giro d'italia

[Parrulo]

When your guy is the boss of the tour, none of the other races really matter much. Straight from the Lance playbook.

funny as contador may be many things but not the kind of guy that only cares about the tour. i dare to say that, if there weren't so many sponsor obligations contador would leave the tour alone next year and go for the giro vuelta double. and even knowing that some of his fans clearly overhype the tour.

 

[robertocarlos]

funny as contador may be many things but not the kind of guy that only cares about the tour. i dare to say that, if there weren't so many sponsor obligations contador would leave the tour alone next year and go for the giro vuelta double. and even knowing that some of his fans clearly overhype the tour.

totally agree two is better than one; no matter how big that tour is.

 

[TheDude]

Yeah, last couple of years Giro has been a more interesting course and race than le Tour. I'll take all the grand tours I can get.

 

[on3m@n@rmy]

Giro is the only GT I'd want to go see. And, ya, too bad it does not attract more big names.

 

[skidmark]

But again, it comes down to my problem that because the Tour is so big, teams have too much riding on it to take risks. When the break got 7 minutes on the way to Pau, Zabriskie got on the front because Horner and Plaza were threatening Hesjedal's top 10 position. There's never a thought of attacking - only of stopping others from doing so. You don't have so much of that at the Giro. The Giro is about 10 or so guys who really want to win and will attack to do so, the Tour is about 30 or so guys who really want to get into that top 20 but aren't prepared to take any risks to do so lest they blow up and lose what they have. The Tour creates drama in the same way as an important football match at 1-0 does - it's not exciting but every move means something. The Giro is a 4-3 attack-fest.

Aside from what I think is the 'best' GT, I think this is a very salient analogy. It is like comparing apples and oranges. The Tour is much more about anticipation - like 'is this big favourite maybe going to go all out today?' which rarely happens, vs. 'holy crap I can't believe that just happened' in the Giro. The tour tends to be more disappointing, but that doesn't mean the anticipation of watching the best in the world duke it out isn't exciting. The Tour parcours is 'safe' most years, which makes sense from an organizational standpoint because if you're going to get people going all out anyway, you might as well get your buck for delivering the big names to the finish. But from a fan standpoint (and from everything I know, Henri Desgrange would fully agree), it'd be great to see something different, like 260km stages and strade bianche in the rain every day. But it's become a different beast than that, which is regrettable but not a total writeoff.

But who knows in the Tour, everyone is so finely tuned for the big spectacle that even something like throwing in the Ventoux on the penultimate day doesn't amount to much (although it might've if the previous 3 weeks were harder)... but that's just it. Watching the Ventoux was exciting because something could have happened. There were lots of attacks, and they didn't get away. Schlecklet and Contador gained 1:20 on everyone and then when he couldn't drop Contador, Schlecklet dropped back to see if he could help his bro get on the podium, and Contador obliged because what did he care. It could've been more exciting, but when you get the best cyclists in the world in their peak form/'form', you see less of a difference, I think, regardless of the parcours. 1-0 indeed.

 

[movingtarget]

This was a good year for grand tours. But my favourite was the Giro. Rare to get all three in the one year with such small time gaps between first and second. The TDF was a big improvement, entertainmentwise on last year but the route was still so so. The Giro had a bit of everything which made it very unpredictable. The Vuelta was a pleasant surprise. Much better than I thought it would be. The only downsides were losing Anton when the race was getting really interesting and Menchov obviously fatigued by the TDF with a knee injury not helping him. Be very interested to see where the Giro is headed next year. I hope the World Champs tops off the year with some great racing.

 

[rhubroma]

Aside from what I think is the 'best' GT, I think this is a very salient analogy. It is like comparing apples and oranges. The Tour is much more about anticipation - like 'is this big favourite maybe going to go all out today?'

Agreed with the first part, less so with the second. I think the issue at stake here has somewhat less to do with "how the game is played" between the respective events (and in this you are right, LS provided a salient argument); and more to do with the physical make-up of the individual parcours and the general design of these tours.

The problem with the Tour is that these latter features have not kept up with the spirit of innovation that has taken hold of the sport really since the late 80's. As bikes have become more technologically designed and futuristic, as training methods (for once doping aside) have gotten more specialized and scientific, the race organizers at the Giro have tried to come up with more interesting terrain (more challenging and spectacular) that conforms with the modern image of the athletes and the sport. By contrast the Tour has remained much more conservative in these aspects, almost as if the course is designed with the sole goal of respecting the race's traditions: as if we are still climbing the Galibier for the first time a century ago or with the expectation that fans can still get excited about 60K TT's in central France after 10 days of sprint finishes.

Ironically what has led Zomengan to take up a progressive mentality with the Giro, is the beating the Italian GT has taken since the reorganization of the cycling calendar and the internationalization of premier events. The Tour was unperturbed by such developments because the whole sport revolves around France in July. But at least the Italians can take some solace, and credit, for being the better designers a la Ferrari and Armani

 

[Ferminal]

This year was the celebration of the 100th birthday of the Pyrenees in the Tour de France, so that's why there was little focus on the Alps. The 2011 Tour has Alpe d'Huez in it.

I think many people here disagree with the idea of killing one mountain range and pumping up the other. Such as 2009 (Alps/Ventoux) and 2010 (Pyrenees).

The Arcalis finish was farcical in 2009, and 2010 the Alps were "OK" purely because of the Madeleine split the field, which was only one day of real mountain racing.

I'd much prefer three big days of racing in both ranges, rather than deliberately making the course lame in order to hype up a Ventoux/Tourmalet climax. 2007 was favoured to the Pyrenees but the Alps weren't too bad (great solo wins from Gerdemann and Rasmussen). 2008 was just a terrible course all round, saved by Sastre.

I can only imagine they will try the same trick again in 2011 with Alpe d'Huez.

Of course this is overlooking all the political and commercial considerations which largely dictate starting and finishing towns/cities.

 

[The Hitch]

I think many people here disagree with the idea of killing one mountain range and pumping up the other. Such as 2009 (Alps/Ventoux) and 2010 (Pyrenees).

The Arcalis finish was farcical in 2009, and 2010 the Alps were "OK" purely because of the Madeleine split the field, which was only one day of real mountain racing.

I'd much prefer three big days of racing in both ranges, rather than deliberately making the course lame in order to hype up a Ventoux/Tourmalet climax. 2007 was favoured to the Pyrenees but the Alps weren't too bad (great solo wins from Gerdemann and Rasmussen). 2008 was just a terrible course all round, saved by Sastre.

I can only imagine they will try the same trick again in 2011 with Alpe d'Huez.

Of course this is overlooking all the political and commercial considerations which largely dictate starting and finishing towns/cities.

I think once, in 2002 or 03 or something, the focus was on the Pyranees but they still had an Alp d huez summit finish in the first half of the race. This is a better idea. I think this year, while the Pyranees were hyped up, the alps were better. not only did we have Madeline, but the day before the Morzine finish was good. And the day before, though debatable whether that was the alps, was good too with Chavanel desscending, footon getting 2nd, and hard enough for Cancellara to lose 5 minutes.

 

[Ferminal]

I think once, in 2002 or 03 or something, the focus was on the Pyranees but they still had an Alp d huez summit finish in the first half of the race. This is a better idea. I think this year, while the Pyranees were hyped up, the alps were better. not only did we have Madeline, but the day before the Morzine finish was good. And the day before, though debatable whether that was the alps, was good too with Chavanel desscending, footon getting 2nd, and hard enough for Cancellara to lose 5 minutes.

I'd have to agree, Radiocrash was also exciting

The Pyrenees completely backfired this year, but that's what happens when you run into Pau. Chaingate was the only saviour (although the overreactions sort of ruined the race for me).

 

[Señor_Contador]

the vuelta doesn't have great mountains like the giro and the tour. Except bola del mundo and angliru, there were a lot of similar stages in this year vuelta, many stages looked like a classic race like a fleche wallone for example.

No, that's not true. And I won't even get into specifics. The Tour does not need to include 20% average gradient climbs in order to be attractive. Heck, there're more people at an Alpe D'Huez finish than at all the Giro stages combined. And you see flags from all over the world, not just Italy.

As far as the Vuelta's mountain stages... let's just say that the course is purposely degraded (from a sports perspective) a bit so as to attract as many high caliber people as possible, knowing that it is near the end of the season and the best cyclist are pretty much "fried" at that point.

It's not that Spain does not have the mountain stages, it's that the race organizers do not want to include the big, big mountain stages (apart from the Angliru, the Pandera or the Sierra Nevada, et cetera). Now, just because they do not want to include Giro-type climbs does not mean they do not have them. But then again, this is something you could've found out yourself...

the tour de france has great mountains but the director is not using them: this year there was a stage with tourmalet,aspin aubisque and peyresourde far away from the arrive, what happened to alpe d'huez,galibier,izoard,! those mountains are much better like for example than morzine. In italy mountains are more spectacular , because they are harder!

No they're not. YOU think they're harder. There's a difference. Doing the Tourmalet stage at the TdF is twice as hard as doing the Stelvio or the Gavia at the Giro. The reason being it's in the middle of summer, temperatures are about 15-30º Celsius and the pace is a lot more intense because the best teams in the world are taking part with their best cyclists. Nothing has happened at the Gavia, for example, since 1988, and that is because Mother Nature intervened. The only thing worth talking about at the Giro is the Zoncolan or the Mortirolo. The rest of the mountains are nice and all, and may het a few "aaaahhhhs" and "oooohhhhhs" but that's all. Very little cycling value at all.

when menchov won zomegnan made a huge mistake because there werent a lot of mountains finish

Menchov won because he was the best at that year's Giro. It's just as simple as that.

 

[Ferminal]

-

So you would prefer to watch an ascent of the Aubisque 70km from the finish over Monte Grappa 25km from the finish? Do you think the former provides for better racing?

 

[Barrus]

Heck, there're more people at an Alpe D'Huez finish than at all the Giro stages combined.

I do not think so, especially if you look at this years Zoncolan stage, and do note that this is not during a holiday so that people from all over the world can travel to the race to attend it

 

[roundabout]

Stelvio is over an hour of climbing ending 600 meters higher than the Tourmalet. Please don't knock it.

 

[Señor_Contador]

Stelvio is over an hour of climbing ending 600 meters higher than the Tourmalet. Please don't knock it.

It doesn't matter! How can you guys be so ethnocentric!

The Tour has Cime de la Bonette, which is 2,802 meters, Col de l'Iseran is 2,770 meters high. The Vuelta has the Veleta, which is 3,392 meters. The Veleta is not used, like I said, because the Vuelta organizers don't want to make the parcourse too hard. The Tour actually uses the Bonette or the l'Iseran every 5 years or so. The Bonette is one of the few climbs in Europe that actually gets to Valverde.

My point is that neither the Tour nor the Vuelta have to include huge Giro-style mountain stages every year to be attractive. Each race is attractive in its own way. Now, just because they don't include them does not mean they don't have them. This is something you could've found out yourself.

I invite you to actually google something before you make incorrect observations/assumptions about it.

 

[The Hitch]

Heck, there're more people at an Alpe D'Huez finish than at all the Giro stages combined. And you see flags from all over the world, not just Italy. .

Well this year they had hundreds of thousands for the prologue in Amsterdam. They said it was a million for stage 1 around Holland. they had (allegedly) 1 million on the Zoncolan, more than the (alleged) 700 000 or so you get on the Alpe.

Dont believe me ? - Look at the final km I did not see anything like this on the TOurmalet.

Bare in mind the hundreds of thousand scattered accross the precceeding 10km of the climb. They didnt get 1 million on the Kronplatz but there were hundreds of thousands of fans there as well.

I would hazzard a guess that if you took away Paris - and the Giro has the honour to give us a proper tt for the finale, not a proccession, then you would have more crowds this year at the Giro than the Tour.

 

[Señor_Contador]

So you would prefer to watch an ascent of the Aubisque 70km from the finish over Monte Grappa 25km from the finish? Do you think the former provides for better racing?

1. It depends on where the race is, who're racing it and what the tactics are.

2. It depends on where the race is, who're racing it and what the tactics are.

 

[Ferminal]

1. It depends on where the race is, who're racing it and what the tactics are.

2. It depends on where the race is, who're racing it and what the tactics are.

You're right, the former could be good if the teams were not as strong, however that will never happen in the Tour due to the external factors already mentioned in this thread.

Tour teams would have to be significantly weaker from where they are now, to get the most racing value out of the "inferior" climbs.

In comparison, Giro teams are never as strong, and teams are nullified to a great extent once you hit the big gradients.

Personally I don't enjoy the controlled racing of the Tour all that much, the unpredictability of both the Giro and Vuelta are more appealing to me. If you enjoy the controlled procession more than unpredictable racing that's fair enough and we're all entitled to our opinions

 

[Climbing]

Heck, there're more people at an Alpe D'Huez finish than at all the Giro stages combined.

Yes, sure... maybe you should check how many people were on Monte Zoncolan and Mortirolo, and not just from Italy.

 

[Señor_Contador]

Well this year they had hundreds of thousands for the prologue in Amsterdam. They said it was a million for stage 1 around Holland. they had (allegedly) 1 million on the Zoncolan, more than the (alleged) 700 000 or so you get on the Alpe.

Dont believe me ? - Look at the final km I did not see anything like this on the TOurmalet.

Bare in mind the hundreds of thousand scattered accross the precceeding 10km of the climb. They didnt get 1 million on the Kronplatz but there were hundreds of thousands of fans there as well.

I would hazzard a guess that if you took away Paris - and the Giro has the honour to give us a proper tt for the finale, not a proccession, then you would have more crowds this year at the Giro than the Tour.

Look, I'm not going to argue that the Giro is also a popular event. We all know that. But the Tour de France is way ahead in the popularity department. The parcourse may not be as hard as the Giro or as easy as the Vuelta, but they don't have to be. They let the riders make the race hard.

 

[Señor_Contador]

Yes, sure... maybe you should check how many people were on Monte Zoncolan and Mortirolo, and not just from Italy.

Hey, if you want to believe the Giro is just as popular as the Tour, who am I do burst your bubble?

 

[Climbing]

Hey, if you want to believe the Giro is just as popular as the Tour, who am I do burst your bubble?

Can you quote the sentence where I said the Giro is more popular than the Tour?

 

[The Hitch]

Look, I'm not going to argue that the Giro is also a popular event. We all know that. But the Tour de France is way ahead in the popularity department. The parcourse may not be as hard as the Giro or as easy as the Vuelta, but they don't have to be. They let the riders make the race hard.

Hey, if you want to believe the Giro is just as popular as the Tour, who am I do burst your bubble?

Look the reason we are telling you how many people there were on the Zoncolan, Kronplatz, in Amsterdam, is because you made the following remark

Heck, there're more people at an Alpe D'Huez finish than at all the Giro stages combined. .

You said there are less than 700 000 people at the whole Giro, so we show you proof that there were several stages at the Giro with more fans than any tour stage.

As for the argument about which one is more popular, that is something completely different. But if you post wrong assumptions dont be surprised when they come into contact with hard evidence.

 

[Mellow Velo]

Consider this. The Tour is in July and benefits from the whole of the Northern Hemisphere entering the Summer vacation period.

The Giro's mountain stages take place at the end of May, beginning of June, yet there were still several hundred thousand more on the slopes of the Zoncolan, than the Alpe.

Within seven years of it first being climbed, The Mighty Z has already reached mythical status.

However is the Giro anywhere near as popular as the Tour?
Certainly the answer must be a resounding no.............with the masses.
With the cycling aficionado? That's another story.

In anycase, I don't think the Giro v Tour question is a popularity contest.
Were it to be so, consider this:
A poll carried out by the French, two years ago or there abouts, found that two-thirds of those who lined the stage route did so not to view the race............
..............but were there for the publicity caravan and it's free handouts.

 

[roundabout]

But the publicity caravan passes about 2 hours before the race itself. That's a lot of time to be gnawing on a cheese sample.