Both yes and no.
The Giro tries what exactly? Apart from trying to giftwrap Evenepoel a pink jersey
Something different - like terms og makikg more accessible for riders and the double. But of course it requires more are trying
It's also not like you can somewhat limit the fatigue but still make solid mountain stages. In fact, apart from Finestre, the Giro tends to accumulate more fatigue than action.
Think there were only like 5 HC climbs in that entire Giro. I think Verbania is a bit of an underrated design because it's an obvious break but you still have a climb hard enough to go nuts.
It isn't therefore the forum complains about RCS and the Giro. I think the general opinion could have been far better with fewer height meters and a easier Giro in total if the design was better. Finishing at Abetone instead of Sestola. Doing a proper Monte Grappa towards Asiago. And doing a better combo of climbs towards Bormio. If that happened I think the forum would be happier even if the skipped either the San Valentino or the Champoluc stage and did a flat stage instead.Something different - like terms og makikg more accessible for riders and the double. But of course it requires more are trying
Of course I would like see a handfull more harshittera there like Manghen, Gavia, Stelvio. But to save the Giro we need to reduce the Tour..
I think this is such an understated point in these route threads. So often it seems like people just want the toughest route as possible and that doesn't necessarily make for better race (and isn't necessarily fair to the riders who you know, actually have to do the things we discuss). For me a smart route is one that is 1) as safe as possible 2) entertaining in terms of GC and day to day racing 3) takes some chances/novelties 4) provides for some good stages for fans to travel to the sport and catch a fun stage without feeling like they had to travel to Mars to do so and 5) Good on TV and 6) makes the organizers money because, it's a business.
I totally agree on this point as well. We can complain about the Giro every day until May. The reality is, despite being clearly not the most elite Grand Tour and despite being an Italian race during an era without many (any?) top Italian GC guys, it has managed to not only keep it's prestige, I'd argue it has become a more prestigious race during the last 10 years. Sure some of that comes down to paying guys, like Froome and possibly Pog and probably eventually Jonas. But that get's us back to economics and why you have to finish in some of the places they finish. Plus, year in and year out, the Giro makes for the best racing of any Grand Tour. I think the same applies this year. Some of that has to do with the fact that it's not the Tour so the most elite heads of state won't target it every year and some of that has to do with Italy's geography but it's a darn good race to watch on TV year in and year out.
Nah, the last exciting Giro was 2018, each edition has gotten worse since IMO. From 2015-18 the Giro was easily the best grand Tour of the year in terms of racing. But team Sky boring the pants off us in the TDF was a big factor back then, those Giro's were exciting and unpredictable compared to the TDF.
In what way are they giftwrapping it for Evenepoel? 13.7km and 28.6km of ITT this year is not even that much. Compare that to what ASO did for Wiggins...
Because every single mountain stage apart from a 2km section on stage 7 gives him forever to pull back lost time if he ever gets dropped on a steep section.
Why would he get dropped on steep sections? You didn't watch TDF last year, or the Vuelta of 2022?
This myth that Landa was a better climber needs to stop. In a easy climb like Abetone, Contador destroyed the field, even Aru was saved by Porte. Landa was dropped.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram