Giro d'Italia 2019 rumours

[Libertine Seguros]

Well, if the last week is great, everybody will forget that the first half was absolute garbage, and go on about it like it's a golden template. Just like the 2011 Tour.

 

[tobydawq]

Re:

Well, if the last week is great, everybody will forget that the first half was absolute garbage, and go on about it like it's a golden template. Just like the 2011 Tour.

Well, the first 220 kms of Amstel weren't that great either...

 

[Red Rick]

Re: Re:

Well, if the last week is great, everybody will forget that the first half was absolute garbage, and go on about it like it's a golden template. Just like the 2011 Tour.

Well, the first 220 kms of Amstel weren't that great either...

Aaaaer you really arguing those are the same thing?

 

[tobydawq]

Re: Re:

Well, if the last week is great, everybody will forget that the first half was absolute garbage, and go on about it like it's a golden template. Just like the 2011 Tour.

Well, the first 220 kms of Amstel weren't that great either...

Aaaaer you really arguing those are the same thing?

No, I just get a bit grumpy because of your and others' needs to bash all routes, even great ones like this Giro's.

There's aaaaaaaaaalways something wrong, and it's always this that takes all the focus.

 

[Valv.Piti]

Obviously wouldnt be CN without it. Part of the charm, although Red Rick is taking it to new heights

LS: But there is a difference, mianly the fact that there's two pretty hard time trials beforehand where as in the Tour that year, there only was a team time trial. The stages in the Pyrenees were fine, but were just raced pathetically (is that a word?) (I think Luz Ardiden was stage 12, so thats similar to to when the Giro really begins). But I maintain that theres some pretty interesting stages.

 

[tobydawq]

Re:

Obviously wouldnt be CN without it. Part of the charm, although Red Rick is taking it to new heights

LS: But there is a difference, mianly the fact that there's two pretty hard time trials beforehand where as in the Tour that year, there only was a team time trial. The stages in the Pyrenees were fine, but were just raced pathetically (is that a word?) (I think Luz Ardiden was stage 12, so thats similar to to when the Giro really begins). But I maintain that theres some pretty interesting stages.

Of course it is.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Re: Re:

Well, if the last week is great, everybody will forget that the first half was absolute garbage, and go on about it like it's a golden template. Just like the 2011 Tour.

Well, the first 220 kms of Amstel weren't that great either...

Aaaaer you really arguing those are the same thing?

No, I just get a bit grumpy because of your and others' needs to bash all routes, even great ones like this Giro's.

There's aaaaaaaaaalways something wrong, and it's always this that takes all the focus.

People still praise the 2011 Tour as a great race to this day. For two weeks it was 2009-level bad.

There are some real good stages in this Giro, but if everybody is peaking for the exact same time, I worry that that's going to mean everybody is in "keep it on the island, your peak is to come" mode and will race the first half of the race like it's 2012. And in the 2012 Giro, riders never got out of that mindset. At least at the 2011 Tour they did, or rather one guy did (no, not Contador), and that's only because he raced the Pyrenees with his head up his backside because he was too scared to ride without his brother by his side.

One great and a couple of very good stages does not a Grand Tour make, and not only does the 2011 Tour not get the criticism it deserves for the two weeks of utter dreck served up before Andy got scared on the Pinerolo descent, but it's also largely responsible for the neutering of real queen stages for the last eight years, because everybody looked at there being a really good 110km stage and decided that all mountain stages should be short, yet failed to notice that right before it there was an even better stage that was... wait for it... 200km long. Now, 200km mountain stages are often a relic, and quite often the long stages are not just being designed not to be decisive, but (and RCS are thankfully an exception to this) are being wilfully designed to suck, which makes the "short stage good, long stage bad" fallacy a self-fulfilling prophecy.

 

[Kyllingen86]

I agree with the fact that this years Giro lacks a proper mountain stage in the Appenines. Neither am I a fan of a grand Tour being too backloaded. However as long as it is not every year or too often, I dont mind an edition labelled "Backloaded"

Except for the two ITT'sI don't expect relevant GC-action before stage 13, but it doesn't mean the first twelve stages are all going to be boring. Only stage 3, 5, 10, 11 are clearly stages for sprinters. There exists a certain unpredictability for the rest.

Stage 2 is a Golden opportunity for a lucky break away specialist to wear pink the following days. While a Sprint can't be ruled out, I believe in the break.

Stage 4 could be for sprinters or punchurs.

Stage 6, 7 and 8 could be break away victories or a reduced sprint where even Yates or Valverde would want to go for it.

Stage 12 is interesting as well. Most likely the GC-riders will wait but it can't be ruled out that action could happen on Montoso. I do expect a break away victory though.


These lumpy stages give more opportunities for smaller teams like Androni, Bardiani and so on to grab a stage victory. Masnada and Cattaneo look like they are in fine form.

 

[Valv.Piti]

It kinda reminds me of the 2016-route. I'd say I like the first 10-12 days better back then, but the mountain stages are both better in general and better paced than that year.

For the Danes out there, here are some of the stages from the Giro in 2010. Some of these stages were just brutal and it was race on pretty much every day. Unfortunately it misses the sterrato stage and the stage over Monte Grappa, but it got most of it covered: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bYctWYdGLuA&list=PLVL9Ywz2FKrIeFOcFJTUWI-Yh8W_-6JdQ&index=1

 

[Red Rick]

Re:

Obviously wouldnt be CN without it. Part of the charm, although Red Rick is taking it to new heights

LS: But there is a difference, mianly the fact that there's two pretty hard time trials beforehand where as in the Tour that year, there only was a team time trial. The stages in the Pyrenees were fine, but were just raced pathetically (is that a word?) (I think Luz Ardiden was stage 12, so thats similar to to when the Giro really begins). But I maintain that theres some pretty interesting stages.

Well, if the last week is great, everybody will forget that the first half was absolute garbage, and go on about it like it's a golden template. Just like the 2011 Tour.

Well, the first 220 kms of Amstel weren't that great either...

Aaaaer you really arguing those are the same thing?

No, I just get a bit grumpy because of your and others' needs to bash all routes, even great ones like this Giro's.

There's aaaaaaaaaalways something wrong, and it's always this that takes all the focus.

I never said that it sucks. It's just that whene everyone's going ham on how awesome like 5 stages are, I can't help but feel like the other 16 stages could be better.

I'm also not arguing for putting more massive mountain stages in the first 8 road stages. But really there should be like 2 road stages in the first 12 stages where a GC rider can try something.

 

[railxmig]

It's important to note that a route can incentify the race but it doesn't make it. Having San Carlo-Courmayeur and Mortirolo-Ponte di Legno will provide an intense day of racing which may or may not be remembered by many and may mask the 1st half of the race unless it will end in a 2011 Tour 1st week bloodbath (ask Hoogerland or Contador).

I would also focus more on the Lago Serru stage as it looks eerily similar to 2015's Madonna di Campiglio stage with Pian del Lupo being this year's extreme version of Passo Daone. The toughest are especially the first couple of kms down to Frassinetto. I guess it's now 100% surfaced as judging by the satelite images at the top it was just a dirt path.

 

[Mayomaniac]

@Eshnar: The Garbaldi has been published:
https://static2.giroditalia.it/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Garibaldi_Giro_italia_2019_low_res.pdf

 

[Eshnar]

Re:

@Eshnar: The Garbaldi has been published:
https://static2.giroditalia.it/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Garibaldi_Giro_italia_2019_low_res.pdf

thank you. It seems the finale of stage 4 is different from the one on the website. They make a huge detour and the stage is 12 km longer. I have to investigate

 

[Eshnar]

so it seems the "right" profile is the one on the Garibaldi. A bit of a shame really. This new one could actually end up in a bunch sprint. Won by Ulissi.

 

[Kyllingen86]

On the Giro homepage I am puzzled about the difficulty ratings.

Stage 19 is considered high difficulty while stage 17 is only medium difficulty.
Stage 17 is longer and as far as I can tell with more mointains and a tougher finish.

 

[Salvarani]

Brutal 2nd and 3rd week

 

[Eshnar]

The new profile of stage 4 is finally updated on the main website.
On related news, my analysis is gonna drop some day this week. Stay tuned!

 

[Jungle Cycle]

Re:

The new profile of stage 4 is finally updated on the main website.
On related news, my analysis is gonna drop some day this week. Stay tuned!

usually the years best post of the whole forum....
the 100th was brilliant..

 

[Bolder]

Re:

The new profile of stage 4 is finally updated on the main website.
On related news, my analysis is gonna drop some day this week. Stay tuned!

Can't wait, this route looks very backloaded but would be interested to hear any alternative takes.