Hey, let's tinker with the Vuelta.

[IndianCyclist]

Gaps between the GTs to be 2 months with November and December also to be considered for cycling events but no reduction of days

 

[BigMac]

Re:

No doubt it needs shortening for cyclings sake. Two major 3 week races Is enough. I think every year there should be two groups of riders that race one giro say nibali Quintana aru and then Contador froome valverde do tour. Then at two week vuelta have match inbetween giro and vuelta with say nibali Quintana aru one team valverde froome Contador another. It could be champions of champions if you want bit like NBA. Cycling needs this to improve sponsorship and money

No, no, no. No.

Just, no.

Argh!

 

[KyoGrey]

Cero respect for La Vuelta and Spain in general, but we are pretty accostumed to it.

But worst of all, cero respect to cycling history itself, which includes 3 GT's, and great stories of cyclists of all nationalities in La Vuelta.

We know that La Vuelta doesn't have the super mountains of the Giro or the money and media coverage of the Tour, but hey! it is a great race in its own way with it's own history and tradition.
Ok, we've had some bad parcours this past decade, but incredibly enough we have managed to often see the best GT of the season in the Vuelta. Great hours of cycling in front of the TV or out cheering the cyclists.

So why? Why destroy it all?

 

[metaCYCLE]

To keep it brief: "Hey, let's not"

 

[Scarponi]

I have always wanted to see a 4 week Grand Tour for some reason

 

[Scarponi]

Plus there are hundreds of "pro" riders who would take a Veulta stage win on their palmares. Its raced hard, the riders are more even due to the position of the caleder

 

[SafeBet]

Re:

I have always wanted to see a 4 week Grand Tour for some reason

Steven Kruijswijk likes this post.

 

[vedrafjord]

Re:

But it's not a post-Tour crit, it's a prestigious and historic race in its own right, and the authorities only want to carve it up because it's less powerful than the Tour or Giro and they can make more space in the calendar for "expansion" races providing crappy, meaningless races in countries with no interest in the sport, in front of no fans, or artificial circuit races where Cookson can sell the sport down the river at the altar of €6 for a warm bottle of weak beer and festival toilets and sell tickets and popcorn.

Yes! The Vuelta is often the most entertaining GT and has gone down to the wire so many times over the last few years, but Cookson doesn't care about entertainment, he cares about money, and Spain's economy is a basket case compared to the average friendly oil-rich dictatorship.

 

[CheckMyPecs]

Re: Re:

Yes! The Vuelta is often the most entertaining GT and has gone down to the wire so many times over the last few years, but Cookson doesn't care about entertainment, he cares about money, and Spain's economy is a basket case compared to the average friendly oil-rich dictatorship.

Coming soon, the UCI Grand Prix de Chechnya.

 

[DBotero]

There is nothing wrong with La Vuelta.Cookson discredits himself with such bizarre ideas.

 

[Echoes]

Reminder to all GT maniacs out there.


In 1989

Paris-Brussels was a genuine classics of 300km and now it's been reduced to 200km and renamed Brussels Cycling Classics.

The Walloon Arrow was a genuine classics, equal to Liège-Bastogne-Liège of 248km and now it's been cut to 200km

The Omloop was 244km and is now cut to 200km

Same goes for the Tre Valli Varesine, the Tour of Emily, the GPE3, the GP de Wallonie (at least in 1988), for the Giro di Romagna, for Dwars door België (which has shamefully been renamed Dwars door Vlaanderen), etc etc etc.

So stop whining, right?

Until these races get their rightful distance back, I'd consider a GT ought never to be longer than 15 days and with stages that should never exceed 200k. Okay?

The UCI waged a war against the classics and the kermesses and you, GT maniacs, are still whining when we argue that your beloved races should be shortened. The UCI obtained what you wanted: a cycling season revolving around the GT's.

LONG LIVE THE CLASSICS !!!

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Or could it be that we saw what happened to the Classics and fear the same thing happening to the stage races too? Remember the "six stages maximum" idea?

 

[burning]

Reminder to all GT maniacs out there.


In 1989

Paris-Brussels was a genuine classics of 300km and now it's been reduced to 200km and renamed Brussels Cycling Classics.

The Walloon Arrow was a genuine classics, equal to Liège-Bastogne-Liège of 248km and now it's been cut to 200km

The Omloop was 244km and is now cut to 200km

Same goes for the Tre Valli Varesine, the Tour of Emily, the GPE3, the GP de Wallonie (at least in 1988), for the Giro di Romagna, for Dwars door België (which has shamefully been renamed Dwars door Vlaanderen), etc etc etc.

So stop whining, right?

Until these races get their rightful distance back, I'd consider a GT ought never to be longer than 15 days and with stages that should never exceed 200k. Okay?

The UCI waged a war against the classics and the kermesses and you, GT maniacs, are still whining when we argue that your beloved races should be shortened. The UCI obtained what you wanted: a cycling season revolving around the GT's.

LONG LIVE THE CLASSICS !!!

Let's kill the cycling alltogether because I hate GT's !!!

 

[metaCYCLE]

Yea. I don't get why the neutering of P-B or LBL must translate into also screwing over the GTs. Especially when there's only one targeted - maybe not by chance - the most entertaining in the last few editions.

 

[Poursuivant]

Re:

No doubt it needs shortening for cyclings sake. Two major 3 week races Is enough. I think every year there should be two groups of riders that race one giro say nibali Quintana aru and then Contador froome valverde do tour. Then at two week vuelta have match inbetween giro and vuelta with say nibali Quintana aru one team valverde froome Contador another. It could be champions of champions if you want bit like NBA. Cycling needs this to improve sponsorship and money

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3txRySd2g4E

 

[Velolover2]

Re: Re:

I have always wanted to see a 4 week Grand Tour for some reason

Steven Kruijswijk likes this post.

And Hesjedal.

 

[Angliru]

Re:

No doubt it needs shortening for cyclings sake. Two major 3 week races Is enough. I think every year there should be two groups of riders that race one giro say nibali Quintana aru and then Contador froome valverde do tour. Then at two week vuelta have match inbetween giro and vuelta with say nibali Quintana aru one team valverde froome Contador another. It could be champions of champions if you want bit like NBA. Cycling needs this to improve sponsorship and money

Just no to all of the above.

 

[MortiroloForever]

As a spanish, it would be very sad to see La Vuelta riding only 2 weeks. Cookson forgets the key that makes different 3 week races: the endurance. Reducing La Vuelta one week would be the beginning of the end for the Spanish most popular cycling competition. To be honest I don't know what could be the consequences in a country where football takes up the whole interest of the people in terms of sports.

The media don't show a lot of enthusiasm on cycling in general. Obviously Le Tour de France is the most followed race, followed by La Vuelta. Behind them, the Giro and the "classics" when a Spanish wins or has a remarkable performance.

 

[42x16ss]

Reminder to all GT maniacs out there.


In 1989

Paris-Brussels was a genuine classics of 300km and now it's been reduced to 200km and renamed Brussels Cycling Classics.

The Walloon Arrow was a genuine classics, equal to Liège-Bastogne-Liège of 248km and now it's been cut to 200km

The Omloop was 244km and is now cut to 200km

Same goes for the Tre Valli Varesine, the Tour of Emily, the GPE3, the GP de Wallonie (at least in 1988), for the Giro di Romagna, for Dwars door België (which has shamefully been renamed Dwars door Vlaanderen), etc etc etc.

So stop whining, right?

Until these races get their rightful distance back, I'd consider a GT ought never to be longer than 15 days and with stages that should never exceed 200k. Okay?

The UCI waged a war against the classics and the kermesses and you, GT maniacs, are still whining when we argue that your beloved races should be shortened. The UCI obtained what you wanted: a cycling season revolving around the GT's.

LONG LIVE THE CLASSICS !!!

Or, you can cut the BS and stand up against the UCI messing with any of the most prestigious races for this reason - regardless of whether they're Classics, GTs or stage races such as Catalunya and Paris-Nice. What you stated in your post is/was disappointing and shouldn't be happening regardless of the race. Rather than showing apathy because the classics aren't being targeted this time, why not stand up for the sport as a whole?

You know, like a true cycling fan.

 

[Echoes]

The problem is GT's are unhealthy in anyone's books. Classics are more human. So classics need to be saved & restored. Ghent-Wevelgem now has its rightful distance back, so why not the other races.

GT's are remnants of an era when organisers were bombastic and did not care about riders' health. Bordeaux-Paris and Paris-Brest-Paris were examples of inhuman classics, of another era. But these are now long gone as pro races (though Paris-Brest still exists as a cyclo & audax race). If it weren't for the huge money that they've generated due to sponsor exposure, GT's would have had the same fate as these two legends.

By the way, until 1973 the Tour of Spain lasted for just 18 days and that does not shock anyone. And of course nobody back then would even consider it a grand tour back then. It was just a prep race for the Tour of Italy.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

So? Just because it wasn't sacrosanct then doesn't mean it shouldn't be sacrosanct now. We know the Vuelta is the soft target among the GTs, but just because some races got mutilated in the past doesn't mean we should mutilate others to compensate. A lot of those Classics were mutilated in the era before the Internet and so outrage didn't have the chance to build up to the same extent.

An eye for an eye will make the world go blind.

 

[Kwibus]

Reminder to all GT maniacs out there.


In 1989

Paris-Brussels was a genuine classics of 300km and now it's been reduced to 200km and renamed Brussels Cycling Classics.

The Walloon Arrow was a genuine classics, equal to Liège-Bastogne-Liège of 248km and now it's been cut to 200km

The Omloop was 244km and is now cut to 200km

Same goes for the Tre Valli Varesine, the Tour of Emily, the GPE3, the GP de Wallonie (at least in 1988), for the Giro di Romagna, for Dwars door België (which has shamefully been renamed Dwars door Vlaanderen), etc etc etc.

So stop whining, right?

Until these races get their rightful distance back, I'd consider a GT ought never to be longer than 15 days and with stages that should never exceed 200k. Okay?

The UCI waged a war against the classics and the kermesses and you, GT maniacs, are still whining when we argue that your beloved races should be shortened. The UCI obtained what you wanted: a cycling season revolving around the GT's.

LONG LIVE THE CLASSICS !!!

While I actually agree with you that it's a disgrace how the classics were killed and how they actually keep on lowering the kms on the classics to my own disgust.
Unfortunately you end up with a rant how GT junkies must suffer the same and all GT's must be brought back to 15 days and classics rule your inferior GT's.....
I prefer keep the GT's the way they are and return the classics to their old glory.

I despise the way they keep lowering the kms as that should make the racing more interesting. What a load of crap. I don't mind a short stage in a stage race, aslong as there are also long stages.

 

[Tonton]

As I stated before, the Vuelta is a GT, GTs are 3-weeks long: period. And I elaborate:

1. The Vuelta has come a long way. For those of you who weren't born or into cycling then, believe me: since moving to September in the mid-90s, the Vuelta has grown tremendously. The same (in reverse calendar-wise) turned the Aussie Open in tennis from a semi-slam to a real Grand Slam tournament. One of the (few) successes as it relates to reforming the race calendar over the years. Ask LS and other knowledgeable members here, and you'll get 15 changes that would make sense, instead of trying to fix something that is working.

2. Over the past 20 years or so, Spain has been the dominant country of cycling. The fan base is huge. Why mess with the greatest event held in Spain, for Pete's sake?

3. If we look carefully at the facts, Ramon's model already exists: the top-riders focus their season on the Giro or the TdF. OR, on the feasible combination Giro-Vuelta, which can earn a champion two GTs in one year. For record-chasers, that's a rather attractive proposition. The Giro+Vuelta>TdF formula is an excellent way to counter-balance the TdF. Not so long ago, Le Tour was everything. Weaken the Vuelta's prestige, and you leave the top-dogs with only Giro and Tour as the major objective of the season. What do you think they will choose? As much as the Vuelta, the Giro would suffer...

4. Yes, the Vuelta may be used by TdF dropouts or under-performers as a last chance to save their season. Nothing wrong with that. That's how we get a better field and with desperation to save a season, riders tend to be more aggressive, particularly when few specifically prepare for it, when teams don't have their best line-up, therefore when the playing field is (somewhat) level.

I could go on and on...you see my points...

 

[Kwibus]

I love the Vuelta of last years! Woohoo

Course sometimes need more imagination, but gc excitement has been great.

 

[hrotha]

By the way, until 1973 the Tour of Spain lasted for just 18 days and that does not shock anyone.

You're aware that the Vuelta has only run continuously since 1955, and that those 18 years of history aren't much compared to the last 42, right?

And that previous incarnations of the Vuelta before it was restarted in 1955 were very much a three-week race, right?