Final 2012 Route Showdown! Which is the best GT route?

[Ryaguas]

Shorter stages in La Vuelta means more attacking... I think it will be a really good GT I have faith!

mmmm my options is Giro > Vuelta > Tour...
if Contador rides Le Tour He will destroy the field and everybody will say that was the most boring GT in the last decades

 

[BroDeal]

Shorter stages in La Vuelta means more attacking...

Shorter stages mean fewer riders crack before the end of the stage, larger groups finish together, and there is less attacking.

 

[The Hitch]

Tour > Giro > Vuelta

The Tour route may not be the best but since you always get the best riders

Suppose the question was "which of the 3 routes would you most like for the TDF".

 

[Museeuw]

Vuelta is like dream come true...

and Tour is just opposite.

 

[AussieGoddess]

I love Spain but I feel sorry for Vuelta especially this year. After the Olympics most of the top riders will be done and they will have another edition of good route full of mediocre teams/riders. Sorry ...

actually I think with the Worlds in Limburg this year, some of the GC guys might decide to have a crack ... using Vuelta as prep

 

[Bavarianrider]

Vuelta is like dream come true...

and Tour is just opposite.

Dream yes, but a nightmare.

Man i wish those Vuelta routes of the late 90es early 00es

 

[Bavarianrider]

I think it's sad that not even one of the GT has a mountain TT.

The lack of TTing in the Vuelta and the Giro is ridiclous anyway.

I really like the Tour route though. It's a bit different then your usual edition. The mountain stages are different then ususal.

If the prologe was 2km longer, the first TT 10km longer and the final TT 5km longer, this would be the best route i a very long time.
But its still ok though, should make an interesting race.

 

[auscyclefan94]

I think it's sad that not even one of the GT has a mountain TT.

The lack of TTing in the Vuelta and the Giro is ridiclous anyway.

I really like the Tour route though. It's a bit different then your usual edition. The mountain stages are different then ususal.

If the prologe was 2km longer, the first TT 10km longer and the final TT 5km longer, this would be the best route i a very long time.
But its still ok though, should make an interesting race.

I love your passion for tt's, Bavarianrider!

to be fair they could of done with another mountain stage in the tour.

 

[Froome19]

I think it's sad that not even one of the GT has a mountain TT.

The lack of TTing in the Vuelta and the Giro is ridiclous anyway.

I really like the Tour route though. It's a bit different then your usual edition. The mountain stages are different then ususal.

If the prologe was 2km longer, the first TT 10km longer and the final TT 5km longer, this would be the best route i a very long time.
But its still ok though, should make an interesting race.

Of course a GT with lots of tt means climbers go onto attack on mountain stages (negates pyrennees last year for example) yet it means the time trialists can just follow wheels to win. something which doesnt deserve being crowned winner of the tdf and means that they will be looking for negative racing
so having a balance would be the best solution as too much time trialling just leads you back to the same problems as there would be with a mountaineous route
1) the winner isn't complete rider, can't climb/tt well enough 2) boring stages as riders don't feel the need to attack, either because they're climbers and have got more mountain stages/as they're time triallist and have got more time trialling stage

 

[Bavarianrider]

I love your passion for tt's, Bavarianrider!

to be fair they could of done with another mountain stage in the tour.

It's time trial that seperate the men from the boys

 

[Bavarianrider]

Of course a GT with lots of tt means climbers go onto attack on mountain stages (negates pyrennees last year for example) yet it means the time trialists can just follow wheels to win. something which doesnt deserve being crowned winner of the tdf and means that they will be looking for negative racing
so having a balance would be the best solution as too much time trialling just leads you back to the same problems as there would be with a mountaineous route
1) the winner isn't complete rider, can't climb/tt well enough 2) boring stages as riders don't feel the need to attack, either because they're climbers and have got more mountain stages/as they're time triallist and have got more time trialling stage

TT are still heavily underepresented.

According to Dr. Michelle Ferrari it takes a 60 minute TT to make up a 30 minute mountain of 8%. It's much easier to win time on a mountain than in a TT. So two 50km+ should always be in a GT.

 

[the asian]

I think it's sad that not even one of the GT has a mountain TT.

The lack of TTing in the Vuelta and the Giro is ridiclous anyway.

I really like the Tour route though. It's a bit different then your usual edition. The mountain stages are different then ususal.

If the prologe was 2km longer, the first TT 10km longer and the final TT 5km longer, this would be the best route i a very long time.
But its still ok though, should make an interesting race.

This not the 90s. Too many TTs will kill a tour. The race will be very boring.
This years' tour route is really awful. It may be good for you because you support Tony Martin, a Cyclist who can only TT and cannot climb, but from a neutrals' perspective it will be really boring.
The reasons were well described in the previous post.

 

[cineteq]

TT are still heavily underepresented.

According to Dr. Michelle Ferrari it takes a 60 minute TT to make up a 30 minute mountain of 8%. It's much easier to win time on a mountain than in a TT. So two 50km+ should always be in a GT.

All these years, and JRod didn't know about this? . LOL!

 

[Bavarianrider]

This not the 90s. Too many TTs will kill a tour. The race will be very boring.
This years' tour route is really awful. It may be good for you because you support Tony Martin, a Cyclist who can only TT and cannot climb, but from a neutrals' perspective it will be really boring.
The reasons were well described in the previous post.

The more TT => the more action in the mountains

 

[Froome19]

TT are still heavily underepresented.

According to Dr. Michelle Ferrari it takes a 60 minute TT to make up a 30 minute mountain of 8%. It's much easier to win time on a mountain than in a TT. So two 50km+ should always be in a GT.

That depends on who the rider is. For guys like zabriskie, cancellara etc yes but for guys like leipheimer, kloden then they will gain a lot more time in 60 min tt over vdb or shcleck than they lose on nearly any mtf. yet they still are not the best riders and don't deserve to win and certainly guys like zabriskie and cancellara don't deserve to win.
TT's should certainly be used yet not in a way where they totally destroy one's chances of winning and give a not good enough climber the chance to win especially as time gaps in gc in gt's are narrowing.

 

[WillemS]

Shorter stages mean fewer riders crack before the end of the stage, larger groups finish together, and there is less attacking.

Sure, but this is not the tour or giro we're talking about, it's the Vuelta. The field is much wider there as it is mostly sub-top riders and absolute top level riders that have already endured a tour. I really liked the attacking dynamics last year and think it will not be different this year, especially with all the bigger names preparing for an explosive finish at the 2012 Valkenburg world cup. Moreover, the profile of the course really aids young, but strong climbers, who are not yet that developed in itt'ing; this year's Vuelta really gives them a stage for showing themselves. Therefore, I think we'll see a fair share of attacks even though stages are shorter.

 

[Bavarianrider]

That depends on who the rider is. For guys like zabriskie, cancellara etc yes but for guys like leipheimer, kloden then they will gain a lot more time in 60 min tt over vdb or shcleck than they lose on nearly any mtf. yet they still are not the best riders and don't deserve to win and certainly guys like zabriskie and cancellara don't deserve to win.
TT's should certainly be used yet not in a way where they totally destroy one's chances of winning and give a not good enough climber the chance to win especially as time gaps in gc in gt's are narrowing.

A GT should show who is the best allrounder. And that requires a fair amount of TT.

A very good climber can finish on a GT podium even if he's a ****ty TT. A very good TT will never finish on the podium if he's a ****ty climber. But at least a very good TT should be able to finish on the podium if he's a decent climber. Today that's not the case.
Riders with 75 Kg should have a fair chance two, not jsut those who a re 65kg and less.

 

[Froome19]

A GT should show who is the best allrounder. And that requires a fair amount of TT.

A very good climber can finish on a GT podium even if he's a ****ty TT. A very good TT will never finish on the podium if he's a ****ty climber. But at least a very good TT should be able to finish on the podium if he's a decent climber. Today that's not the case.
Riders with 75 Kg should have a fair chance two, not jsut those who a re 65kg and less.

I guess it depends on what you consider a fair amount. for me it would be 65km max of itt- more than this years less than last years- as good tt's (like kloden, leipheimer and to a certain extent martin) can gain enough time from then to still have a chance of finishing on the podium by limiting losses in climb's whlist good climbers can go on attack and gain enough time in mountains to make up for what they lost.
any more would be disproportionate and be unfair on the climbers.
This also goes back to my first point that it makes the racing boring as the tt's can just follow wheels

 

[the asian]

The more TT => the more action in the mountains

But it won't be any use. Time gaps in Climbs are decreasing due to reasons best described for the clinic. Time Trialists will wheel suck their way to victory, specially in the Tour where Mountain stages are not usually properly designed as in the Giro. It's very rare in the tour to see three back to back proper, tough Mt stages, where the climbers can get a reasonable advantage. This years tour certainly doesn't have it.

If 100 Km of TTs are included there must be at least six or seven truly tough mt stages with multiple climbs which will enable the climbers to create sufficient time gaps.

 

[Froome19]

But it won't be any use. Time gaps in Climbs are decreasing due to reasons best described for the clinic. Time Trialists will wheel suck their way to victory, specially in the Tour where Mountain stages are not usually properly designed as in the Giro. It's very rare in the tour to see three back to back proper, tough Mt stages, where the climbers can get a reasonable advantage. This years tour certainly doesn't have it.

If 100 Km of TTs are included there must be at least six or seven truly tough mt stages with multiple climbs which will enable the climbers to create sufficient time gaps.

And that will bever happen in modern day TDF as it would leave to little stages left over for Gilbert and Cavendish to win

 

[El Pistolero]

Giro probably best route, but I'll enjoy the Tour more if he is not banned. Vuelta will be interesting... If he gets to ride. And VDB will also try a Tour-Vuelta combination this season.

 

[El Pistolero]

And that will bever happen in modern day TDF as it would leave to little stages left over for Gilbert and Cavendish to win

Gilbert doesn't need to win 5-7 Tour stages like Cavendish, he's happy with one. They should take out half of the flat stages and turn them into some hilly and mountain stages though.