• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

How will the Tour respond to the Giro?

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Jul 23, 2009
2,891
1
0
Visit site
That stage profile sums up much of our frustration. I think the tour will answer the Giro by having lots of stages on flat multi-lane motorways bordered by... ooh look Graham, sunflowers!!
 
Ferminal said:
The Giro is a race, the Tour is a procession.

The Tour doesn't need to do anything to maintain a racing image/culture because the commercial chips are stacked well and truly in their corner.

For fans of season long racing though, 3 MTFs and 9 dead flat stages is getting boring rather quickly.

I couldn't agree with you more...
Unfortunately TDF became just a meaningless show and nothing more :(
 
Mar 13, 2009
571
0
0
Visit site
I also agree, without doubt the Giro is the best RACE of the year

Short, punchy stages, longer ones that encourage breakaways, but "could" be OK for the sprinters... if they time it right.

But the ASO with particularly with tour turns over more money than everyone else put together. And the rich Anglo markets (yes that includes me) lap it up. Real enthusiasts know what is going on, we know how good a race can be, but we are still happy because the wider public recognise our sport for once instead of something with teams and balls
 
May 3, 2010
289
0
0
www.ror-zone.com
Ferminal said:
tdf2010stage16profile_600.gif

This stage would of be x100000000 better if they ran it in reverse!
 
Jun 16, 2009
19,654
2
0
Visit site
I guess the tour is reluctant to put 5 mtf's a ttt and stages like the stagew 7 of the giro because if they do contador will win by 10 mins. Little ITT km's for the tour is going to make the gaps big.
 
auscyclefan94 said:
I guess the tour is reluctant to put 5 mtf's a ttt and stages like the stagew 7 of the giro because if they do contador will win by 10 mins. Little ITT km's for the tour is going to make the gaps big.

Maybe, but the TdF is meant to be a SPECTACLE. It's supposedly cycling's showcase. Last year's flat stages were mostly a predetermined procession (Another Cav bunch sprint win anyone?) and Contador destroyed everyone when the road started tilting.

Last year the only really memorable piece of riding that effected any of the classifications was Hushovd on the stage through the Sallanches Valley (can't remember which #) to shake up the Sprint Classification.

Surely something can be done to get a memorable duel or a crazy break that will make the GC interesting again....
 
Parhaps if the first week was something like this

Stage 1: Gent – Wevelgem
Stage 2: Wevelgem - La Flèche
Stage 3: La Flèche - Wallonne
Stage 4: Wallonne - Liège
Stage 5: Liège – Bastogne
Stage 6: Bastogne – Paris
Stage 7: Paris - Roubaix
 
tdf2010stage16profile_600.gif


It's needs to move the Pyrenees 40kms closer to Pau and Tarbes.
How many times have these two towns hosted a start/finish?
Each time, the finishes in these towns are non-GC effecting events

It's all about the money, as a host "bid" costs so, so much.

The Tour is it's own worst enemy. It doesn't care that its boring, just so long as it continues to grow economically.

The Giro is for cycling's tifosi.
The Tour is for corporate entertainment.
 
Roland Rat said:
1. Ban radios

Agree with this. And 42x16ss above who suggested that the TdF should be a spectacle.

It seems to me that the Tour is stuck trying to be a metaphor for the Parisian concept of France, which requires that all things romantic are doped with entirely false notions of sophistication.

By paying respect to Italian cycling, the Giro sought this year to reference its own lore rather than to build a touristic hubris from the shrinkwrapped flatpack of national identity. Zomegnan looks for the pure heart of cycling on the slopes of the Zoncolan while Prudhomme invests his event with the consummate aloofness of the Paris diktat.
 
swuzzlebubble said:
Parhaps if the first week was something like this

Stage 1: Gent – Wevelgem
Stage 2: Wevelgem - La Flèche
Stage 3: La Flèche - Wallonne
Stage 4: Wallonne - Liège
Stage 5: Liège – Bastogne
Stage 6: Bastogne – Paris
Stage 7: Paris - Roubaix

I'd like to see the last one! A Paris - Roubaix within the Tour (probably not going to happen since the race ends in Paris... would be odd for it to visit earlier...
But... having the last stage go from Roubaix to Paris... that would be interesing!)

Roland Rat said:
1. Ban radios
2. Ban Bruyneel
3. Ban Armstrong
4. Reduce teams to 7 riders.

Sorted.

I don't see what's wrong with having 9 riders at the start. After all; the race is three weeks, fewer riders and some teams (like Rabo...) wouldn't have any riders left!
 
Apr 8, 2010
1,257
0
0
Visit site
Cerberus said:
It's not that we didn't get to see because no one tried. The fact that no one tries is testimony to the fact that a GC contender can't break away on the flat. It's almost impossible. Sure a superior GC contender can control the race on a MTF, assuming he doesn't have a bad day, but any GC contender can control a flat race, whether he's superior or inferior, whether he has a good day or a bad. All he needs is a team.

Maybe I should've been clearer:
If the race had blown up on the climbs with a small group of favourites after the climbs, it could get very interesting and could be very difficult for an isolated Contador to control

It seems a lot of people here didn't watch this stage. Long run into pamplona and very interesting.


edit: oh, and btw: was the mtf in terminillo really that thrilling?
 
Magnus said:
edit: oh, and btw: was the mtf in terminillo really that thrilling?

No, just because a stage finishes on an HC or Cat 1 does not ensure thrilling/attacking/decisive racing. Just look at the Vuelta last year, or Andorra/Ventoux last year.

But having a flat drag after the final descent, does ensure defensive, subdued and boring racing.

I'd prefer one thousand Terminillo or Arcalis finishes, than one thousand 2009 TdF Stage 9s into Tarbes.
 
Jun 16, 2009
19,654
2
0
Visit site
Ferminal said:
No, just because a stage finishes on an HC or Cat 1 does not ensure thrilling/attacking/decisive racing. Just look at the Vuelta last year, or Andorra/Ventoux last year.

But having a flat drag after the final descent, does ensure defensive, subdued and boring racing.

I'd prefer one thousand Terminillo or Arcalis finishes, than one thousand 2009 TdF Stage 9s into Tarbes.

Compared to Andorra or Ventoux, Terminillo owned!
 
I think what the tour needs is more medium hard stages that resemble one day races. Right now there is too much of only flat sprinter stages or high mountain stages and not enough in between. Things like the first stage in 2008 that had a though finish that showed off the climbers but not tough enough to decide the race in any way. Some stages like that woukd be enough to keep the GC interesting in the first few weeks and it still keeps the possibility of having a though last week.
 
ingsve said:
I think what the tour needs is more medium hard stages that resemble one day races. Right now there is too much of only flat sprinter stages or high mountain stages and not enough in between. Things like the first stage in 2008 that had a though finish that showed off the climbers but not tough enough to decide the race in any way. Some stages like that woukd be enough to keep the GC interesting in the first few weeks and it still keeps the possibility of having a though last week.

Correct.

All it takes is a little bump in the last few KM to create an exciting and unpredictable result. Take the P-N stage this year where Sagan launched himself to victory from 3km.

I wouldn't have more than 4-6 dead flat stages, with the others lumpy enough for a break to succeed or produce a smaller finishing group, or stages with a significant ramp in the dieing km.
 
Mar 18, 2009
4,186
0
0
Visit site
swuzzlebubble said:
Parhaps if the first week was something like this

Stage 1: Gent – Wevelgem
Stage 2: Wevelgem - La Flèche
Stage 3: La Flèche - Wallonne
Stage 4: Wallonne - Liège
Stage 5: Liège – Bastogne
Stage 6: Bastogne – Paris
Stage 7: Paris - Roubaix

Stage 8: Amstel - Gold Race
Stage 9: Mountain TT in ENECO
Stage 10: Omloop - Nieuwsblad. Cobbled stage.
Stage 11: Criterium in the quaint tourist town of AMGEN

I'm joking here, but he's not that far off, since LBL doesn't actually end in Liége.
 
ingsve said:
I think what the tour needs is more medium hard stages that resemble one day races. Right now there is too much of only flat sprinter stages or high mountain stages and not enough in between. Things like the first stage in 2008 that had a though finish that showed off the climbers but not tough enough to decide the race in any way. Some stages like that woukd be enough to keep the GC interesting in the first few weeks and it still keeps the possibility of having a though last week.

Agreed. It's much too formulaic. You pretty much know that each year is going to be:

Prologue;
3/4 sprint stages
ITT or TTT
medium hilly stage
2/3 stages Alps or Pyreneans
4 stages flat/rolling
3 stages Pyreneans or Alps
2-3 stages flat/rolling
ITT
Champs Elysee.

Prudomme seems to think that interest is kept by changing regions, but as long as this formula is pretty much adhered to, it'll be the same. And riders know they have a week to ease themselves into the GC race. Mix it up a bit. Send stage 2 up the Ventoux or something. Have an ITT up the Col du Galibier and then down the other side as well.


Edit:

He should take a lesson from all great shows, concerts etc.

Start with a bang and keep ramping it up. Then it goes quiet in the middle, before ramping up again to the final crescendo.

Week 1 - Alps.
Week 2 - sprinters
Week 3 - Pyreneans.
 
May 15, 2010
48
0
0
Visit site
The tour doesn't need to change, it's much bigger than the Giro. It can't get away with some of the stuff the Giro does because of the commercial aspects of the Tour. The Giro is etching out it's niche as the toughest of the Grand Tours.The Tour is the Tour, it is the one that the big riders want to win because of the money and the prestige. The Giro is looking to be different from the Tour and suceeding.

Where the Tour can change for the better is that it can do more to make the Tour more exciting in the early stages. For example last year was pretty dull until the last week.

The year before that we had a cracking couple stages to start with in Brittany with Valverde winning stage 1 up that really steep hills.

The tour doesn't need gravel stages, it needs to look more carefully at it's routes to ensure that the stages can be won by different means, not just the sprinter teams dominating.
 
Mar 13, 2009
5,245
2
0
Visit site
BroDeal said:
When the Giro used gravel climbs a few years ago, the Tour director said he would look into doing the same. Nothing happened. The Tour has floated the idea of starting in Montreal. Nothing happened, and now the Giro will start in D.C. Prudhomme is claiming that the Giro's stage 7 was a response to this year's Tour stage with cobbles. That he would try to claim some credit for the Giro stage means he is aware of that the exciting racing in the Italian race is overshadowing the racing in his own race. How will the Tour respond?

In my opinion, the the Giro needs to pull off stunts like Amsterdam, Venice, D.C., Strade Bianche, etc. in order to stay in the international focus.

The Tour doesn't need that. Millions of people will watch it and will stand on the side of the road regardless of its parcours. It's just like a soccer World Cup, except every year.

So therefroe I don't think the Tour doesn't need to and probably won't "respond" to the show that the Giro is pulling off in any way, cause they simply don't need to.


The Tour is like the Super Bowl and the Giro is like College (American) Football. College Football is crazy and unpredictable, the Super Bowl is often boring, but still everyone watches it and it's the most prestigious game.
I think another reason why the Giro is less predictable (and therefore sometimes more exciting) is because the best riders simply don't participate or aren't in top form yet. Someone was complaining about Cavendish's many wins in the TdF earlier on, but I think the only reason it's different in the Giro is that Cavendish does not participate and is not in top form. Same for Sastre and Wiggins, both not in form. Same if Contador participated or Andy Schleck in top form