Are There Enough Decent Descents??

[cycladianpirate]

Help me out here (as an idiot who admittedly spends more time riding a bike than watching others do so).

Why do so few races/stages end with a long and technical descent?

Seems a nice recipe to me - climbers to the fore to get over the mountain followed by a chase down by the technically gifted/mad.

Obviously I'm missing something.....

 

[ingsve]

Help me out here (as an idiot who admittedly spends more time riding a bike than watching others do so).

Why do so few races/stages end with a long and technical descent?

Seems a nice recipe to me - climbers to the fore to get over the mountain followed by a chase down by the technically gifted/mad.

Obviously I'm missing something.....

Well, mountain top finishes are arguably more spectacular and more in line with the needed strengths of GC riders. When there is a descent after a climb it's often an anti-climax since riders often bunch up again and you don't get as many gaps in time. Descents can also often be a bit chaotic and dangerous so it's always a risk especially at the end of a race when the win is on the line. Downhill finishes are mostly used when the final mountain top isn't big enough to accommodate all the people involved in the race that need to be at the finish so they finish in a town further down the climb instead.

 

[Panda Claws]

Andy Schleck would cry himself to sleep at the sight of this thread.

 

[Ripper]

Andy Schleck would cry himself to sleep at the sight of this thread.

LMFAO ....

 

[Havetts]

A descent finishing stage all depends on how tough the climb that is being descended is, how technical it is and how hard the stage is. Let alone the distance from the summit till the finish line.

Cause if either of those criteria fail, it usually doesnt produce much action. See this years stage over the Aubisque, GC-contenders didnt do anything cause it was alot of km's out from the finish, plus the stage wasn't hard enough to even be succesfull.

 

[SHAD0W93]

And Samu or Nibbles will celebrate a Tour victory.

 

[Afrank]

I think finishing the stage directly on the descent is a interesting concept, of course we might see more crashes with alot of riders trying to race down a descent as fast as they could. Maybe if the riders had to pass over a lot of mountains and finish on the descent; then the mountains could reduce the front group to a select few, the ones that had the strength and stamina to traverse a lot of mountains, then it would be pretty exciting to see a descent finish.

 

[cineteq]

Lets hope so.

Love to see that: Liquigas vs. BMC TdF Downhill Showdown

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Some of the most exciting mountain stages of recent years have been descent finishes - Le Grand Bornand 2009, Monte Grappa 2010, Saint-Jean-de-Maurienne 2010, for example.

But unless the climb being descended is absolutely brutal enough to split the pack apart on its own, or you have freak GC situations that should not be relied upon (eg at the 2010 Giro) then you need to make sure the stage before it is super-hard so that people are dropped.

The 2009 Vuelta attempted this kind of thing with its final mountain stage into La Granja de San Ildefonso, with the descent finish. Unfortunately they weren't able to put enough ahead of Navacerrada to make it so that the climb broke the pack, so when Samuel Sánchez attacked and a relatively fresh Valverde stayed with him, he gave up. GC gaps were small, but the descent wasn't difficult enough (though Valverde is a very good technical descender and caught Samu very easily) to pull things apart after such a relatively easy climb, and in the end Juanjó Cobo attacked for the win in the last 2km - hardly the climax the organisers were after.

 

[cineteq]

Well, mountain top finishes are arguably more spectacular and more in line with the needed strengths of GC riders. When there is a descent after a climb it's often an anti-climax since riders often bunch up again and you don't get as many gaps in time. Descents can also often be a bit chaotic and dangerous so it's always a risk especially at the end of a race when the win is on the line. Downhill finishes are mostly used when the final mountain top isn't big enough to accommodate all the people involved in the race that need to be at the finish so they finish in a town further down the climb instead.

Or like in TdF 2009, neither of the were the best downhillers in the bunch.

It might as well has been a MTF, a waste of downhill finish.

Tour de France 2009: Bourg Saint Maurice - Le Grand Bornand (169.5 km)

1 Fränk Schleck (Lux) Team Saxo Bank 04:53:54
2 Alberto Contador Velasco (Spa) Astana
3 Andy Schleck (Lux) Team Saxo Bank
4 Vincenzo Nibali (Ita) Liquigas 0:02:18
5 Lance Armstrong (USA) Astana
6 Andreas Klöden (Ger) Astana 0:02:27
7 Bradley Wiggins (GBr) Garmin - Slipstream 0:03:07
8 Christophe Moreau (Fra) Agritubel 0:04:09
9 Christian Vande Velde (USA) Garmin - Slipstream
10 Rémi Pauriol (Fra) Cofidis, Le Credit en Ligne 0:06:10

 

[The Hitch]

I like stages with those technical descents. Just look at this years Tour for the stage into Pinerolo where we saw some great action with Contador, Sanchez and Evans. Yet we saw Andy Schleck complain about the safety of that stage.

I think that is maybe the big downside of the Vuelta coming up. There is no stage similiar to that.

Contador Sanchez and Evans was the stage to Gap

Stage to Pinerolo there was a 3.5k flat after the descent which ruined it. Was still entertaining but 12 riders pulling together including Schlecklet domestiques was enough to bring back those who had the balls to attack (The Great One and The Special One) and there were no gaps in the end.

 

[The Hitch]

Some of the most exciting mountain stages of recent years have been descent finishes - Le Grand Bornand 2009, Monte Grappa 2010, Saint-Jean-de-Maurienne 2010, for example.

But unless the climb being descended is absolutely brutal enough to split the pack apart on its own, or you have freak GC situations that should not be relied upon (eg at the 2010 Giro) then you need to make sure the stage before it is super-hard so that people are dropped.

The 2009 Vuelta attempted this kind of thing with its final mountain stage into La Granja de San Ildefonso, with the descent finish. Unfortunately they weren't able to put enough ahead of Navacerrada to make it so that the climb broke the pack, so when Samuel Sánchez attacked and a relatively fresh Valverde stayed with him, he gave up. GC gaps were small, but the descent wasn't difficult enough (though Valverde is a very good technical descender and caught Samu very easily) to pull things apart after such a relatively easy climb, and in the end Juanjó Cobo attacked for the win in the last 2km - hardly the climax the organisers were after.

How do you make a 200 word posts about great descent finishes in recent times without mentioning the best Giro stage of the last half decade?

 

[Libertine Seguros]

How do you make a 200 word posts about great descent finishes in recent times without mentioning the best Giro stage of the last half decade?

Aprica 2010 finished on a gradual climb.

 

[The Hitch]

Aprica 2010 finished on a gradual climb.

Doh, of course it is, though I guess it lets me make the point I wanted to i that a mega descent off a big mountain before a smaller weaker climb produces great stages too.

 

[Fetisoff]

Last year's TDS stage with Sagan chasing down Cunego on the descent and winning the spring was pretty awesome

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

I remember in the 2000 tour when Virenque won a very good stage on a descent into Morzine coming off the Joux Plane.

Meh. 2006 was the year. Floyd! Watch here.

Ingsve answered the OP's question best.

 

[Afrank]

Last year's TDS stage with Sagan chasing down Cunego on the descent and winning the spring was pretty awesome

+1 that was great

Another good one, stage 2 of the US pro cycling challenge, Van Garderen's attack at the top and descent to the bottom, lost the stage to Hincapie but took the overall lead.

 

[Eshnar]

We'll all see the stage to Cortina in this year Giro Will be epic.

 

[18-Valve. (pithy)]

Last year's TDS stage with Sagan chasing down Cunego on the descent and winning the spring was pretty awesome

Not to sound all Schleck-ish, but if rider safety is a concern at all that descent was maybe a bit over the top.

 

[Fetisoff]

Not to sound all Schleck-ish, but if rider safety is a concern at all that descent was maybe a bit over the top.

Well, I was just talking from the fan's perspective there. Not being the fan of either Cunego, or Sagan (or Tour de Swiss for that matter), I remember I was on the edge the whole time, couldn't sit in my chair.

So yeah, for a fan it was great. For the rider safety - might have been over the top, if i remember correctly one of the Leakys in the top 10 actually fell and got injured, can't remember exactly who that was.

Edit: It was Salerno, and he was in the top25, not top 10

 

[Dancing On The Pedals]

Doh, of course it is, though I guess it lets me make the point I wanted to i that a mega descent off a big mountain before a smaller weaker climb produces great stages too.

It might not have been for the stage finish, but Arroyo's descent in a desperate attempt to keep pink was one of the best rides I've ever seen. As for the OP, GT's should challenge riders in all aspects of cycling, and one of those skills is the ability to descend. Stands to reason therefore that descent finishes should be an important part of GT racing. Hopefully, parcours designers will incorporate them more over the next few years.

 

[cycladianpirate]

Thanks for that.

I get the impression that a stage here and there culminating with a descent (following a decent, field-splitting climb) would be welcome, but that dear old 'Health & Safety' issues come into the equation.

I suppose that, when you add in the necessity of covering the action with motorbike cameras, it's a fair enough point. Bit of a shame, though. All sports should emphasise the skill factor in my humble view - I'd rather see vital seconds gained by superior bike handling in a gut-wrenching descent than, say, a TTT.

 

[dolophonic]

I prefer MTF's but a good day in the mountains will have exciting descents too.
The agony of the MTF is where its at

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Doh, of course it is, though I guess it lets me make the point I wanted to i that a mega descent off a big mountain before a smaller weaker climb produces great stages too.

Yes, this is usually a recipe for greatness; whether it be a medium mountain stage like Pescocostanzo 2008 or a huge mountain stage like the usual Aprica finishes or that great 2003 Giro stage to Pontechianale - or of course Sestrières after Finestre.

I think it works so well because the final climb is too easy to leave everything there, so riders have to attack on the penultimate one; but this of course means a descent (or flat) that allows for the next story - the chase - to come into it. But then, you have the uphill again; often the easy climb will open up bigger gaps than it ever could normally, because of the agony of going uphill again after the monster climb before, which has had to be taken at full gas.

Of course, short climbs that aren't even properly climbs at the end of the stage, such as the wonderful finish in the old town in Briançon, are also good options.

 

[meandmygitane]

The Vuelta al País Vasco 2011 and 2010 had a similar type of stage which were pretty fun to watch:
http://www.steephill.tv/2010/vuelta-al-pais-vasco/profile-4.png

They lose about 80m of altitude in a little more than 2km (~4%), S. Sanchez won both times.

Could be a interesting feature in a race, certainly with bonus points.