• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Giro 2013 rumours

Page 33 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
I was gonna say this doesn't look too Wiggins-friendly but then again I don't have much confidence in anyone to be able to break the power meter train way of doing things.

Contador would demolish him but I mean after him there's Nibali, JRod?, Scarponi, Kreuziger, Hesjedal..

Maybe I'm overestimating Wiggins' climbing abilities.


Stage 10 - Altopiano del Montasio: 5.2km at 10.6%, max 16%
Stage 14 - Bardonecchia: 7.2km at 9.0%, max 14%
Stage 15 - Galibier: 7.8km at 8.4%, max 11%
Stage 19 - Val Martello: 12km at 8.6%, max 16%
Stage 20 - Tre Cime di Lavaredo: 7.2km at 9.6%, max 14%


Stages to Pescara, Firenze and Tre Cime de Lavaredo obviously look most exciting. Val Martello could be more interesting if it wasn't the day before Tre Cime.

Also I thought one of the reasons Zomegnan went was because of the transfer kms? Seems like there's a decent amount of transfers in there..
 
airstream said:
Not tons. Even in the Giro we usually have only 3-4 proper MTFs. I'm not against descents and look up to them, but everyone realizes say the thing Vino did back then in the Vuelta happens maybe once a decade. Well, let's better stop arguing anyways. In the end, it's the matter of personal preferences, not one's rightness.

I try to ignore your posts and be nice, I really do...

Yeah let's drop this. We're not making any progress anyway.
 
Netserk said:
I count two that matters:
tappa_dettagli_tecnici_altimetria_16.jpg

tappa_dettagli_tecnici_altimetria_03.jpg

The final kms of those two stages:

m4myc.png


344be5j.png



The first one is disappointing, the last climb isn't too hard. But the one right after the Galibier + Rest Day could be interesting. Climb is 6kms at 8,5%.
 
Sep 22, 2012
542
0
0
Visit site
Netserk said:
First stage upgrade:
With the exact same start and finish the stage is 228 km long.
gWk0f.png

LgGU4.png


EDIT:
This way they don't even have to ride Cenis twice :)

I agree, so much better. I am thinking about more radical change to the previous stage and making this one even harder and longer, maybe I am insane.
 
Sep 22, 2012
542
0
0
Visit site
Descender said:
The final kms of those two stages:

The first one is disappointing, the last climb isn't too hard. But the one right after the Galibier + Rest Day could be interesting. Climb is 6kms at 8,5%.

I had a fiddle around with the finish of the first one and it is hilly near the finish but the slopes are mostly not that steep. I think they have done about as well as possible although if you can prove me wrong go ahead.
 
First and last stages can gtfo. Awful.

Does every single GT have to have a TTT now?

Making the ITT tougher is fine, but we are left with anemic mountain stages. 138km? Honestly? Also, I am dead against them doing the Stelvio again. That should be a special attraction, like Ventoux is in the Tour - it should be once every few years we see that, and doing it two straight years is weak.

Galibier MTF is ugly as hell.

The hilly stages in the first half of the race look MUCH, MUCH more interesting than these crappy mountain stages. At least they've cut down on the number of meaningless sprint stages designed just so smug teams can point to their win column.
 
Jun 4, 2011
405
0
0
Visit site
I like it because there's a bit of everything and i think that is a very balanced route: we have a long TT for time trial specialist to get some advantage, but also a lot of mountain terrain where pure climbers can get those minutes back. We have both sprint mountain stages like Galibier and Val Martello, but the + 200 km queen stage remains as a symbol of the Giro. And also we have both very steep stuff like Jaffreu and Tre cime, but also more regular climb like Galibier, Gavia and Stelvio. In addition the mountain time trial will be on a not very steep climb, so it will be a sort of a fair all around challenge.
Plus i'm happy that there are not a lot of uphill sprint, that i personally don't like, but that mixed stages don't finish uphill.

Thing i don't like: the short TTT, it looks more like a commercial for teams sponsor and for the Island of Ischia rather than a meaningful GC stage.
 
Libertine Seguros said:
First and last stages can gtfo. Awful.

Does every single GT have to have a TTT now?

Making the ITT tougher is fine, but we are left with anemic mountain stages. 138km? Honestly? Also, I am dead against them doing the Stelvio again. That should be a special attraction, like Ventoux is in the Tour - it should be once every few years we see that, and doing it two straight years is weak.

Galibier MTF is ugly as hell.

The hilly stages in the first half of the race look MUCH, MUCH more interesting than these crappy mountain stages. At least they've cut down on the number of meaningless sprint stages designed just so smug teams can point to their win column.

A positive analysis of a GT route, as usual...
 
Mad Elephant Man said:
I had a fiddle around with the finish of the first one and it is hilly near the finish but the slopes are mostly not that steep. I think they have done about as well as possible although if you can prove me wrong go ahead.

Yup, I had the same feeling while drawing the actual stage. No better alternative with that finish.

Still, as you say the last climb isn't hard enough. Pity.
 
JRanton said:
Will Cav even show up in May?

It's strange because I thought with Guardini's stage win this year the organisers would want to see them sprint against each other a few times.

I don't know if it's still like it, but a few years ago they found that the audience figures for flat stages were chronically bad in comparison to hilly and mountainous stages, so maybe it's a financial consideration.
 
Sep 22, 2012
542
0
0
Visit site
My go at redoing stages 14 and 15 so they are better stages.

Stage 14.
Starting from Cervere, where it is planned to start go SW to Caraglio and Pradleves to do the Colle della Fauneria then descend north to do the Colle di Sampeyre, then the Col Angel, Col d'Iozard and descend into Braincon for the finish. About 220kms with four challenging climbs and a mountain stage with a descent finish.

Stage 15
As Netserk posted only with the start being in Braincon so the stage would be 20kms shorter and one minor climb less.
 
Libertine Seguros said:
First and last stages can gtfo. Awful.

Does every single GT have to have a TTT now?

Making the ITT tougher is fine, but we are left with anemic mountain stages. 138km? Honestly? Also, I am dead against them doing the Stelvio again. That should be a special attraction, like Ventoux is in the Tour - it should be once every few years we see that, and doing it two straight years is weak.

Galibier MTF is ugly as hell.

The hilly stages in the first half of the race look MUCH, MUCH more interesting than these crappy mountain stages. At least they've cut down on the number of meaningless sprint stages designed just so smug teams can point to their win column.
Did you actually see the profile??

I have no idea what you are talking about!
 
Sure it would need to be asphalted, or at least the start of the last descent and then just do the ascent unpaved, but nonetheless here is my upgrade of stage 14. If this stage were meant to be, I would also change 15 so it would end in Briancon after Galibier (after the original stage, and not my upgrade of that, as I don't won't a too hard stage after this one).
IR5pR.png


EDIT: the last ascent: 10.8 km at 10.3 average.

EDIT2: So this would be the next stage:
nGNZk.png
 
Libertine Seguros said:
I get annoyed enough when the Giro decides to stop trying to be the Giro and starts trying to be the Tour. But when it starts trying to be the Vuelta...

What exactly is the difference between next years Giro and the average Giro route like 90-2006 route apart of the fact that 2 mountain stages could be 50km longer? :confused:
Actually if abything it's still more montanious then back then.
 
Feb 23, 2012
201
0
0
Visit site
Looks like a good, balanced route. There are all kinds of stages with a nice first week to start and a very tough third week to decide the gc. I don't like the short mountain stages but there's enough climbing left and this years Vuelta proved that shorter stages with explosive finales can be very attractive.
Just hope the quality of the field will be better than this year. Pretty certain also that the Tour route won't top this when it's unveiled.
 
Leonardus said:
Looks like a good, balanced route. There are all kinds of stages with a nice first week to start and a very tough third week to decide the gc. I don't like the short mountain stages but there's enough climbing left and this years Vuelta proved that shorter stages with explosive finales can be very attractive.
Just hope the quality of the field will be better than this year. Pretty certain also that the Tour route won't top this when it's unveiled.
The short stages from the 2013 Giro looks harder than this year's Vuelta. They made them short to avoid so much carnage and also to avoid the riders to be too tired to make any attacks. Reminds me of the Tour won by Cadel.

I like the route, but I guess everybody is entitled to their opinion anyway.
 

TRENDING THREADS