The issue with using PRC (which is one of the greatest things on the internet)'s guide to the comparison of the top 20 climbs of each race is that it only deals with those climbs and therefore the difficulty of other things in the race go out of the window - the APM Coefficient was designed more for cyclotourists, but as the Vuelta has historically used a comparatively limited number of climbs, many of the climbs they were riding were basically unknown to pro racing, so testing the validity of the coefficient against them wasn't really applicable. It has its limitations when dealing with short steep stuff, but as the Vuelta had relatively limited parcours until the 70s, and has then gone bonanza on its use of particular climbs since in order to help establish the mythos around them, the Spanish sites have become a hotbed of traceur activity with people discovering new climbs and designing around them, and providing a source of information about viability of climbs even to Unipublic.
Anyway, about the comparison of the Grand Tours, while the Vuelta is the runt of the GT litter, being significantly younger and only really establishing itself and stepping out of its "tailor the course to the star we want to import" rut with the development of the skiing industry and the later political transition in the 70s, each race has its own things that make it a unique challenge compared to the other two.
GIRO:
- often the longest stages (to this day often 250km+ stages)
- most volatile weather - biggest change of rain, snow and heavy wind affecting outcome
- least predictable racing owing to most varied form curves and most likely issues with allergies and illnesses among riders
- often strange and random GPM assignments leading to stages being underestimated
- often the most dangerous wildcard teams, although less so this year, but traditionally some strong Italian wildcard ProConti guys
- the possibility of mountains from start to finish with mountains all around the country
- availability of more of the hardest climbs of any of the three GTs
- possibility of sterrato stages
TOUR
- fewer intermediate stages, and more focused peaking with the mountains in two specific areas
- highest average pace, because of importance to so many sponsors, meaning frantic rushes to protect what you have
- most conservative and controlled racing because of the above, but as a result harder to make escapes
- most flat stages, but possibility for these to be highly exposed
- possibility of cobbled stages
- traditionally the most TT mileage of the three GTs, although less so in current climate
- relative predictability of mountains means most riders know the climbs very well, so making a decisive move is more challenging and while there may be fewer moves they can often mean more
- nobody isn't trying to hit their peak for the Tour so everybody is as close to top level as they can be
VUELTA
- the most searing heat of the GTs, often requiring riding through exposed terrain in some pretty uncomfortable temperatures
- the geography of Spain is such that there is a lot of false flat and uncategorized climbing, therefore many stages are potentially more tricky than they seem with unexpected ramps and repechos
- the fewest big long climbs, but a wide variety of nightmarish ramps of short to mid length
- the most MTFs, and the fewest real sprinters' stages, so though stages are often shorter and mid-climb stages limited in number, the GC men have to be attentive more often
- opportunities to test out form for the World Championships (dependent on parcours of course)
- late season location means a lot of riders are tired, or trying to salvage a poor year, so stages that might not be decisive in an earlier race can be
- often used as an opportunity for inexperienced or secondary GC men to have a free hand with the team leader having targeted the Tour, so can lead to value and interest as a scout report for the future too
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram