could be more ITT than at the current moment, but something like in the 90s with 120 km of ITT is absolutely not a necessity. Nor is it a balanced race. Something like a flat ITT of 40-50 km in the first week and a 25-35 km hilly one later would be more than enough.
 
Last edited:
also the other biggest difference between the tours now and then, and one I can't help but see as a positive, or at least necessary in our era is that it's very rare for a GT to have more than two pure sprint days in a row. even last year's tour which made the trek from Brittany to the Alpes broke up three flat days with a time trial.
I agree. This has been the most positive aspect of recent Tours, an improvement on the worst aspect of the Armstrong era Tours.

Nevertheless, flat stages, especially long (stage 7 in 2020 probably helped the next 2 mountain days), should always have their place.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
Not loading the race with flat and irrelevant stages is the single most positive thing all GTss seem to have agreed upon. I think its especially a point thats important to TdF due to its geography, but Prudhomme and Gouvenou have done a fantastic job on that account. It can be hard in France, but they have made sure to make sufficient hilly days/cobbles etc. in areas where you might as well have had a flat bunch sprint. Kudos!

Edit: I care a lot about who the fastest man is, but thats in track and field. Not necessarily in cycling. Never interested me.
 
Reactions: Gigs_98
Planche des Belles Filles and Pau
Wow Libertine, you are really taking a left-field flyer with those two!!!! I believe it's an anti-clockwise tour next year starting in the Pays Basque I assume for Women and Men, so Pau yes agreed, but I am not so sure about Planche des Belles Filles maybe if they have done all the big climbs in the Pyrenees on the way down south and across to the east.
I am SO looking forward to the Grand Départ next year, this year's Tour de France Femme has converted me to women's cycling and as I am injured so I am watching a LOT of cycling via GCN Mens and Womens, life is good even if my leg hurts!!!!
 
Reactions: Sandisfan

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS