General News Thread

[Gigs_98]

Re:

When do they normally announce the route for Il Lombardia?

Pretty late iirc. Why?
Anyway I expect the route of 2016 again. I think that the plan is to alternate the finishes in Como and Bergamo.

 

[Gigs_98]

Re:

Hadn't seen any links posted here this year, so here ya go:
Cosmo's 'How The Race Was Run' 2018!
http://cyclocosm.com/

So isn't he making the podcast for cyclingnews anymore? Anyway, thanks a lot for sharing

 

[Red Rick]

Re: Re:

When do they normally announce the route for Il Lombardia?

Pretty late iirc. Why?
Anyway I expect the route of 2016 again. I think that the plan is to alternate the finishes in Como and Bergamo.

I know it's pretty late, but I was curious since it changes so often.

Alternating the '15 and '16 routes would be perfect. '14 was a disaster and I didn't really like the routes before that too much either.

 

[Red Rick]

Re: Re:

Hadn't seen any links posted here this year, so here ya go:
Cosmo's 'How The Race Was Run' 2018!
http://cyclocosm.com/

So isn't he making the podcast for cyclingnews anymore? Anyway, thanks a lot for sharing

Think it's for Eurosport now?

 

[Nirvana]

Re: Re:

When do they normally announce the route for Il Lombardia?

Pretty late iirc. Why?
Anyway I expect the route of 2016 again. I think that the plan is to alternate the finishes in Como and Bergamo.

On the italian forum i read that the contract signed with Bergamo and Como has expired with last year edition so we could have also a different finale this year if they don't sign a new one.

 

[alexcta]

Re: Re:

When do they normally announce the route for Il Lombardia?

Pretty late iirc. Why?
Anyway I expect the route of 2016 again. I think that the plan is to alternate the finishes in Como and Bergamo.

On the italian forum i read that the contract signed with Bergamo and Como has expired with last year edition so we could have also a different finale this year if they don't sign a new one.

No , this year's Lombardia would finish again in Como (also 2019 and 2020)

 

[Netserk]

So we can have the 2004-2009 last 50km back? Just insert the Muro di Sormano before that

 

[Brullnux]

Yeah I remembered the como/bergamo deal was over 4 years but didn't know whether it was 2014-17 or 15-18. Anyway, that's a shame, the 2016 course was lovely.

 

[Gigs_98]

Talking about the lombardia route, as far as I know on the climb to Madonna del Ghisallo you could turn right just before the beginning of the flat section in the middle of the climb, and use a different road to get to Ghisallo. That other road goes 250 meters higher and descends down to the place where the climb usually ends. In other word it would be a much more difficult climb. I get that Ghisallo is pretty much the only iconic climb that's almost always in the route, but still I think if you go back to the 2004-2009 route there is the danger that Ghisallo isn't hard enough to really cause carnage. This other Ghisallo climb would solve that problem. The 2004-2009 with the muro di sormano and this climb instead of the classic ghisallo ascent would be great, I think.

Btw, just looked for it and the first 10 kilometers of this profile is what I'd use:

 

[Netserk]

I think a route like this would be hard enough for the climbers to win, while also balanced enough to allow a wide range of contenders, depending on how it is raced.

 

[Valv.Piti]

Talking about the lombardia route, as far as I know on the climb to Madonna del Ghisallo you could turn right just before the beginning of the flat section in the middle of the climb, and use a different road to get to Ghisallo. That other road goes 250 meters higher and descends down to the place where the climb usually ends. In other word it would be a much more difficult climb. I get that Ghisallo is pretty much the only iconic climb that's almost always in the route, but still I think if you go back to the 2004-2009 route there is the danger that Ghisallo isn't hard enough to really cause carnage. This other Ghisallo climb would solve that problem. The 2004-2009 with the muro di sormano and this climb instead of the classic ghisallo ascent would be great, I think.

Btw, just looked for it and the first 10 kilometers of this profile is what I'd use:

I climbed Monte San Primo last year 'after' Ghisallo. The first part of Ghisallo in itself is damn hard, harder than what you would think!

 

[Red Rick]

Re:

I think a route like this would be hard enough for the climbers to win, while also balanced enough to allow a wide range of contenders, depending on how it is raced.

Nah, pretty sure that route is all about San Fermo.

Anyway, earlier today I was looking how Passo San Marco would fit into Il Lombardia, but I don't think that's a great idea.

Also, checking the map on that part of the globe made me realise that the 2008 and 2009 Worlds were like 10 kms apart or something crazy

 

[Nirvana]

If you want a climbers route i don't think will be a problem whichever will be the finish town, the three editions designed by Vegni (i don't consider 2014 because even if he was already in charge of RCS probably he didn't have too much time to design the route how he wanted) are probably the three hardest Lombardia ever raced, so it's likely that he doesn't want a route open to classics riders like in the past.

 

[Brullnux]

Re:

I think a route like this would be hard enough for the climbers to win, while also balanced enough to allow a wide range of contenders, depending on how it is raced.

I think the 2016 route was perfect

That route is, though, a pretty good balance too. Right now the Como route is pretty focused on the Civiglio, here at least there are three attack points (madonna del ghisallo, civiglio and san fermo). It's worth trying. Can't be worse than 2014.

 

[Red Rick]

I think monuments providing action is more important than monuments being balanced. The 2015/2017 routes are very predictable, but they guarantee 20km of action or so.

 

[Gigs_98]

Re:

I think monuments providing action is more important than monuments being balanced. The 2015/2017 routes are very predictable, but they guarantee 20km of action or so.

This. I don't have a huge problem with the 15/17 route but 16 was imo better because you could be almost certain the race would at latest explode on the miragolo san Salvatore.

 

[Red Rick]

Re: Re:

I think monuments providing action is more important than monuments being balanced. The 2015/2017 routes are very predictable, but they guarantee 20km of action or so.

This. I don't have a huge problem with the 15/17 route but 16 was imo better because you could be almost certain the race would at latest explode on the miragolo san Salvatore.

Yeah. What I wonder is how much of a shot puncheurs would have if you take out the Valcava.

 

[Nirvana]

This night an earthquake hit the area of stage 10 of the Giro (epicenter in Muccia where they should pass with 50 kms to go), the mayors of the area repoterd a lot of collapses in building (probably already damaged considering that the area is almost the same of all the earthquakes of last two years) and damages.

https://www.ilfattoquotidiano.it/2018/04/10/terremoto-macerata-scossa-di-magnitudo-4-7-sindaci-gravi-danni-dieci-repliche-crollato-campanile-della-chiesa-di-muccia/4282900/

Edit: apparently there is an ongoing seismic swarn in recent weeks which is growing up in intensity.

 

[davebqvst]

Vuelta wildcards were announced today:
Cofidis, Burgos-BH, Caja Rural-RGA, Euskadi-Murias

 

[hrotha]

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/vuelta-a-espana-snubs-aqua-blue-sport-in-favour-of-home-teams-wild-cards/

Nice word choice, CN. "Snubs". Entitled much?

 

[MuskyOurSaviour]

While it is probablywrong word, Aqua blue last year was quite active and came out with a good stage win. It it quite suprising not to see them selected

 

[EroicaStradeBianche]

The problem is the World Tour system, which forces 18 teams to race all Grand Tours, all big classics, all the others WT events. A lot of WT teams participate at WT races only because they have to do so, without real objectives, certain Pro Conti Teams could give much than some wc teams in certain races. The organizers will always give some Wildcards for domestic/economic reasons but the WT has forced them to always have these 18 teams. This year Flandern Classics left home Pozzato and Chavanel (former podium finishers and top 10 last year), they could have made a better result than many WT teams also this year, but the organizers are forced to have Movistar. It's only an example because I consider Movistar on of the best teams but are they really necessary at the Ronde? The same for many teams...
Another example: all the WT teams have to go to T-A and P-N at the same time and many of them are unable to bring 2 competitive teams in both races, in the meanwhile a team like Androni (the won the young rider and the point clasments last year) could not participate, Aqua Blue could not participate, french teams could not participate to P-N. I see in many minor stage races (but also in GTs) teams with less depth likeLotto Soudal/ Dimension Data/EF/ecc (only examples I have nothing against them) doing absolutly nothing if not going in the break, why not a pro conti team who has prepared very well for that particular race instead?
National rooted WT teams like the two lottos, FDJ, Movistar have a real interest in racing the tour of california or in canada or in oman? look at california; because of these teams the american teams will struggle to race their home race.

It's a system which kills the Professionals Teams. The difference of publicity received by a mediocre WT is enormous, they race the Tour , the Giro, Roubaix, in Australia, in Canada, in the Middle East, they are always on Eurosport without "doing nothing". Who wants to invest in a professional team? What kind of races will you able to ride as a professional team? what kind of exposure will your sponsor get? Why don't they make a common classment where all the professionals and WT are in and they create a relegation system? I don't understand why they've created a system that deliberately is destroying the minor teams. Aqua Blue don't have to be against the Vuelta organizer(they are putting a lot of money, time, work in order to organize their race and as a private they have the right to invite according to economic criteria) but against that WT system

 

[Bye Bye Bicycle]

I see why the three Spanish teams are selected but their performances this year so far have been abysmal. That being said I also consider Aqua Blue as not being worthy of a wild card to a Grand Tour. There are better non-Spanish ProConti teams.

 

[Netserk]

Re:

The problem is the World Tour system, which forces 18 teams to race all Grand Tours, all big classics, all the others WT events. A lot of WT teams participate at WT races only because they have to do so, without real objectives, certain Pro Conti Teams could give much than some wc teams in certain races. The organizers will always give some Wildcards for domestic/economic reasons but the WT has forced them to always have these 18 teams. This year Flandern Classics left home Pozzato and Chavanel (former podium finishers and top 10 last year), they could have made a better result than many WT teams also this year, but the organizers are forced to have Movistar. It's only an example because I consider Movistar on of the best teams but are they really necessary at the Ronde? The same for many teams...
Another example: all the WT teams have to go to T-A and P-N at the same time and many of them are unable to bring 2 competitive teams in both races, in the meanwhile a team like Androni (the won the young rider and the point clasments last year) could not participate, Aqua Blue could not participate, french teams could not participate to P-N. I see in many minor stage races (but also in GTs) teams with less depth likeLotto Soudal/ Dimension Data/EF/ecc (only examples I have nothing against them) doing absolutly nothing if not going in the break, why not a pro conti team who has prepared very well for that particular race instead?
National rooted WT teams like the two lottos, FDJ, Movistar have a real interest in racing the tour of california or in canada or in oman? look at california; because of these teams the american teams will struggle to race their home race.

It's a system which kills the Professionals Teams. The difference of publicity received by a mediocre WT is enormous, they race the Tour , the Giro, Roubaix, in Australia, in Canada, in the Middle East, they are always on Eurosport without "doing nothing". Who wants to invest in a professional team? What kind of races will you able to ride as a professional team? what kind of exposure will your sponsor get? Why don't they make a common classment where all the professionals and WT are in and they create a relegation system? I don't understand why they've created a system that deliberately is destroying the minor teams. Aqua Blue don't have to be against the Vuelta organizer(they are putting a lot of money, time, work in order to organize their race and as a private they have the right to invite according to economic criteria) but against that WT system

Before 2011, WT (ProTour back then) teams didn't have to participate in all PT races. It only became mandatory afterwards. I think it was to have a guarantee for PT races for the best teams to show up.

I think that if both the WT teams and the race organizer would both be fine with the team not participating, they should be allowed not to, so that another team can. Best would be to burn the WT down to the ground though...

 

[Armchair cyclist]

Re:

The problem is the World Tour system, which forces 18 teams to race all Grand Tours, all big classics, all the others WT events.

Not all the other WT events: the ten 2017 additions (the "Oh, damn, we are a bit thin on content if ASO see through their threat to withdraw all their races" list) are optional.

I remember suggesting hereabouts (before the 2017 expansion) that the WT teams should be able to decline up to 2 WT races each year, with those finishing higher getting first pick on which to stay away from. With the expanded WT, they could each choose 4 that do not align with their sporting/commercial interests, and still guarantee race organisers at least 15 of the top 18 teams, while possibly opening up more wild card spaces.

Not likely to make much difference to the wild card availability for grand tours though: I don't see teams turning their noses up at them.