2023 Tour de France route rumors

[OlavEH]

Because differences are good. More distance is better. The sooner the B-list of contenders are eliminated, the better.

Most of the Tour versions the last 15 years would have only been worse with more ITT and harder mountain stages. Contador, Froome, Nibali, Wiggins and Thomas would just have been more superior than the acutally were.

 

[OlavEH]

In the 90's cycling was bigger than ever before or after in the mainstream. That's when there were gaps due to TT miles and riders like Richard Virenque & Marco Pantani were forced to go on memorable mountain escapes that created big entertainment.

@Libertine Seguros is 100% correct.

Yep, really. The GTs in the 1990s were SO representative for how GTs should be...........

 

[QueenStagiaire]

Most of the Tour versions the last 15 years would have only been worse with more ITT and harder mountain stages. Contador, Froome, Nibali, Wiggins and Thomas would just have been more superior than the acutally were.

Ok, so: The Tours of the last 15 years
Sastre 2008- already enough ITT, I agree that more mountains would not make it better

Contador 2009- agreed

Contador/Schleck 2010- you‘re probably right, although having more ITT would make Menchov more of a threat, perhaps Schleck with harder mountains would win (might not be better, but I don‘t think it would be worse)

Evans 2011- meh, more ITT would probably make the Schlecks attack in the Pyrenees, I don‘t know how it would affect the Alps, it would have been a different race, not clear if for better or for worse

Wiggins 2012- already had enough TT, more mountains might tire Wiggo out leading to more Sky infighting. He would definitely not be more dominant on a perfect route

Froome 2013- Froome struggled on the tougher stages and in the last week, maybe more TT would have killed off the GC fight early, but remember that Quintana and Purito were forced to attack for podium places anyway

Nibali 2014- I don‘t think it would have mattered, it might have been more spectacular even

Froome 2015- Froome would have gained a lot from the ITTs, I‘m not sure Quintana would have kept trying,but remember Froome was only the strongest on the Unipuerto mountain stage, it might have been similarly interesting

Froome 2016- nothing ever happened in the mountains, it could only be better

Froome 2017- awful route, awful race, Froome was not dominant on the tougher mountain stages, Sky could have strangled the race even more if Froome had gained more from longer time trials but Froome was never the strongest on the Tour‘s queen stage: could be worse, could be better

Thomas 2018- This one actually had decent mountain stages, but remember that
more dominance≠more boring The race might’ve been different

Bernal 2019- a lot better with more TT and tougher mountains: Thomas would struggle to maintain his lead while the others would have to make up loads of time, Ineos would not be able to control it, who knows what Alaphilippe‘s role would’ve been

Pogačar 2020- the race was only saved by the plot twist in the end, maybe Pog could‘ve had another miracle performance in him with another ITT, probably better

Pogačar 2021- Pog killed off the race on two stages in awful weather but I don‘t see why a tougher race would make it worse

Vingegaard 2022- yeah, it would probably not be as amazing, but we know the final ITT was affected by recovery- another ITT might have put Pogačar closer- also: the top teams would probably have lacked the numbers to control a tougher version of the Pyrenees

Conclusion: I think the idea that most years would be worse is not clearly true. Racing might have been different but I also think that dominance on a tougher route would not be worse;yet this is just my personal opinion and I‘m really extreme when it comes to the spectacle vs. suspense question: Using the football metaphor I might even take a 7-2 over a 2-1.

 

[Red Rick]

Looking back I can't say I miss the parcourses of 6 or sometimes 5 mountain stages balancing out 2 TTs. But different times, when single HC finishes had 2 minute gaps by climbers that weren't also the best TTers yeah.

 

[OlavEH]

Conclusion: I think the idea that most years would be worse is not clearly true. Racing might have been different but I also think that dominance on a tougher route would not be worse;yet this is just my personal opinion and I‘m really extreme when it comes to the spectacle vs. suspense question: Using the football metaphor I might even take a 7-2 over a 2-1.

No, Froome would have been more dominant. Same with Thomas. And Contador. The only version where much more TT certainly would have helped was 2019 and perhaps 2011. But probably not the latter. Some versions might have been better, but not very likely.

I'm all for better designed mountain stages. And also some more ITT in certain versions. But stating that the Tour would benefit much from returning to 1990s stage design, like a handful of people on the forum does, is just ignorant.

 

[Big Doopie]

dominance is not a bad thing.

i will take a dominant ride with attached exploit over middling defensive non-battle that remains close.

we remember the great rides, not the close contests with no one standing out.

pog's amazing ride in the first main mountain test of 2021 is the only thing anyone will remember from TDF 2021 even though it killed off the suspense.

cycling is not really a sport for fans that want the last-minute goal in injury time or the three-point shot at the buzzer.

cycling has always been tied to the drama of the superhuman effort by a mythical champion and of their exploits and shocking collapses.

 

[pman]

What are you guys talking about? I think there are lots and lots of opportunities if you want to gain time. Were first and foremost talking Joux Plane and Col de la Loze, and coupled with the Pyrenean stages, Puy de Dome, Grand Colombier, Mont Blanc and Ballon + Platzerwezel, there's more than enough. Thats 8 actual mountain stages.

I think people are criticizing the route because that's we all do the week after the big reveal. But good point, there are tons of chances to gain real time, especially in the final 2/3rds of the race.

 

[pman]

Most neutrals will prefer a 6-3 over a 0-1 because of guaranteed entertainment value, but fans of the relevant teams in those scenarios would rather be losing 1-0 (chance to get in the match) or winning 6-3 (comfortable lead). The more important the match, the more willing people are to tolerate a dull game, because everything that happens is more important, and also a low scoring match can often be better that way because the result is always in jeopardy. There can be some very good 0-0 games. But there are also many, many 0-0 games where the only loser is football. Even with some of the best players and managers in the world. Mourinhoball springs to mind.

Haha, well I am a Roma fan.

 

[pman]

I think we can all agree casual fans watch the Tour for several reasons (in no particular order). 1) Someone from their country is doing well, hence the perpetual conspiracy theories about the routes favoring French riders 2) People love epic and novel stages and yes 3) People like close GC battles.

Obviously, we'd like a route that facilitates all 3, at least the latter two. However, our sport is one with only a few elite GC riders and teams. Sometimes we get a few years of parity but a few dominant riders/teams seems the norm for GC in the Tour. The route definitely has a few unique, made for TV stages such as the Puy de Dome. The main problem with the route is that the mountains stages don't seem to please the fans of massive climbs while the lack of ITT ks don't seem to please the diehard time trialing fans.

But personally, I like the route. It could be better but I like it.

 

[OlavEH]

dominance is not a bad thing.

i will take a dominant ride with attached exploit over middling defensive non-battle that remains close.

I don't think most cycling fans were particularly excited about the Sky dominance and the victories of Wiggins, Froome and Thomas from 2012 to 2018. Most of these version saw a fairly dominant winner and 4 of these 6 wins were ranked in bottom 5 of the worst GTs in the 2010s by this forum.

 

[pman]

I don't think most cycling fans were particularly excited about the Sky dominance and the victories of Wiggins, Froome and Thomas from 2012 to 2018. Most of these version saw a fairly dominant winner and 4 of these 6 wins were ranked in bottom 5 of the worst GTs in the 2010s by this forum.

I totally agree and it feels like we could be entering another era like that but with Jumbo at the front.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

I think we can all agree casual fans watch the Tour for several reasons (in no particular order). 1) Someone from their country is doing well, hence the perpetual conspiracy theories about the routes favoring French riders 2) People love epic and novel stages and yes 3) People like close GC battles.

You're forgetting the most important one: 4) it's the Tour de France. It is the one event in cycling which transcends the sport and that the non-cycling fan in a non-traditional cycling country has heard of and knows and understands. It's the most important race on the calendar, is covered on more mainstream channels than other races in non-traditional (and even in many cases in traditional) cycling countries. Just like how many people will watch athletics at the Olympics but don't care about the ongoing Diamond League or Continental Tours, or don't care about the Indycar Series as a whole but will watch the 500, the fact that the Tour has that currency beyond the sport means it will always have a headstart in attracting a crowd that even the other monuments, the Giro and even the Worlds can't compete with.

But as a result, it does mean that the Tour is a bit more beholden to larger stage hosts as it needs scope for a much bigger media circus to come with it, so it often has limitations around the course and locations that are suitable for, say, the Route d'Occitanie, can't accommodate the Tour. The return of Puy de Dôme is a big story as a result because for many years it was off-limits for logistical reasons. The race also comes under less pressure to innovate because of that larger audience than any other race can command, as well as many of its famous climbs having effectively become brands themselves, and simultaneously is somewhat more limited than the Giro and Vuelta in terms of geography, because the mountains in France are clustered around a few specific areas rather than dotted throughout the country.

 

[pman]

You're forgetting the most important one: 4) it's the Tour de France. It is the one event in cycling which transcends the sport and that the non-cycling fan in a non-traditional cycling country has heard of and knows and understands. It's the most important race on the calendar, is covered on more mainstream channels than other races in non-traditional (and even in many cases in traditional) cycling countries. Just like how many people will watch athletics at the Olympics but don't care about the ongoing Diamond League or Continental Tours, or don't care about the Indycar Series as a whole but will watch the 500, the fact that the Tour has that currency beyond the sport means it will always have a headstart in attracting a crowd that even the other monuments, the Giro and even the Worlds can't compete with.

But as a result, it does mean that the Tour is a bit more beholden to larger stage hosts as it needs scope for a much bigger media circus to come with it, so it often has limitations around the course and locations that are suitable for, say, the Route d'Occitanie, can't accommodate the Tour. The return of Puy de Dôme is a big story as a result because for many years it was off-limits for logistical reasons. The race also comes under less pressure to innovate because of that larger audience than any other race can command, as well as many of its famous climbs having effectively become brands themselves, and simultaneously is somewhat more limited than the Giro and Vuelta in terms of geography, because the mountains in France are clustered around a few specific areas rather than dotted throughout the country.

Yeah, I agree on all of that but because it's the Tour, the directors are also under more pressure to do the things necessary to attract a big audience hence the mixture of trying to innovate while also trying to keep the race tight in an era of 2 or 3 super teams. The other grand tours are much more free to experiment, backload mountains, put in itts to attract certain riders,.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Yeah, I agree on all of that but because it's the Tour, the directors are also under more pressure to do the things necessary to attract a big audience hence the mixture of trying to innovate while also trying to keep the race tight in an era of 2 or 3 super teams. The other grand tours are much more free to experiment, backload mountains, put in itts to attract certain riders,.

See, the problem here is that I don't agree that putting ITTs in the race is experimenting, in fact the heavily reduced amount in recent years is far more experimental; and that I don't think there's the pressure to do the things necessary to attract a big audience, because the Tour de France's inherent name recognition value means it will attract a bigger audience regardless.

Yes, they want to replace when they lose a key audience (e.g. the German coverage disappearing post-Puerto and Telekom scandals, and audience figures and narratives that attract media attention will inform how they go about designing (reintroducing the TTT and neutralising the first set of mountains when Armstrong returned, for example), but by and large they can afford to be conservative far more than other race organisers.

However, I do think that the shoring up with Saudi money of the Dakar Rally, ASO's previously loss-making pet project, has helped immensely, as they were highly dependent on the revenues from the Tour for a while to fund their rally raid exploits, so innovation within the cycling portfolio was limited.

The biggest problem for ASO in balancing goals 2 and 3 that you list, however, is that precisely because the Tour de France has currency with non-cycling fans far beyond anything else in the calendar, results at the Tour are far more important, so you have a lot more riding to protect places further down the GC here. Pierre Rolland complained about IAM riding to protect Mathias Fränk who at the time was in 14th on the GC a few years ago, and I always point out Garmin in 2010 riding to neutralise a break's gap lest Chris Horner and Rubén Plaza threaten Ryder Hesjedal's 10th place. But the closer the battle is, the more places you lose if you try something that doesn't pay off, so it encourages more of the cagey, defensive riding that doesn't entice future viewing or create headlines from riders who choose to take the bird in the hand - or are instructed to by team cars who have sponsor needs - and potentially now also UCI promotion/relegation points - in mind, for whom not losing 7th place is more important than the chance to gain 5th place.

 

[BigCoward]

I don't think most cycling fans were particularly excited about the Sky dominance and the victories of Wiggins, Froome and Thomas from 2012 to 2018. Most of these version saw a fairly dominant winner and 4 of these 6 wins were ranked in bottom 5 of the worst GTs in the 2010s by this forum.

Well there is a huge amount of anti British sentiment on this board so I'm not surprised. Was it the race or the racers that were the problem? Not that that was the only factor but its definitely a contributory factor.

Board generally 'there should be more TT Kms, its a true test'. Wiggins 2012 is best TT by a mile, has a wonderful TT position, absolute elegance 'not those TT Kms though'.

 

[rghysens]

Well there is a huge amount of anti British sentiment on this board so I'm not surprised. Was it the race or the racers that were the problem? Not that that was the only factor but its definitely a contributory factor.

Board generally 'there should be more TT Kms, its a true test'. Wiggins 2012 is best TT by a mile, has a wonderful TT position, absolute elegance 'not those TT Kms though'.

The general consensus over here is that itt and mountain stages should balance each other out. 2012 had too much itt for that one Alpine stage and two pyrenean stages, 2023 has one very short mountain stage that has to be raced individually in addition to eight other mountain stages.

 

[OlavEH]

Well there is a huge amount of anti British sentiment on this board so I'm not surprised. Was it the race or the racers that were the problem? Not that that was the only factor but its definitely a contributory factor.

I don't mind the British at all. For me it was mostly the race and secondly type of riders. Especially Wiggins is about as stereotypical diesel engine rider that is, and I don't like that type. Wasn't too fond of Dumoulin either.

 

[Cookster15]

2012 TdF was by far the worse edition I have followed. Too much TT which was perfectly suited to Wiggins then of course Sky strangled the race. 2023 looks like a well balanced route suited to Remco should he choose to accept taking on the big two.

 

[gregrowlerson]

Really? Off the top of my head in recent years can think of Wiggins, Froome, Dumoulin and Evenopoel as TTer's who then became good climbers. As opposed to the vast majority of GC riders who are climbers that basically try to limit their losses in TTs.

And now we're in a situation where the two best climbers are also two of the best TTers in a GT. So why add more TT miles to exacerbate the difference between them and the rest? The organisers have to think about keeping the race interesting for a TV audience which this forum represents maybe 50% at best, in terms of knowledge and subsequent viewing experience. Not forgetting the sponsorsof teams other than Jumbo or UAE.

And why do you think it is that you can only think of a handful of time trialists who have recently been able to contend for GC?

There are not necessarily more riders who are very good climbers and average time trialists as opposed to riders who are very good time trialists and average climbers.

If all GT routes still had 100-150 kms of ITT/TTT, then many of the current day climbers who are considered GC contenders would never be labelled as such. They'd probably never threaten to finish top 10, and would either target KOM or stages.

 

[OlavEH]

If all GT routes still had 100-150 kms of ITT/TTT, then many of the current day climbers who are considered GC contenders would never be labelled as such. They'd probably never threaten to finish top 10, and would either target KOM or stages.

And would have been replaced by what riders? Mayby Rohan Dennis would have succeeded with transformation from time trialist to GC rider and maybe Tony Martin would have tried. But else? There are hardly any viable options for top time trialists that would have replaced the pure climbers in top 5 or 10 in GC.

 

[Red Rick]

I don't even like putting Wiggins and Dumoulin in the same category. Wiggins literally never anything in the mountains on his own, and it's literally only one of his 2 GT top 10.

 

[gregrowlerson]

And would have been replaced by what riders? Mayby Rohan Dennis would have succeeded with transformation from time trialist to GC rider and maybe Tony Martin would have tried. But else? There are hardly any viable options for top time trialists that would have replaced the pure climbers in top 5 or 10 in GC.

There would be other riders, but they are a mystery because they never had the incentive to display or improve their climbing abilities.

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

I don't even like putting Wiggins and Dumoulin in the same category. Wiggins literally never anything in the mountains on his own, and it's literally only one of his 2 GT top 10.

Take out the time trials, and Wiggins still beat Nibali in 2012.

 

[Red Rick]

Take out the time trials, and Wiggins still beat Nibali in 2012.

Nibali wasn't that good in the 2012 Tour anyway. It's also nice selection bias for Froome pulling back Nibali every time while Froome also the one punishing any weaker moment.

I don't think Wiggins was a top 3 GT rider on an average parcours in 2012, let alone any other year.

 

[YavorD]

Does anyone how "the descent" from Col de la Loze looks like?