Giro d'Italia 2017 STAGE 21: Monza – Milano 29.3 km ITT

[johnymax]

I have a feeling Pinot will do way better than the first ITT. Still not enough for Dumoulin who I think will take a well deserved overall win in Piazza Duomo(lin)

 

[Alexandre B.]

Re:

The reason Dumoulin won isn't because of too many ITT km; it's because Quintana performed well below his best in the mountains and in the ITTs.

Quintana was still better than he was in the 2015 Vuelta but not any better than he was in the 2016 Tour.

Even with the 2016 Vuelta form he enters the final TT with a 3+ minute lead and Dumoulin would be further back.

You realize that the stage has not even started, right?

 

[BullsFan22]

C'mon guys, why are we discussing what the route should have been? This is about the final stage of what's turned out to be a very exciting Giro D'Italia!!!

The only guy, in my opinion, that has no shot at a podium tomorrow is Pozzovivo. I know Zakarin is also probably not favored to get into the top 3, but his chances are much better than Domenico's.

It's such a weird composition as well. Quintana leads, and I think he will either end up winning the overall tomorrow, if he has an exceptional day and Dumoulin and other others, but especially Dumoulin, don't have good days, or he will miss out on the podium altogether. For some reason I don't see him getting 2nd or 3rd. Pinot is probably favored to overtake Nibbles, but who knows how much today's efforts play into effect tomorrow (yes, I know he isn't the only one that's going to be tired). Nibali could, potentially lose the podium, because if Dumoulin is racing well, he'll obviously get passed by big Tom, but also Pinot, though the difference between Nibali and Quintana could be very small tomorrow when it's all said and done. Like I said earlier, Zakarin will need one of his best TT's to have a shot at the podium, but there is a realistic chance. He needs to really motor and make up 32 on Pinot and 36 on Nibali. Not an insurmountable difference to make up, but it's going to be difficult.

 

[Valv.Piti]

Re: Re:

I think the Mortirolo+Aprica is a bit overrated because there's plenty of other combinations that could be used in that way but they rarely are. Plenty of harder climbs too.

Plenty of harder climbs than 12,1 km @ 10,8%?

This climb just always delivers. Always..

Few passes that are used on a somewhat frequent basis yes. But I've spent too much time getting lost on the web to know there's nastier climbs. Of climbs that are actually raced, the Finestre is at least as hard, and the only difference in the last 2 occasions of both combo's has been the situation going in and the stage before. Both climbs have more options than just Aprica and Sestriere too. For Mortirolo I think a finish in Ponte di Legno or on top of the Tonale is too much of a stretch.

There's obviously nastier climbs out there, but I don't think they need to be any harder than this to assure great racing. Just make it plenty hard even before Mortirolo, which they have managed well in the Giro, finish in Aprica and your set. Its an instant classic, really, theres no need to do anything else. You can throw the occasional curveball and use Christina or whatever, but I think this specific combo is as surefire as it gets in cycling.

Personal preference, but I do also prefer to watch steep climbs at around 10 kilometres like Mortirolo (and Mont du Chat!) than the more grinding and longer climbs. Others probably have it a different way.

 

[Tonton]

C'mon guys, why are we discussing what the route should have been? This is about the final stage of what's turned out to be a very exciting Giro D'Italia!!!

The only guy, in my opinion, that has no shot at a podium tomorrow is Pozzovivo. I know Zakarin is also probably not favored to get into the top 3, but his chances are much better than Domenico's.

It's such a weird composition as well. Quintana leads, and I think he will either end up winning the overall tomorrow, if he has an exceptional day and Dumoulin and other others, but especially Dumoulin, don't have good days, or he will miss out on the podium altogether. For some reason I don't see him getting 2nd or 3rd. Pinot is probably favored to overtake Nibbles, but who knows how much today's efforts play into effect tomorrow (yes, I know he isn't the only one that's going to be tired). Nibali could, potentially lose the podium, because if Dumoulin is racing well, he'll obviously get passed by big Tom, but also Pinot, though the difference between Nibali and Quintana could be very small tomorrow when it's all said and done. Like I said earlier, Zakarin will need one of his best TT's to have a shot at the podium, but there is a realistic chance. He needs to really motor and make up 32 on Pinot and 36 on Nibali. Not an insurmountable difference to make up, but it's going to be difficult.

I tend to agree with you. Pozzo won't overtake anyone and get a top-5. The time differences are so small that it could go either way between Nairo, Vincenzo, and THibaut. Dumourain? I can't see him not win. Zakarin is the joker.

 

[SeriousSam]

There's a fairly good chance one of Quintana and Nibali will pay for the decision to let Pinot get a minute

 

[Libertine Seguros]

If Pinot, Nibali or even Zakarin win, they become the first rider since Aitor González to win a GT on the road without ever wearing the leader's jersey once. The last rider to win a GT without wearing the leader's jersey was of course Michele Scarponi due to Contador's ban, but Contador was the original winner on the road.

 

[Ataraxus]

Posters who think 70 km ITT is too much are not being rational at all and their fanboyism toward specific riders has become deeply entangled with the real mission of GC classifications and the characteristics that the winner of these classifications should have.
With the domestiques getting stronger year by year, the one-on-one battles between GC men are only happening in ITTs and the last km of MTF usually. I don't fully agree with Dr. Ferrari theory of the amounts of ITT and >8% climbs a GC should have to be balanced, but if you are going to have Blockhaus, Piancavallo, Umbrail, Oropa, Etna, and a dolomitic stage in one GT, a 70 km ITT is quite reasonable IMO.

It's another issue of course thatclimbers can't shake the TTist in the climbs,
that Etna is raced conservatively,
that Descents of Grappa, Selvino, Fumaiolo and the Dolomitic stage aren't exploited at all,
that Tiny Quintana can't hold the teams wheel in the crosswinds of stage three etc etc.

 

[Bullrun]

70 km of ITT is less than what would be considered enough ITT. I wouldn't say, as many state, that 100 km is the magic number, but seriously, 70 km, if nothing else, is not enough. My $0.02.

Even considering what kind of rider most GC riders are nowadays? There are so few GC riders who are all-rounders now that making a 100km TT Grand Tour is handing the race to a Froome, Dumoulin, Porte.. The rest are climbers who can do a 'quite good' time trial.

GTs should be designed to give maximum excitement, and if that means designing for the majority of GC riders to fight on, then so be it.

You have the causality inverted. There aren't so few TT kms by historical standards because there's a lack of all-rounders competing for GC; rather there are a lack of all-rounders because there's a ridiculous low number of TT kms in today's GT designs.

A climbing specialist winning multiple GTs has nothing to do with the history of cycling - that type should be able to win on occasion: Van Impe, Bahamontes and Herrera won 1 each and that's perfectly fine. On the other hand, together they won like 30 KoMs classifications, which is what makes sense. I for one thin that pedestrian all around GC riders (pedestrian as all-rounders, as in specialists), who manage to lose time on finals on descents, and on flat stages, who struggle mighty on crosswinds, cobbles, time-trialling, lack punch and basically are only good on high-mountains (and even there, only truly dominating on some specific type of stages) shouldnt' be top 3 favourites on every GT they enter. It's dreadful and boring and as long as those riders have strong teams and there's only symbolic TT kms, the GT gets reduced to a couple of high.mountain stages they target to pedal hard. Imagine if it had always been like that, how different would be cycling history - we wouldn't even had a Bartali-Coppi rivalry. Plus, with ITT below a certain threshold, teams gain a disproportionate importance.

Sure, design GTs that type of rider can win. But also others that super strong time trialers can win by doing damage control in the high-mountains. It will still be exciting in the mountains: today's stage was thrilling. Ideally find the sweet spot that allows both of those prototypes to contend.

Anyway, saying it's fine to have as little as possible ITT kms because most GC are climbers is reminiscent of flawed logical thinking like the Butterfield Paradox: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fox_Butterfield#Criticism . Imagine upping the ITT kms to 200kms and then claiming organizers should target +250kms and more TT stages because most contenders are TTers anyway.

 

[Tonton]

Re:

If Pinot, Nibali or even Zakarin win, they become the first rider since Aitor González to win a GT on the road without ever wearing the leader's jersey once. The last rider to win a GT without wearing the leader's jersey was of course Michele Scarponi due to Contador's ban, but Contador was the original winner on the road.

Yes, yes, yes! And please LS, design the next Giro .

 

[Ataraxus]

70 km of ITT is less than what would be considered enough ITT. I wouldn't say, as many state, that 100 km is the magic number, but seriously, 70 km, if nothing else, is not enough. My $0.02.

Even considering what kind of rider most GC riders are nowadays? There are so few GC riders who are all-rounders now that making a 100km TT Grand Tour is handing the race to a Froome, Dumoulin, Porte.. The rest are climbers who can do a 'quite good' time trial.

GTs should be designed to give maximum excitement, and if that means designing for the majority of GC riders to fight on, then so be it.

You have the causality inverted. There aren't so few TT kms by historical standards because there's a lack of all-rounders competing for GC; rather there are a lack of all-rounders because there's a ridiculous low number of TT kms in today's GT designs.

A climbing specialist winning multiple GTs has nothing to do with the history of cycling - that type should be able to win on occasion: Van Impe, Bahamontes and Herrera won 1 each and that's perfectly fine. On the other hand, together they won like 30 KoMs classifications, which is what makes sense. I for one thin that pedestrian all around GC riders (pedestrian as all-rounders, as in specialists), who manage to lose time on finals on descents, and on flat stages, who struggle mighty on crosswinds, cobbles, time-trialling, lack punch and basically are only good on high-mountains (and even there, only truly dominating on some specific type of stages) shouldnt' be top 3 favourites on every GT they enter. It's dreadful and boring and as long as those riders have strong teams and there's only symbolic TT kms, the GT gets reduced to a couple of high.mountain stages they target to pedal hard. Imagine if it had always been like that, how different would be cycling history - we wouldn't even had a Bartali-Coppi rivalry. Plus, with ITT below a certain threshold, teams gain a disproportionate importance.

Sure, design GTs that type of rider can win. But also others that super strong time trialers can win by doing damage control in the high-mountains. It will still be exciting in the mountains: today's stage was thrilling. Ideally find the sweet spot that allows both of those prototypes to contend.

Anyway, saying it's fine to have as little as possible ITT kms because most GC are climbers is reminiscent of flawed logical thinking like the Butterfield Paradox: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fox_Butterfield#Criticism . Imagine upping the ITT kms to 200kms and then claiming organizers should target +250kms and more TT stages because most contenders are TTers anyway.

Beautifully put.

 

[portugal11]

Re:

Imagine a Giro with 5-6 proper mountain stages, starting down south with Blockhaus, going north-west with a classic Finestre-Sestriere combo, next day Sampeyre and Fauniera, then east and throw Mortirolo-Aprica in their head (pick one of the 06, 10 or 15 stages, they are all brilliant), stroll down to the dolomites and punish the peloton with Fedaia-Sella combo, Giau-Tre Croci-Tre Cime, Duran-Staulanza-Giau or whatever and if you are mean, completely unrealistic and your name is Angelo Zomegnan, give them the killing blow with Crostis-Zoncolan. Or just Crostis, I wanna see that climb.

I want to see crostis's descent

 

[luckyboy]

What would be a comparable upset at WorldTour level to Dumoulin losing this to Quintana/Nibali/Pinot/Zakarin tomorrow? It's very hard to think of anything so unlikely

 

[DanielSong39]

What would be a comparable upset at WorldTour level to Dumoulin losing this to Quintana/Nibali/Pinot/Zakarin tomorrow? It's very hard to think of anything so unlikely

Steven Kruijswijk in last year's Giro, after Stage 18. Had an 85% chance of winning according to the bookies.
Quintana's epic snow stage in the 2014 Giro.
Rasmussen thrown off the 2007 Tour, after he had the race sewn up.
Landis' legendary solo breakaway in 2006 Tour (followed by a stellar ITT to seal it).

If you go back further:
Lemond's world record time trial in 1989 to win the Tour by 8 seconds
Delgado from 6 minutes back in the penultimate stage to beat Millar in 1985 Vuelta

So, not that uncommon.

With that said, it ain't happening.

 

[GuyIncognito]

What would be a comparable upset at WorldTour level to Dumoulin losing this to Quintana/Nibali/Pinot/Zakarin tomorrow? It's very hard to think of anything so unlikely

1981 Giro finale
Basically this situation with just 2 men, the odds on favorite got beaten not just on GC but on the TT stage itself by the climber.

More recently, Gesink contriving to somehow lose the 2010 Tour de Suisse in the TT after easily "winning" it in the mountains

Lemond's world record time trial in 1990 to win the Tour by 8 seconds

1989

And it only happened because Fignon was injured which kept him up all night and meant he couldn't even warm up.

That famous clip of Fignon finishing the TT and falling to the floor crying in anguish at losing? He thought he'd won, he was crying because of the pain from the injury.

 

[jaylew]

4 or 5 posts later, you're still missing the point.

What was your point? You just listed TT lengths with no context.

The last two years show me where there was a Froome or Dumoulin competing. Nobody was an incredibly time trialist so you can have 100km or 5km and it would still be an exciting fight.

I didn't believe it needed contextualization.
Despite having a former TT specialist (now converted into an all rounder), this year's Giro will likely have the smallest time gap between the first three riders. That tells me it was a fairly competitive Giro.

In 2013 between Nibali and Evans there was a time gap of almost 6 minutes.
In 2014 between Quintana and Aru there was a time gap of 4 minutes (being Uran, the second placed rider, a guy who was way better time trialist than the others).

Both years had relatively the same amount of ITT kms has this year's.

So the problem isn't related with ITT kms.

In fairness, it's only going to be close because of Dumo's bathroom issue. I don't really think there were too many TT kms but I thought the mountain stages were underwhelming this year, and I don't mean their result. I thought the mountain stages looked somehow light and not very decisive when I saw the route, particularly the ones in the latter half of the race. I mean, there wasn't a single really hard mountain top finish in the second half of the race.

We're going to have a great finale (thanks to poopgate) and Dumo will be a worthy winner if he takes it but I thought the parcours for the centenary Giro was really underwhelming.

In any case, the absolute number of TT kms isn't important to me, it's about the balance. You could have a GT where the right amount is 100k or one where it's 50k

 

[DanielSong39]

What would be a comparable upset at WorldTour level to Dumoulin losing this to Quintana/Nibali/Pinot/Zakarin tomorrow? It's very hard to think of anything so unlikely

1981 Giro finale
Basically this situation with just 2 men, the odds on favorite got beaten not just on GC but on the TT stage itself by the climber.

More recently, Gesink contriving to somehow lose the 2010 Tour de Suisse in the TT after easily "winning" it in the mountains

Lemond's world record time trial in 1989 to win the Tour by 8 seconds

And it only happened because Fignon was injured which kept him up all night and meant he couldn't even warm up.

That famous clip of Fignon finishing the TT and falling to the floor crying in anguish at losing? He thought he'd won, he was crying because of the pain from the injury.

Corrected.

If Fignon had cut off his ponytail he would've won as well, but hindsight is 20-20.

 

[DanielSong39]

More recently, the 2017 Tour of California. No one had George Bennett smashing the time trial to beat Majka and Talansky.

 

[jaylew]

What would be a comparable upset at WorldTour level to Dumoulin losing this to Quintana/Nibali/Pinot/Zakarin tomorrow? It's very hard to think of anything so unlikely

I don't think it would be a giant upset if any of those guys win, honestly. An upset sure, but not monumental in my book. All 4 of those guys have ridden TTs in the past that would get the job done, particularly if Tom is off his game.

 

[Oude Geuze]

Lots of talk about TD being fatigued, I don't see it. He struggles when several mountains are ridden hard, he excels on single mountain climbs and ITT. He sits at 70kg, let's say he can ride at 6w/kg threshold. NQ perhaps 55kg, 6.2w/kg. That translates into 420w and 341w respectively at threshold, 80w gap is probably a conservative estimation. Slightly more drag for the taller rider. TD will have to have a very bad day to loose this.

 

[shalgo]

So what are the odds that we get some really good helicopter footage from close in front of Dumoulin, Pinot, and Quintana?

 

[LeoMontero]

70 km of ITT is less than what would be considered enough ITT. I wouldn't say, as many state, that 100 km is the magic number, but seriously, 70 km, if nothing else, is not enough. My $0.02.

Even considering what kind of rider most GC riders are nowadays? There are so few GC riders who are all-rounders now that making a 100km TT Grand Tour is handing the race to a Froome, Dumoulin, Porte.. The rest are climbers who can do a 'quite good' time trial.

GTs should be designed to give maximum excitement, and if that means designing for the majority of GC riders to fight on, then so be it.

You have the causality inverted. There aren't so few TT kms by historical standards because there's a lack of all-rounders competing for GC; rather there are a lack of all-rounders because there's a ridiculous low number of TT kms in today's GT designs.

A climbing specialist winning multiple GTs has nothing to do with the history of cycling - that type should be able to win on occasion: Van Impe, Bahamontes and Herrera won 1 each and that's perfectly fine. On the other hand, together they won like 30 KoMs classifications, which is what makes sense. I for one thin that pedestrian all around GC riders (pedestrian as all-rounders, as in specialists), who manage to lose time on finals on descents, and on flat stages, who struggle mighty on crosswinds, cobbles, time-trialling, lack punch and basically are only good on high-mountains (and even there, only truly dominating on some specific type of stages) shouldnt' be top 3 favourites on every GT they enter. It's dreadful and boring and as long as those riders have strong teams and there's only symbolic TT kms, the GT gets reduced to a couple of high.mountain stages they target to pedal hard. Imagine if it had always been like that, how different would be cycling history - we wouldn't even had a Bartali-Coppi rivalry. Plus, with ITT below a certain threshold, teams gain a disproportionate importance.

Sure, design GTs that type of rider can win. But also others that super strong time trialers can win by doing damage control in the high-mountains. It will still be exciting in the mountains: today's stage was thrilling. Ideally find the sweet spot that allows both of those prototypes to contend.

Anyway, saying it's fine to have as little as possible ITT kms because most GC are climbers is reminiscent of flawed logical thinking like the Butterfield Paradox: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fox_Butterfield#Criticism . Imagine upping the ITT kms to 200kms and then claiming organizers should target +250kms and more TT stages because most contenders are TTers anyway.

Beautifully put.

i dont like time trials, i like the mountains, to me time trials is only how many watts can you generate, there is no tactics, no possitioning, no nothing. 70 kms is way to much, unless there is a mountain tt. lets try a stelvio mountain tt.

 

[KGB]

Final GC:
1.TD
2.Pinot
3.Nibali(but will love to see there Zaka).

 

[DanielSong39]

The 2015 World Championship Time Trials also come to mind. Kiriyenka pulled off a major upset and was joined in the podium by Malori and Coppel. Finishing 4-7: Castroviejo, Dumoulin, Dennis, Tony Martin.

Kiriyenka was seen as a darkhorse contender but that's a sick field he beat.

 

[GuyIncognito]

Re:

The 2015 World Championship Time Trials also come to mind. Kiriyenka pulled off a major upset and was joined in the podium by Malori and Coppel. Finishing 4-7: Castroviejo, Dumoulin, Dennis, Tony Martin.

Kiriyenka was seen as a darkhorse contender but that's a sick field he beat.

I thought he wanted a GC fight.
If I misunderstood and we're going with single day tts, the first ever World TT championships had an amazing field with many brilliant time trialists, all the world's best other than Indurain and Rominger. Berzin, Olano, Breukink, Marie, Jaskula, Zulle, Mauri, among others.

Bafflingly they all lost several minutes.

The podium consisted of Boardman who wasn't that great at those long distances, an italian domestique not renowned as a time trialist and a 20 year old stagiaire Ullrich who was still a couple of years away from doing anything in a TT