2023 Tour de France route rumors

Page 60 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Of course there is. You might as well argue that Paris-Roubaix don't need the first 100 km, as the last 160 km are so well designed.

Stages also have impacts that last longer than to their finish line. The day after a marathons is different to a day after a simple VO2 Max effort.
We're not takling about a 110 km vs a 230 km stage, but i.e. 180 km vs 230 km. Even in those marathon mountain stages in the past the extra length was mostly flat and/or they often had a higher percentage of climbing on lower gradients. I really don't see why that is better than the Pla d'Adet stage above or the Joux Plane stage I mentioned. It's not like we've ever seen something like St.Girons to Luz Ardiden via Portet d'Aspet, Mente, Portillon, Peyresourde, Azet, Ancizan and Tourmalet (which would be about 220 km and a shitload of climing above 7 %).
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
The longest mountain stage (measured by duration) in recent time is the Val di Fassa Giro stage from 2011. I think it's plainly obvious that distance and total effort had a marked impact on it, it wouldn't have been the same if it was 170 km long.
 
The longest mountain stage (measured by duration) in recent time is the Val di Fassa Giro stage from 2011. I think it's plainly obvious that distance and total effort had a marked impact on it, it wouldn't have been the same if it was 170 km long.
although probably GC - wise, not even that exciting, but wow, what a stage was that. Long range action, riders really suffering in the end. That showed what makes cycling great and attrition is a part of it.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
While the Aubisque stage was all about the MTF (even if Sastre and Soler attacked early in the stage and Rasmussen went for KOM points) in 2007, I don't see what would be gained from a shorter or easier stage. Rabobank had worked the whole day and Menchov was used on the penultimate climb, so the attrition meant that the MTF was better than it otherwise would have been.
 
We're not takling about a 110 km vs a 230 km stage, but i.e. 180 km vs 230 km. Even in those marathon mountain stages in the past the extra length was mostly flat and/or they often had a higher percentage of climbing on lower gradients. I really don't see why that is better than the Pla d'Adet stage above or the Joux Plane stage I mentioned. It's not like we've ever seen something like St.Girons to Luz Ardiden via Portet d'Aspet, Mente, Portillon, Peyresourde, Azet, Ancizan and Tourmalet (which would be about 220 km and a shitload of climing above 7 %).
well, the 80's option, the chance of having attacks on Tourmalet is way bigger, than in the short 2021 version. The 80's option is more difficult to control for the whole day for a team. So, a chance of sending riders in the break for the attacking team is 'easier'. While those 50 k of flat in the short version is easy to control. Secondly, helpers, will be tired when the reach the second half of the tourmalet. While, after only 50 km of flat, most helpers will be fresh. Thirdly, the engine vs tank discussion. The riders great in endurance should have there chance.
 
The longest mountain stage (measured by duration) in recent time is the Val di Fassa Giro stage from 2011. I think it's plainly obvious that distance and total effort had a marked impact on it, it wouldn't have been the same if it was 170 km long.
But this also contained both Giau and Fedaia. It's not like the 230 km stage to Pla d'Adet in 1993 which had Port de Canto, Bonaigua, Portillon and Peyresourde before the MTF.

I don't mind long mountain stages if there is purpose and a general idea behind the design. For instance first a section mostly to tire the riders, then a really big climb in suitable distance from the finish followed by an easier last part. I once designed Chamonix-Bourg St.Maurice stage via Forclaz, Champex, Grand Bernard and then Petit Bernard via Colle San Carlo before descending to Bourg. Or as someone suggested recently; Finestre used in the same way before Sestrire-Montgenevre and a finish at the fort in Briancon.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
well, the 80's option, the chance of having attacks on Tourmalet is way bigger, than in the short 2021 version. The 80's option is more difficult to control for the whole day for a team. So, a chance of sending riders in the break for the attacking team is 'easier'. While those 50 k of flat in the short version is easy to control. Secondly, helpers, will be tired when the reach the second half of the tourmalet. While, after only 50 km of flat, most helpers will be fresh. Thirdly, the engine vs tank discussion. The riders great in endurance should have there chance.
Are we now talking about the two different versions of Pla d'Adet stages? In 2022 I really don't see any good argument for why that 230 km stage to Pla d'Adet is better than the 170 km stage you posted.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
Are we now talking about the two different versions of Pla d'Adet stages? In 2022 I really don't see any good argument for why that 230 km stage to Pla d'Adet is better than the 170 km stage you posted.
We are discussing the recent trend of generally shorter mountain stages in the Tour. 1999 is not part of that recent trend.

What is the typical mountain stage of the last couple of years (and what range is there of mountain stages)? What was the typical mountain stage before that (and what range was there of mountain stages)?

The trend is not toward dense, well-designed mountain stages. The trend is toward easier mountain stages that are not more well-designed than previously. Instead, there are more of them.

The mountain stages still start mostly flat, and it is not just the flat km in the middle that have been removed. There's less vertical gain.

And the marathons have gone completely extinct.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
Are we now talking about the two different versions of Pla d'Adet stages? In 2022 I really don't see any good argument for why that 230 km stage to Pla d'Adet is better than the 170 km stage you posted.
Yes, you are correct, I was comparing the Luz Ardiden stages from Netserk :tearsofjoy:

btw, I didn't post any pla d'adet stage. That one was finishin in Piau Engaly. It was not showing if long or short stages are better, but that perception of what is short is changing. In those days, this was seen as really short.
 
The trend is not toward dense, well-designed mountain stages. The trend is toward easier mountain stages that are not more well-designed than previously.
Indeed, good summary of the discussion with this phrase. I think I started my arguments as a response that I don't share the optism that there is a trend to better mountain stages. Stages get shorter, but not better designed. And I have dificulties to see, why Gouvenou suddenly shall change this trend, towards stages designed for great racing. This is just his style. So, yes, great the tour discovered the Grand Colombier, but how many times has it been used properly? Yes, great, the tour discovered col de la Loze, but still not used proberly, ect.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
I think the 2011 Gardeccia stage is overatted on this forum. Don't get me wrong, it was an epic stage with amazing scenery, but ultimately the race only really exploded in last 4km....
I think there have been much better 200+km marathons in the last decade or so
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
The longest mountain stage (measured by duration) in recent time is the Val di Fassa Giro stage from 2011. I think it's plainly obvious that distance and total effort had a marked impact on it, it wouldn't have been the same if it was 170 km long.
That stage would be very different now tbh. I think it was also marked by some pretty weak teams that Giro, which led to the field reducing itself quickly and attacking as early as Giau being viable. With stronger teams I think an attack on Fedaia is more plausible there.

There's no particular criterion for queen stages to hit 7 hours. And I would also say the last time the Giro planned a 220km queen stage was in 2019 before Gavia cancellation. Also 2017 had the Bormio stage with 3HC climbs but that overall design just wasn't great.

For me the big difference right now is the Giro at least puts 180-200km on their biggest mountain stage, while the Tour is headed for 140 as a rule of thumb.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
We are discussing the recent trend of generally shorter mountain stages in the Tour. 1999 is not part of that recent trend.

What is the typical mountain stage of the last couple of years (and what range is there of mountain stages)? What was the typical mountain stage before that (and what range was there of mountain stages)?

The trend is not toward dense, well-designed mountain stages. The trend is toward easier mountain stages that are not more well-designed than previously. Instead, there are more of them.

The mountain stages still start mostly flat, and it is not just the flat km in the middle that have been removed. There's less vertical gain.
1999?

Yeah, the trend is shorter mountain stages with 3 or 4 climbs. The Hautcam and Peyragudes stages this year is very typical. And although I would like a couple of longer mountain stages with more total height meters than what we've had the last 10+ years, there are positive aspects too. There is a bit more variation than earlier when it comes to type of stages, i.e. cobbels and more HTFs. And there have been several new additions the last decade which could be used creating better designed mountain stages than what we've seen earlier, although the full potential of these climbs are not used yet. But I still think it's better now than the general trend in the years from 2012 to 2019.

If they added length and height meters and/or improved design of 2 or 3 mountain stages each version and increased to a suitable amount of ITT, like 60-90 km, the routes would be equally good or better than what we saw 30+ years ago. For next year I would be for example descending and climbing back to Meribel, which would have made that stage just over 190 km and doing a double ascent of GC with Biche in between, which would have been about 165 km. And adding some climbs and at least 50 km to the Le Markstein stage.

And it woudn't be wrong either if they reduced the number of stages where it a potential to attack for the GC contenders. Both this year and in 2020 I count as much as 11 stages where it would be possible to gain time. That is really a couple more than necessery. The Megeve stage this year and the Orcieres stage in 2020 are good examples of that.
 
Last edited:
Reactions: Sandisfan
Oct 25, 2020
98
91
1,780
In the boredom of the off season, I decidedto scroll through the Tour route for 2023..... one stage that I'm curious about is the stage to Cauterets. In years gone by, the Cauterets stages weren't very selective with usually 10 or more guys all finishing together.

However, with the extended finish in 2023, do you guys think that this stage has potential to create significant gaps?? The two climbs beforehand should definitely leave the legs weary. Plus, they have significant climbing the day before with Soudet and Marie Blanque.

The last 4/5km of this new Cauterets finish is significantly steeper than the earlier part of the climb.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
In the boredom of the off season, I decidedto scroll through the Tour route for 2023..... one stage that I'm curious about is the stage to Cauterets. In years gone by, the Cauterets stages weren't very selective with usually 10 or more guys all finishing together.

However, with the extended finish in 2023, do you guys think that this stage has potential to create significant gaps?? The two climbs beforehand should definitely leave the legs weary. Plus, they have significant climbing the day before with Soudet and Marie Blanque.

The last 4/5km of this new Cauterets finish is significantly steeper than the earlier part of the climb.
The 2003 Vuelta used this climb including the extension to Cam Basque. It was a similar stage but slightly easier, using Pourtalet and Aubisque in place of Aspin and Tourmalet (Pourtalet south is easier than Aspin east, but Aubisque and Tourmalet are a decent comparable, both being just over 17km at just over 7%, Tourmalet slightly tougher but it's negligible)



It was in a similar position in the race (stage 7, first major mountain stage, day after a significant GC stage). It was the day after a 44km ITT rather than a medium mountain type stage, and by and large the breakaway settled things while ONCE managed things for race leader Isidro Nozal, but he still lost a bit of time as things broke up.

You can see the stage here:

 
Reactions: Sandisfan
Oct 25, 2020
98
91
1,780
The 2003 Vuelta used this climb including the extension to Cam Basque. It was a similar stage but slightly easier, using Pourtalet and Aubisque in place of Aspin and Tourmalet (Pourtalet south is easier than Aspin east, but Aubisque and Tourmalet are a decent comparable, both being just over 17km at just over 7%, Tourmalet slightly tougher but it's negligible)



It was in a similar position in the race (stage 7, first major mountain stage, day after a significant GC stage). It was the day after a 44km ITT rather than a medium mountain type stage, and by and large the breakaway settled things while ONCE managed things for race leader Isidro Nozal, but he still lost a bit of time as things broke up.

You can see the stage here:

Thanks very much for the info and video link. I think it has the potential for some decent action!!
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
Rasmussen's first GT victory. Grande poulet!
The 2003 Vuelta used this climb including the extension to Cam Basque. It was a similar stage but slightly easier, using Pourtalet and Aubisque in place of Aspin and Tourmalet (Pourtalet south is easier than Aspin east, but Aubisque and Tourmalet are a decent comparable, both being just over 17km at just over 7%, Tourmalet slightly tougher but it's negligible)



It was in a similar position in the race (stage 7, first major mountain stage, day after a significant GC stage). It was the day after a 44km ITT rather than a medium mountain type stage, and by and large the breakaway settled things while ONCE managed things for race leader Isidro Nozal, but he still lost a bit of time as things broke up.

You can see the stage here:

 
Reactions: Sandisfan

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS