Giro vs le Tour

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Jul 25, 2010
372
0
0
You can find lots of stuff online about the Tour (in English) but you can't find much about the Giro/Vuelta. I have found more stuff out about the classics then about the Giro.

Also, as others have pointed out, the Giro is not really hyped or promoted. You can have all the brutal climbs in the world but unless you tell people about it no-ones gonna know.
 
Skip Madness said:
um... wtf?
allow me to explain. my friend thinks he is a great cycling fan because he watches the tour. ONLY THE TOUR!!!!! and he thinks he is a cycling fan!!!!! who knows everything about cycling even tho he doesn't even knew what paris roubaix was untill 2 weeks ago.

-- edited by mod--

hope i was clear enough
 
Jun 9, 2010
2,007
0
0
Parrulo said:
its all about the media but things can be changed.

just a few days ago i was trying to explain how much better the giro was to a friend of mine who is a hardcore "tour fan" ( aka a f*gg0t) and he was calling BS on what i was saying cus you know. . . "the tour is awesome" so i showed him the course for this year's giro and this year's tour and then showed him some videos from the stade bianche stage and zoncolan+ finestre in 2005 and he was like "oh sh*t i must watch this!!!!"

also a few of my friends that i got into cycling last year are already watching the classics and setting up for their first giro

so ya time changes everything
Amen mate!
 
Jun 22, 2009
10,645
2
0
I don't see the need to choose. A lot of posters here make out like it is one or the other (not referring to OP).
In reality I like the giro better too (last few years anyway), but I also appreciate the tour. And guess what, when July comes around, I'm also pretty excited.

But yeah the giro has had a much better course in recent years. Of course it is also ridden at a lower tempo which can lead to some better racing also.

The tour is good because of the circus that it is. I love seeing the sport I love get so much media attention, even if it isn't the most entertaining race. Plus you generally get the best fields here, because so many riders prioritize the tour (giro certainly has a stellar field this year tho).

The calendar was probably why the tour was the number one race is the first time.
No football etc.

Naturally i expect the Tour organizers to improve courses when they feel threatened by the giro.
 
dlwssonic said:
the tour will always be above the giro it is far above any race in cycling. people know pro cycling as the tour de france. Most only know that race and lance armstrong. I dont really know why but it holds much more prestige.
Let me guess. You're American, right? :rolleyes:

The Tour is for fans of a rider. The Giro is for fans of the sport.
 
Jul 2, 2009
2,394
0
0
Moose McKnuckles said:
The Tour is for fans of a rider. The Giro is for fans of the sport.

The Tour is the one race where all of the best riders in the world turn up - even Gilbert this year. The Giro, while a great race with innovative parcours, is challenged for by Italians and no.2 GC riders.

Anyone who says 'Giro is for the fans of the sport' and superior is just being arrogant and somewhat insecure*, just like music fans who claim that their local band are better than U2 or REM.

In English football, the second tier is usually more exciting than the Premiership (and I'll be at Cardiff v QPR on Saturday) - but everyone knows that the Premiership is what it's really all about.


*You'll ask why insecure. Well, usually people who say this aren't from traditional cycling countries and they see themselves as a little bit alternative and not following the crowd. So when others discover the Tour they have to go deeper and mock the newbies. But we were all newbies once. (The muso analogy works here too).
 
Jun 22, 2009
10,645
2
0
Mambo95 said:
The Tour is the one race where all of the best riders in the world turn up - even Gilbert this year. The Giro, while a great race with innovative parcours, is challenged for by Italians and no.2 GC riders.

Anyone who says 'Giro is for the fans of the sport' and superior is just being arrogant and somewhat insecure, just like music fans who claim that their local band are better than U2 or REM.

In English football, the second tier is usually more exciting than the Premiership (and I'll be at Cardiff v QPR on Saturday) - but everyone knows that the Premiership is what it's really all about.
Although I agree to an extent (about fan arrogance), the Giro has a pretty great line up this year. And the tempo is harder at the tour (like the pace is quicker in the epl).

I do get the feeling of arrogance around here tho. People act like they are real cyclists fans because they support the giro and bad mouth the tour. Totally unnecessary. I often get a vibe from people here like.."heh you like the tour... oh how little you know.. you're not a real cycling fan" etc etc.

Gotta love how much attention the giro gets here tho. I just dislike some of the attitude displayed compared to the tour, again unnecessary.
 
Mambo95 said:
The Tour is the one race where all of the best riders in the world turn up - even Gilbert this year. The Giro, while a great race with innovative parcours, is challenged for by Italians and no.2 GC riders.

Anyone who says 'Giro is for the fans of the sport' and superior is just being arrogant and somewhat insecure*, just like music fans who claim that their local band are better than U2 or REM.
Why would I be insecure? Insecure about what? You think I care if someone on a message board thinks better of me because I prefer the Giro? Really, I think this reflects more on your high regard of message board approval than anything else.

But I will grant you that I was too flippant in my comment regarding "fans of the sport." Fair enough, I was being too harsh on the Tour, though I do think that the parcours at the Giro is far beyond the usual bland fare at the Tour.
 
Jul 2, 2009
2,394
0
0
Moose McKnuckles said:
Why would I be insecure? Insecure about what? You think I care if someone on a message board thinks better of me because I prefer the Giro? Really, I think this reflects more on your high regard of message board approval than anything else.

But I will grant you that I was too flippant in my comment regarding "fans of the sport." Fair enough, I was being too harsh on the Tour, though I do think that the parcours at the Giro is far beyond the usual bland fare at the Tour.
The insecure bit - well I explained that.

As for the parcours. Yes, the Giro is probably harder, but switch the startlists and importance around and the Giro would be ridden like the Tour and the Tour would be ridden like the Giro. Also, while those 15% climbs may be 'epic' there's not exactly any attacking going on. It's just a grinding out process. Much of the excitement is caused by the lack of depth in the peloton.
 
Timmy-loves-Rabo said:
Although I agree to an extent (about fan arrogance), the Giro has a pretty great line up this year. And the tempo is harder at the tour (like the pace is quicker in the epl).

I do get the feeling of arrogance around here tho. People act like they are real cyclists fans because they support the giro and bad mouth the tour. Totally unnecessary. I often get a vibe from people here like.."heh you like the tour... oh how little you know.. you're not a real cycling fan" etc etc.

Gotta love how much attention the giro gets here tho. I just dislike some of the attitude displayed compared to the tour, again unnecessary.
I pretty much agree with this entire post.
 
May 27, 2010
5,376
0
0
Moose McKnuckles said:
Let me guess. You're American, right? :rolleyes:

The Tour is for fans of a rider. The Giro is for fans of the sport.
No way Im not american, im asian. This is from a non cycling nation, people here hardly know a thing about cycling other than the tdf and armstrong it is just more famous all the stars are there. You can't expect them to have such hard parcours because it is a gt where there are sprinters and classics man too. It cant be too one sided to the climbers. But yes tdf is sometimes boring but thats because its of a higher level. And I would have only known the tdf and armstrong if it wasnt for eurosport:D
 
Mambo95 said:
The insecure bit - well I explained that.

As for the parcours. Yes, the Giro is probably harder, but switch the startlists and importance around and the Giro would be ridden like the Tour and the Tour would be ridden like the Giro. Also, while those 15% climbs may be 'epic' there's not exactly any attacking going on. It's just a grinding out process. Much of the excitement is caused by the lack of depth in the peloton.
The depth of the Tour field would also be tested on "15%" gradients. Whatever the cause, it makes for a more exciting race.

If the Giro sat "#1" in terms of prestige etc then it would be ridden more conservatively (which would be a bad thing, so people who like the Giro shouldn't want it to be the tour).

I think the Tour is an easy target because the hype it receives is disproportionate to the entertainment. Or when they have stages like the one to Pau last year.
 
There are too major factors as to why the Tour is bigger, and they were set in the early 1900s.

Location-Cars were barely in existence, so you had to go nearby to ride in races. France is bordered by Belgium, Spain, Italy, Germany, Luxembourg, Switzerland, a few of these being true cycling mad countries, while Italy is mostly bordered by water. IT was easier to get to races in France.

Established Races- When the Tour had started up in 1903, you already had a few established races, including Paris-Roubaix (1896), Paris Tours (1896), Bourdeaux-Paris (1891), Paris-Brussels (1893), L-B-L in Belgium (1892), were already established and had started to become yearly ran in 1900s.

Italy oldest races are Giro Di Lombardia (1905), Milan San Remo (1907), Milan-Torino (1876, but only had 6 editions before it went back to back years in 1913) Giro del Piemonte (1913), Giro Del Veneto (1909), Giro Dell Emilia (1909), Giro della Romagna (1910),

I am sure there are other races im forgetting, but these are the ones came off the top of my head. International cyclist had already established something in The Paris area for a few years before the Italian races were created.
 
This is a terrific thread, but I agree that there is too much Giro VS. Tour type talk - as in that you can only like one or the other.

For me, I am a young cycling fan, and a Tour one at that. My interest started with Armstrong, and has continued to grow slowly through the years. In more recent years I am starting to branch out and at least notice that other races exist.

Television coverage is important. The TDF has had full free to air coverage in Australia, whereas the Giro has had virtually nothing (I think that about 6 stages of last year were given a 30 minute highlights package), same with the Vuelta. I am not that big on watching TV, so personally I don't have an interest in getting pay TV. But I still take note of what goes on at the Giro and Vuelta.

Yes, the parcours at the Giro has recently been better than the TDF (which seems to have been on the slide since '07, but the mountain stages in 2011 look really good), but generally the best GC riders still ride AND focus on the TDF. This is perhaps the main point of discussion here, and is why 2012 will be so important in the potential rise in prestige and popularity of the Giro. Because this year seems to be the first where the Giro's field can rival the Tour's. We know that right now, the best GT GC riders are AC and AS. Both focused on the Tour last 2 years. But if Contador rides the Giro this year then things might change. Plus there are many other top GC riders choosing to focus on the Giro this year, so the field may have greater depth than the Tour. Now if Giro could somehow entice AC and the Schlecks to their race in 2012 - in preference to the Tour, then things might change a little.

Riders can entice lesser fans like myself to watch something they wouldn't. I got the DVD of the '06 Vuelta simply because Vino won it! But it is hard to get my hands on a DVD of the '06 Giro with Basso, whereas any recent Tour is easy to buy.
 
Only cycling fans follow the Giro, while everybody follows the Tour - even people who know nothing about cycling. The Tour has the advantage that it's in summer holiday and there's no football in July. It's a trademark that the whole world knows.

You can't say the mountain stages in recent Tours didn't have a tough course, with arrivals on the Mont Ventoux and the Tourmalet. The problem was that the riders didn't attack much. This year the Tour has arrivals on Luzardiden, the Galibier and l'Alpe d'Huez, so I hope it will be more interesting than the latest decade.

The Giro is often more exciting to follow because it's an open battle between individuals. There usually isn't a team that can completely control the race. The decision is usually in the mountains, because there aren't so many kilometers of time trial.

Myself I wouldn't know what to do with my life in May and September if it wasn't for the Giro and the Vuelta.
 
i love them both of course but since 2007 il giro is way better.in 2007 le tour was terrible good but they destroyed it with the doping scandals right in the finale.anyway,april and may are my favourite cycling months.
 
I enjoy both. More hype about the Tour but the Giro has more uncertainty and a more interesting route and this year an amazing lineup. I think the Giro organizers have been more willing to make changes. The TDF had the cobbles last year and it provided a lot of drama but it still did not approach the overall excitement of the Giro until the final time trial when Contador had an off day by his standards. This year the TDF goes up Huez twice on a short stage which is different but still falls short of some of the brutal Giro stages.
 
Going back to the OP. The Tour has gained the greater prestige. Of that, there can be no question. It has benefited from having THE prime spot on the calander and has been more successfully marketed, to become the commercial pinnacle of the sport.
It is the only race that appeals to the worldwide media and public alike.
In short, it sells.

I don't agree with the premiership football analogy, in terms of we, the fans.
However, I think it serves to highlight the situation from a team/rider perspective.
Potential revenue and earning capacity draw the top team riders to Le Tour. It's as simple as that.
So this rational doesn't serve the argument that the Tour is "better", imo.

A better sporting comparison from the fan's point, I feel, would be that of horse racing and the Grand National. Pretty self-explanatory, that one.

Personally, I wouldn't want to see the Giro enter into a commercial p*ssing contest with Le Tour. Be careful what you wish for.
I would prefer to see the Giro keep it's identity and let it's racing do any converting.
 
Sep 2, 2010
1,853
0
0
It's just marketing really. If I were to compare it to football i'd say it's like that the premier league is always the most popular and well watched league but theew has been times when la liga or Serie A were actually better but unless you were a die hard football fan you wouldn't know it.
 
Jul 24, 2009
242
0
0
Parrulo said:
allow me to explain. my friend thinks he is a great cycling fan because he watches the tour. ONLY THE TOUR!!!!! and he thinks he is a cycling fan!!!!! who knows everything about cycling even tho he doesn't even knew what paris roubaix was untill 2 weeks ago.

he feats in a group of cycling fans that i like to call f*gg0ts.

hope i was clear enough
I understood the bit about someone only liking the Tour, the bit I didn't understand was why you describe him with a homophobic slur.
 
Jul 24, 2009
242
0
0
If you don't want me to take it as a homophobic slur, it would probably be wisest not to use a word which is routinely used as a homophobic slur when a million more appropriate terms would suffice.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY