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

[Dekker_Tifosi]

Thanks to luckyboys excellent work it was easy to compare.

Vuelta for me.

 

[The Hitch]

It is impossible because the "perfect" route is something that doesn't exist but in our own ideas. The same "Rate the Vuelta" thread shows that fans have deeply different visions.

Yes but being totaly objective seemingly means 0 influence of other factors.

2 people can be totally objective and come up different opinions but if they are able to cloud out any bias, or have no bias in the first place then they are being objective.

 

[Eshnar]

Yes but being totaly objective seemingly means 0 influence of other factors.

2 people can be totally objective and come up different opinions but if they are able to cloud out any bias, or have no bias in the first place then they are being objective.

We could discuss for a while about that
I could argue that, being "objective" the opposite of "subjective", the bolded must be wrong.
Anyway it's just a matter of words.

 

[Descender]

The Tour hands down.

 

[cineteq]

Tour, easily

I'm pretty sure this has nothing to do with Tony riding for GC

 

[jens_attacks]

giro>vuelta>tour

 

[Ferminal]

Giro

I'll re-do my analysis of each route.

Week 1
Prologue, great, we haven't had enough of these lately. A couple of sprint stages, no problem. Another time trial already? Then another sprint stage? Strade bianche stage is a missed opportunity which frustrates me. Token "mountain" finish at the end of the first week is becoming tiresome, no problems with Lago Laceno though.

Week 2
Starts with another two flat stages which makes it three in a row, with a rest day... Four days of inaction. The medium stage is great, however by now you are craving a proper mountain stage. We have to go through another flat stage before it comes. No problems with these two mountain stages, they are solid without being too difficult, things can still happen.

Week 3
Kicks off with the most pointless GT stage this year - flat all the way with a short 5-6% finish... ok at the start of a race, but sandwiched between five big mountain stages? The rest of the course speaks for itself, can only fault the repetition of the flat finishing time trial, something different, occasionally, please?

Pros
-Very well designed mountain stages
-A couple of decent intermediate stages
-ITT Prologue

Cons
-Formulaic (TTT, Token Mountain, brutal final week, finishing ITT)
-Missed opportunities (hills in Denmark, Stage 6)
-Poor balance (40km of TT against some ridiculous mountains)
-Waiting until 14 for the first proper MTF, this is worse than the 2011 Tour.

Solutions
Make one of the road stages in Denmark hilly. Move the TTT to the start of the 2nd week and make it an intermediate ITT. Swap Token Mountain for a proper mountain stage (reduce the difficulty of one of the mountain stages later on). Put the intermediate stage in the middle of the four flat days (i.e. 9-10 flat, 11 int. 12-13 flat). Make 16 a flat finish.

Verdict
I think my first impression of the route is still fair, the first 14 days collectively will not be interesting enough. I feel like I'm trying to be "bought" by the mountains, and have them convince me that it's a very good route. Still don't think I can give it more than 5/10.

 

[Parrulo]

stage 17 of the giro is the best designed mountain stage of the year imo

i am looking for it even more then i am looking for the stelvio stage

 

[roundabout]

The most pointless GT stage of the year is the circuit race in Logroño. Apart from making the Vuelta a 21-day race it serves zero purpose whatsoever.

Stage 16 of the Giro at least breaks up the mountain stages so that something is more likely to happen on each one of them.

 

[cineteq]

The most pointless GT stage of the year is the circuit race in Logroño. Apart from making the Vuelta a 21-day race it serves zero purpose whatsoever.

Stage 16 of the Giro at least breaks up the mountain stages so that something is more likely to happen on each one of them.

It depends, if you are fan and live around the area, it's a great show. This is important too.

 

[BroDeal]

Giro > Vuelta > Tour of California > Tour

Yes, the TdF route is that bad.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

I'd forgotten just how bad the first week of the Giro is. Still, for the most part the rest of it is good.

Make the Logroño stage a time trial, and replace one of the worthless mountain stages like Valdezcaray with a proper intermediate stage (Basque country ideal for this) and same for Fuente Dé (if they're going to insist on an entirely superfluous uphill finish, Cueva El Soplao is just near there and far better), perhaps something a bit less predictable than Lagos de Covadonga and possibly a mountain stage without an MTF.

Here's a quick draw-up of something a bit less predictable:

Lots of options here. Starts in the same place as the Covadonga stage but goes the other way. The climbs on the route as drawn are Cerredo, Ranadoiro, Connio, Pozo de la Mujeres Muertas and Acebo. The route is 225km in length.

First option: finish in Ibias after Connio (166km). This leaves us with a final climb of 14km @ 5,4%, with the last 3km at over 7%, and a descent finish.

Second option: continue on past Ibias and climb the Pozo before finishing after a descent and then a period of false downhill flat in Cangas del Narcea (214km). This leaves us with a final climb of 11km @ 6,2%, with the last 4km at nearly 8%.

Third option: rather than taking Connio, continue on the false flat descent from Ranadoiro and climb the other side of the Pozo to finish in Ibias (ca.180km). This is something like 12km @ 6%, but the main important factor is that it will have 5km at over 8% in the middle of it.

The climb up to Acebo at the end on the 'full version' as shown is just to please Guillén.

 

[Winterfold]

2 people can be totally objective and come up different opinions but if they are able to cloud out any bias, or have no bias in the first place then they are being objective.

By definition they are being subjective.

Objectivity is a myth, the world is a better place once you accept that.

On a completely subjective level the Tour route is by far the best, as long as someone lets Cuddle's tyres down.

 

[Timmy-loves-Rabo]

Thanks to luckyboys excellent work it was easy to compare.

Vuelta for me.

yep nice luckyboy.

But I think giro is the best route, tho I don't mind the vuelta.

Giro > Vuelta > Tour.

 

[greenedge]

Giro route for me. Tour is very close to being a good route, but they wasted too many good climbs on nothing stages.

I think the Giro is still too hard. I don't like NetApp being invited as well. I do agree That the TDF needs another mountain and maybe 10km less ITT.

however like @User Guide said; people will support their countries riders. And the TDF suits Evans, with good competition, whilst with no Alberto at the Giro it has no real international GC riders.

 

[The Hitch]

Anyone maybe seen profiles of the 2012 gts, laid out like this?

 

[Ferminal]

The most pointless GT stage of the year is the circuit race in Logroño. Apart from making the Vuelta a 21-day race it serves zero purpose whatsoever.

A close second.

Tour

Week 1
Another good start with the prologue, and uphill finish the next day followed by a sprint and another challenging finish, these four days are fine. Three flat sprint stages to come, this is one too many. 7 is a good finish, much better than cousin Token Mountain. 8 looks like a great intermediate stage.

Week 2
Route continues along a good path starting the week with an ITT, officially 10 is high mountains, but one has a right to be sceptical about the positioning of Grand Colombier. Even though La Toussuire isn't great, I have big hopes for 11. 12 to Annonay is one of those pointless break days. So far the route is going well and it's not until 14 that I feel rage.

Week 3
Stage 16 is underdone, I actually like 17 now, the Bales-Peyragudes combo is reasonable. No huge complaints from the final three days, Champs sprint is getting on, but it's less annoying than a constant ITT finale.

Pros
-Well balanced first half (Prologue, intermediate ITT, sprint finishes, uphill finishes, a sharp MTF, a couple of intermediate descents.
-A few well designed stages
-Finally we get a GT with a decent amount of ITT km.

Cons
-Final week the race falls away, a couple of critical errors in the design of the mountain stages are all that it takes to make a potentially good finish seem bland.
-Six sprints consecutively following on from the prologue (don't care if they are uphill or flat, after a while they all feel the same).

Solutions
There are very simple solutions here I think. Drop some cobbles, hills, or cobbled hills into one of the early stages. 10 I'd lock in as a big mountain stage (Finish in Culoz or go on to Mont du Chat, or redo the stage completely and push it further into the Alps). Make 12 flat, and possibly even remove the uphill finish. 14... easy, just take 25km off the end. 16... Azet.

Verdict
I agree that it is a bit of a different route, it could prove to be refreshing. However, the critical mistakes in just a few stages are frustrating and bring the whole route down. It feels a bit underwhelming, like it needs to go on for another week. There are still some stages to look forward too though, and the first half is a million times better than the Giro's. If I could see all profiles I'd probably give it a 5/10.

 

[craig1985]

MTF's aside, I like stage 17 of the Giro. Looks like an exciting stage already.

 

[Mambo95]

The more I look at the Vuelta route, the more I like it. Sure a downhill finish would have been welcomed and perhaps a touch more TTing. But generally it seems a quite modern GT, with the action loaded very much towards the last hour and offering plenty of opportunity for action.

I favour shorter stages. Tired riders think defensively, fresher riders are more attacking. I'm not a really fan of 'epic' stages where riders grind along at slightly different speeds.

It's a GT designed with TV in mind and that's good.

 

[The Hitch]

MTF's aside, I like stage 17 of the Giro. Looks like an exciting stage already.

Yep. Probably the best stage profile though I suppose Mortirolo Stelvio could provide more action because it will be the last day. For the same reason it could provide no action.

The only problem is that the Giau is the last climb of the day and should be penultamate imo, but with nothing but descent to follow.

But its such a great stage profile.

 

[cineteq]

The more I look at the Vuelta route, the more I like it. Sure a downhill finish would have been welcomed and perhaps a touch more TTing. But generally it seems a quite modern GT, with the action loaded very much towards the last hour and offering plenty of opportunity for action.

I favour shorter stages. Tired riders think defensively, fresher riders are more attacking. I'm not a really fan of 'epic' stages where riders grind along at slightly different speeds.

It's a GT designed with TV in mind and that's good.

Very open minded commentary +1

 

[Jancouver]

Tour > Giro > Vuelta

The Tour route may not be the best but since you always get the best riders, it will turn even mediocre route into great one. Too bad for Giro & Vuelta. They may have good and exciting routes but because you dont get the top teams/riders it doesnt matter what kind of route they have.

Juts look at last year Vuelta. Who won? Some guy named Cobo or something like that? He wouldnt make even top 10 at last years Tour ... no offense but you can have the greatest route but as long you have just second class riders (Giro usually has few good riders) the route doesnt mean s...

 

[Zinoviev Letter]

Tour > Giro > Vuelta

The Tour route may not be the best but since you always get the best riders, it will turn even mediocre route into great one. Too bad for Giro & Vuelta. They may have good and exciting routes but because you dont get the top teams/riders it doesnt matter what kind of route they have.

Juts look at last year Vuelta. Who won? Some guy named Cobo or something like that? He wouldnt make even top 10 at last years Tour ... no offense but you can have the greatest route but as long you have just second class riders (Giro usually has few good riders) the route doesnt mean s...

I couldn't disagree more.

The Tour is the most important, so it always has the strongest field. But being the most important means that the racing tends to be more conservative - everybody is terrified of making a mistake, blowing up and destroying their chances. You also have an endless parade of talented riders grimly hanging on in an attempt to get a top 10, whereas a strong but not quite strong enough rider is more likely to go for stage win in the other GTs.

If we could start every Tour by giving a Contador a five minute handicap, we would at least be guaranteed action.

 

[Timmy-loves-Rabo]

Tour > Giro > Vuelta

The Tour route may not be the best but since you always get the best riders, it will turn even mediocre route into great one.

since when has this been true? although the nature of the 2011 tour was affected by crashes and chaos the general racing from the so called big names is generally a negative not a positive. Teams all concerned with thier biggest goal setting a high boring pace.

The 2011 edition wasn't even that good imo, apart from the alpes of course. The first couple weeks seemed entertaining because of crashes and chaos, but really they took out a lot of juicy competition. A shame really.

And the pyrennes completely sucked. wheel following at it's best.

Lucky for as and ac showing some balls in those 2 stages otherwise it was pretty dull.

But 2011 was not a great year for GT's imo. The giro was ok, and the vuelta too had a couple good stages.

Tour > Giro > Vuelta

Too bad for Giro & Vuelta. They may have good and exciting routes but because you dont get the top teams/riders it doesnt matter what kind of route they have.

Juts look at last year Vuelta. Who won? Some guy named Cobo or something like that? He wouldnt make even top 10 at last years Tour ... no offense but you can have the greatest route but as long you have just second class riders (Giro usually has few good riders) the route doesnt mean s...

While I agree teh vuelta had a weak field cobo isn't 2nd class because your merely ignorant btw

The giro has had good fields for quite a few years. The competition going to the giro still excites me. Italians, south american flair (haneo, rujano) and a few international riders (jrod, fuglsang etc) with a great course look promising.

And I suspect a more established vuelta line up this year also. But even so, by no means does a lack of BIG Names make it a bad race.

 

[Jancouver]

since when has this been true? although the nature of the 2011 tour was affected by crashes and chaos the general racing from the so called big names is generally a negative not a positive. Teams all concerned with thier biggest goal setting a high boring pace.

The 2011 edition wasn't even that good imo, apart from the alpes of course. The first couple weeks seemed entertaining because of crashes and chaos, but really they took out a lot of juicy competition. A shame really.

And the pyrennes completely sucked. wheel following at it's best.

Lucky for as and ac showing some balls in those 2 stages otherwise it was pretty dull.

But 2011 was not a great year for GT's imo. The giro was ok, and the vuelta too had a couple good stages.



While I agree teh vuelta had a weak field cobo isn't 2nd class because your merely ignorant btw

The giro has had good fields for quite a few years. The competition going to the giro still excites me. Italians, south american flair (haneo, rujano) and a few international riders (jrod, fuglsang etc) with a great course look promising.

And I suspect a more established vuelta line up this year also. But even so, by no means does a lack of BIG Names make it a bad race.

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 ...