Amstel Gold Race 2025, one day classic, April 20 (men's)

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
2017-2019 was much, much better than 2010-2012. Bemelerberg as the last climb is the best thing to ever happen to the race. I will not tolerate this crazy slander of a perfectly fine climb for its purpose. I hereby declare myself a Bemelerberg supremacist.

We've had no more than 4 riders sprint for the win without Cauberg as the last climb. Unlike the Cauberg years.
Yep, the Amstel Gold is a race where the climbs in and of themselves aren't challenging enough to be selective in and of themselves, it's the accumulation of them, and so a periodic refresh of the route is more important here than, say, Flèche where everybody knows it's all about Huy anyway. If the route stays the same too many years, then people learn how to race each route and the racing becomes stale. Flèche, for what it's worth, is stale, but because of the prestige of winning atop the Mur and people not wanting to waste too much energy mid-week ahead of Liège, it seems to do fine for what it is.

When they first moved the route to remove the final Cauberg it was a good shift, but the race has become somewhat less of a "hilly" classic as a result, less attached to the Ardennes classics, and I think the organisers wanted to restore some of that status. You say that we had no more than 4 riders sprint for the win, but group 2 was close enough last year to get the same time. Bemelerberg is much better as the last climb of the men's route than it is as part of the pathetic circuit on the women's race, but it still absolutely sucks as a climb, serving only to artificially add an arbitrary number to the amount of climbs in the race, kind of like when they give KOM points in GT starts in the Netherlands, as opposed to a real climb that could be meaningfully selective like Eyserbosweg, Keutenberg or Kruisberg, and I miss the days of climbs other than Cauberg being relevant.

The 2012 Worlds lengthening that circuit around Valkenburg was an absolute travesty for the race, moving potentially selective climbs further from the finish and rendering only Cauberg relevant, hence the need to revamp the course in 2017. If they wanted to shake things up to make it more of a hilly race again, then the 2012 Worlds circuit needs to go, like, completely. All they're doing here is going back to the worst version of the earlier courses rather than actually "fixing" anything.

And the women's race route is just a travesty. No amount of positives you can draw about the men's route since moving the finish will ever make up for it. They paradoxically probably worked really hard to figure out what the absolute laziest thing they could do was, and then they did it... and then actively made it worse by pointlessly extending the course on the last lap only to make it even harder to make anything but the last ascent of the Cauberg relevant.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Sandisfan
Yep, the Amstel Gold is a race where the climbs in and of themselves aren't challenging enough to be selective in and of themselves, it's the accumulation of them, and so a periodic refresh of the route is more important here than, say, Flèche where everybody knows it's all about Huy anyway. If the route stays the same too many years, then people learn how to race each route and the racing becomes stale. Flèche, for what it's worth, is stale, but because of the prestige of winning atop the Mur and people not wanting to waste too much energy mid-week ahead of Liège, it seems to do fine for what it is.

When they first moved the route to remove the final Cauberg it was a good shift, but the race has become somewhat less of a "hilly" classic as a result, less attached to the Ardennes classics, and I think the organisers wanted to restore some of that status. You say that we had no more than 4 riders sprint for the win, but group 2 was close enough last year to get the same time. Bemelerberg is much better as the last climb of the men's route than it is as part of the pathetic circuit on the women's race, but it still absolutely sucks as a climb, serving only to artificially add an arbitrary number to the amount of climbs in the race, kind of like when they give KOM points in GT starts in the Netherlands, as opposed to a real climb that could be meaningfully selective like Eyserbosweg, Keutenberg or Kruisberg, and I miss the days of climbs other than Cauberg being relevant.

The 2012 Worlds lengthening that circuit around Valkenburg was an absolute travesty for the race, moving potentially selective climbs further from the finish and rendering only Cauberg relevant, hence the need to revamp the course in 2017. If they wanted to shake things up to make it more of a hilly race again, then the 2012 Worlds circuit needs to go, like, completely. All they're doing here is going back to the worst version of the earlier courses rather than actually "fixing" anything.

And the women's race route is just a travesty. No amount of positives you can draw about the men's route since moving the finish will ever make up for it. They paradoxically probably worked really hard to figure out what the absolute laziest thing they could do was, and then they did it... and then actively made it worse by pointlessly extending the course on the last lap only to make it even harder to make anything but the last ascent of the Cauberg relevant.
There has not been a single stale edition of the race with Bemelerberg as the last climb. Last year too was more of a hilly classic than Friere being the main attacker before the Cauberg sprint nearly won by Sagan.

Keutenberg has been more relevant and Cauberg less so since Bemelerberg became the last climb.

It's as if you discuss the men's race and its route with the women in mind.

When discussing the men's race in the men's thread, regarding Bemelerberg as the last climb which has only ever happened in the men's race(?), I couldn't care less about the women's race. It is irrelevant to this discussion.
 
Last edited:
There has not been a single stale edition of the race with Bemelerberg as the last climb. Last year too was more of a hilly classics than Friere being the main attacker before the Cauberg sprint nearly won by Sagan.

When discussing the men's race in the men's thread, regarding Bemelerberg as the last climb which has only ever happened in the men's race(?), I couldn't care less about the women's race. It is irrelevant to this discussion.
My hatred is not of Bemelerberg as the last climb.

It is of Bemelerberg, period.

And the use of the crappy 2012 circuit in the men's race 2013-16 and in the women's race ever since its reinstatement only serves to reinforce its total worthlessness. In fact, its worthlessness has been its greatest strength in the more recent routes, because it improves racing earlier on because of its unsuitability for making a decisive split.

Moving the finish back to the Cauberg - which unfortunately they are doing, whether we like it or not, negates this, and means that it only reinstates the worst of both worlds: the 2013-16 route where the circuit nullifies any moves before it, and there's nothing but the Cauberg on the circuit that offers any selectivity.

I don't really want them to reinstate a Cauberg finale, but if that's what they're going to do, then I want something more like the route from circa 2008 with the Kruisberg-Eyserbosweg-Fromberg-Keutenberg combo from 25 to 13km out (would be more like 27 to 15 since the finish was moved to Berg en Terblijt), so that it doesn't guarantee a straight Cauberg shootout, than the 2013-16 route reinstating.
 
My hatred is not of Bemelerberg as the last climb.

It is of Bemelerberg, period.

And the use of the crappy 2012 circuit in the men's race 2013-16 and in the women's race ever since its reinstatement only serves to reinforce its total worthlessness. In fact, its worthlessness has been its greatest strength in the more recent routes, because it improves racing earlier on because of its unsuitability for making a decisive split.

Moving the finish back to the Cauberg - which unfortunately they are doing, whether we like it or not, negates this, and means that it only reinstates the worst of both worlds: the 2013-16 route where the circuit nullifies any moves before it, and there's nothing but the Cauberg on the circuit that offers any selectivity.

I don't really want them to reinstate a Cauberg finale, but if that's what they're going to do, then I want something more like the route from circa 2008 with the Kruisberg-Eyserbosweg-Fromberg-Keutenberg combo from 25 to 13km out (would be more like 27 to 15 since the finish was moved to Berg en Terblijt), so that it doesn't guarantee a straight Cauberg shootout, than the 2013-16 route reinstating.
The 2003-2012 route descended down to a Cauberg sprint for a reason, I don't think it was a good route.

I also don't think 2025 is the same as 2013-2016 as the smaller roads do make a meaningful difference, and in this day and age it is still far superior to the 2003-2012 route.
 
The 2003-2012 route descended down to a Cauberg sprint for a reason, I don't think it was a good route.

I also don't think 2025 is the same as 2013-2016 as the smaller roads do make a meaningful difference, and in this day and age it is still far superior to the 2003-2012 route.
Do you feel 2013-16 was an improvement on 2003-12?

Because I feel it was a completely pointless addition to the course that only removed hope of anything else happening, and wish Valkenburg never won the bid for the Worlds in 2012 because we've been paying for it ever since.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sandisfan
Do you feel 2013-16 was an improvement on 2003-12?

Because I feel it was a completely pointless addition to the course that only removed hope of anything else happening, and wish Valkenburg never won the bid for the Worlds in 2012 because we've been paying for it ever since.
No, it was worse, and worse in a different way.

But cycling is in a different place now, and the route now is not the 2013 route. I don't fear a passive race at all, if anything I welcome a more passive race than the counterfactual!
 
For what it's worth I really liked the Bemeleberg as the final climb. However if you have to return to the finish just after the Cauberg I would very much prefer it without the Bemeleberg circuit. I fear with the current set of riders not much will happen after the penultimate Cauberg with either Pogacar being solo or a small group actually happy to still be here and therefore cooperating with Pogacar. Then you might as well skip the final lap and end it right then and there. If the last few years have taught us one thing then that a long finale is not necessarily a good thing.
 
For what it's worth I really liked the Bemeleberg as the final climb. However if you have to return to the finish just after the Cauberg I would very much prefer it without the Bemeleberg circuit. I fear with the current set of riders not much will happen after the penultimate Cauberg with either Pogacar being solo or a small group actually happy to still be here and therefore cooperating with Pogacar. Then you might as well skip the final lap and end it right then and there. If the last few years have taught us one thing then that a long finale is not necessarily a good thing.
Had Pogi decided to rest before Liège, would you also fear that the last lap would be worthless?

I assume this finish is here to stay for a number of years, and I don't think Pogi will start here every year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sandisfan
Question: who actually pays for Bemelerberg to be included, if they're putting Cauberg as the final climb? Does Valkenburg insist on their beloved 2012 circuit, and if so, why, because the town itself sees the race just as many times with or without it, as shown in the contrast of the 2003-12 and 2013-16 routes? With Cauberg as the final climb, it makes zero sense to include, and only serves to neuter earlier racing, and only made the race worse until they switched up the (men's) finish in 2017.

With the Cauberg finish as well, the extension on the final lap is rendered kind of pointless, it only made the women's race even worse last year, I mean I guess it's narrower than taking the main road, but without the cut-through to Berg which made it part of the run-in, rather than a minor diversion in the lead-in to the final climb, I don't see it as offering anything other than a slight change of scenery to prevent watchers from nodding off while waiting for the 2km that means something in the women's race.
 
Had Pogi decided to rest before Liège, would you also fear that the last lap would be worthless?

I assume this finish is here to stay for a number of years, and I don't think Pogi will start here every year.
I think that's hard to judge. But without either Pogacar or Evenepoel I think there is an actual danger this race does return to the dark days of the Cauberg sprint on the current route. I don't think racing over the last ten years has changed that much if you remove the aliens from the equation. But yeah it's hard to tell. I agree that a race without Pogacar and Evenepoel exploding 40 km from the finish and with the Cauberg 2k from home is the ideal scenario, but no idea if that's how it would play out.
 
Question: who actually pays for Bemelerberg to be included, if they're putting Cauberg as the final climb? Does Valkenburg insist on their beloved 2012 circuit, and if so, why, because the town itself sees the race just as many times with or without it, as shown in the contrast of the 2003-12 and 2013-16 routes? With Cauberg as the final climb, it makes zero sense to include, and only serves to neuter earlier racing, and only made the race worse until they switched up the (men's) finish in 2017.

With the Cauberg finish as well, the extension on the final lap is rendered kind of pointless, it only made the women's race even worse last year, I mean I guess it's narrower than taking the main road, but without the cut-through to Berg which made it part of the run-in, rather than a minor diversion in the lead-in to the final climb, I don't see it as offering anything other than a slight change of scenery to prevent watchers from nodding off while waiting for the 2km that means something in the women's race.
I simply think they want the riders to go over the Cauberg twice in the finale to make the spectacle for the spectators better.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sandisfan
For what it's worth I really liked the Bemeleberg as the final climb. However if you have to return to the finish just after the Cauberg I would very much prefer it without the Bemeleberg circuit. I fear with the current set of riders not much will happen after the penultimate Cauberg with either Pogacar being solo or a small group actually happy to still be here and therefore cooperating with Pogacar. Then you might as well skip the final lap and end it right then and there. If the last few years have taught us one thing then that a long finale is not necessarily a good thing.
If the Bemelerberg is to be included, then because of its abject lack of selectivity, it needs to either be only used so far from the finish as to be just adding a random number to the number of climbs in the race, or it must be the final climb as it has been in the men's race in recent years. This halfway house version with the circuit just kills everything between the two Cauberg ascents.
I simply think they want the riders to go over the Cauberg twice in the finale to make the spectacle for the spectators better.
You can achieve this without the long extension to the circuit that adds Bemelerberg, though. Just use the roads they've used for the finale in recent years, but in the opposite direction. They did this in the 2022 Simac Ladies' Tour, but then extended the circuit south after finishing these roads, to add Sibbergrubbe.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sandisfan

TRENDING THREADS