Re:
Valv.Piti said:
Vuelta best for me, a bit better than the Giro which was pretty mediocre.
I also do think the Vuelta was the best designed, altho it had many flaws it gave Contador so many opportunities to do his thing. Giro more balanced but disappointing considering what they had available.
I think the hardest is between the Giro and Vuelta, everybody were empty in the Giro in the end and they raced every day in the Vuelta.
I agree totally with your comments about the Giro and Vuelta here. I can recall most fans being disappointed with the vast majority of the Giro as it was taking place, but perhaps given some bias to the event itself, one comes to recall it more fondly in time (or forget how average it was).
I was happy that Tom won, but the first week was horrible, and even if it improved, it didn't have an ending that came close to matching it's 2016 edition for example.
The Giro was still the best balanced and probably toughest course though. A decent amount of ITT, and multiple mountain stages at a half respectable length. The Vuelta had plenty of mountains, but if you look at the last week, the stages went from 180, down to 160, down to 150, down to 120 kms in distance.
Perhaps it isn't just about a salary cap, and about team numbers, but about stage distance. If a stage in week three was 230 kms long with 4 HC/1C climbs, would there still be 4-6 members of Sky at the head of the race?
As for the Tour, I think that there is bias that goes against it here. I certainly don't recall it being anywhere near as bad as the 2012 edition. And people seem to forget the patches of suspense. Like when Aru broke away from the train on stage 5 to gain time, and we wondered. Or when Froome hit the wall on those final steep pitches on stage 12, and lost yellow. In the Tour there was even excitement when it wasn't expected, such as on that stage in week three where cross winds resulted in three group splits.
The reason why people don't refer to that as exciting racing isn't because it wasn't exciting racing, but because Chris Froome remained in the leading group. That's not his fault.
Don't worry, I didn't like it either, as Contador lost even more time. But the stage was surprisingly interesting. There were plenty of stages in the Tour where something happened; it's just that most people didn't like the outcome.
The Tour even had arguably the most exciting moment of the GT season. Stage 13, when a serious GC contender got a serious gap on the yellow jersey, as did a semi-serious contender. And there was all the internal team conflict that went with that. If Landa had gone on to defeat - or get closer - Froome then that could be remembered as the stage of the season. He didn't, but at the time, it was very exciting (especially for me as an Alberto fan, who by the way had a number of good moments and performances in the Tour which defied his ninth place finish), probably more exciting than anything that happened in the Giro, besides perhaps Tom turning the tables on Nairo on Oropa.
Also with the Tour, if you are a Valverde fan you wouldn't like the race, understandably. Or a Porte fan. Contador fans will prefer the Vuelta. Nibali fans will prefer both. And there don't seem to be many Uran or Bardet fans in the forum lol.