Isn't it criminal what they are doing with GTs?

[MacBAir]

Re: Re:

I don't think there should be a fixed answer. GTs being competitive is more important than GTs being balanced. With teams like Sky around, old GT routes with 100km of flat tt'ing wouldn't work anymore.

And what Libertine said, as always.

+1.

It would be a walk in the park.

Well, against guys like Rodriguez and Quintana? Sure. Against guys like Alberto, Pantani and others? No.
It would only be a walk in the park as long as fearless climbers whose only chance at winning was to take advantage of those specific opportunities were non existent.

 

[Escarabajo]

Take Pantani out. His was a magical performance. Pantani would take 3 minutes on Alpe D'Huez on Froome. LOL. I want to know who the others are?

 

[Escarabajo]

Bottom line is has to be balanced. IMHO.

 

[May0maniac]

Re: Re:

Pure climbers should be able to win GTs, but only if they earned it by taking advantage of the stages that suit them the same way time-trialists take advantage of the ITTs. Yes, 100 km of ITT should be more or less standard.

There is absolutely no strategy for a mountain goat with 100 TT especially if they are flattish. Please don't try to paint me a picture where there is a possibility because you will only find flawed ones, like Pantani. In the year when Cunego won there was no real strong TT in that Giro with decent climbing skills.

Honchar?

Thatt's why I put decent climbing skills.
Honchar would be no match for Quintana because TBH he would lose too much time in the mountains.

Yeah, but 2004 Honchar was a pretty decent climber, it's not like he lost a huge amount of time on the climbs, the problem was the strength of the Saeco team and Cunego's long range attack on the Falzes stage.
I have to agree, Quintana would probably wreck him in the mountains.

 

[Escarabajo]

Fair enough!

 

[Brullnux]

Re:

Take Pantani out. His was a magical performance. Pantani would take 3 minutes on Alpe D'Huez on Froome. LOL. I want to know who the others are?

Bahamontes, Gaul (extremely good TTer but was many minutes behind when the mountains began, so good for this conversation), Chicken 2007 (didn't win but was doing everything right, Contador also I guess from the same year), Pedro Delgado to name some.

 

[IndianCyclist]

TT = 90 k
1 Prologue/short ITT 5 -20k or 1 TTT - 20 k
1 Long ITT - 60 k
1 MTT - 10 k
Mountains - 6 MTT, 1 Medium Stage
2 Leg breakers - > 20% slope
3 big mountain stages
Hills - 3 LBL type stages
Flats -
1 Cobble stage
Flats -
2 uphill sprints
3 pure sprints
2 Windy stages

 

[jens_attacks]

of course it's criminal. any grand tour should have around 100 km of ITT. it's horrible.

 

[PremierAndrew]

Re:

of course it's criminal. any grand tour should have around 100 km of ITT. it's horrible.

You can't blame the race organisers though, they want an interesting GC battle, and with Froome around, that can only happen either with minimal ITT or minimal climbing to the point that Cancellara would have a shot at winning

But the Giro organisers should be putting in 100km of TTing considering Froome doesn't seem interested

 

[silvergrenade]

Re: Re:

of course it's criminal. any grand tour should have around 100 km of ITT. it's horrible.

You can't blame the race organisers though, they want an interesting GC battle, and with Froome around, that can only happen either with minimal ITT or minimal climbing to the point that Cancellara would have a shot at winning

But the Giro organisers should be putting in 100km of TTing considering Froome doesn't seem interested

Yeah, the best 2 GT riders just arent doing the Giro.

 

[hrotha]

Re: Re:

Pure climbers should be able to win GTs, but only if they earned it by taking advantage of the stages that suit them the same way time-trialists take advantage of the ITTs. Yes, 100 km of ITT should be more or less standard.

There is absolutely no strategy for a mountain goat with 100 TT especially if they are flattish. Please don't try to paint me a picture where there is a possibility because you will only find flawed ones, like Pantani. In the year when Cunego won there was no real strong TT in that Giro with decent climbing skills.

Well, a pure climber in the strict sense and notwithstanding the poor wording in my original post is a one-trick pony and shouldn't get any more of a chance at winning a GT than a pure time-trialist like Bert Grabsch. Now, someone like Contador who's more of a climber than a time-trialist but can still time trial pretty well would absolutely be in contention.

Take a look at recent GTs (say, the last 10-15 years), see how many were won by pure climbers and compare that to any other previous period in the history of the sport.

 

[Red Rick]

Didn't Quintana like top 15 the flat, windy TT? He's a better TT'er than anybody his posture has any right to be.

 

[pink_jersey]

Yeah...Put 100km of TT and Froome will win the triple every year. When a rider like him is so much better than the rest, and has such a strong team, at least the parcours should favour his rivals.

 

[carton]

Re:

No.

QFT.

 

[Eclipse]

I'd like a team size reduction to see if it makes a real difference to the way things are raced.

As for how a GT should be formatted, they should continue to flex. It's one of the unique charms of cycling that the same race can have a different route and flavour every season while still retaining the same characteristics that define it.

Lets be honest though, almost nobody bar spectators who are there in person want to watch more time trials >_>

 

[avanti]

Going back a few decades all-round cyclists could win GTs and one-day races - Merckx, Bobet, Anquetil, LeMond, Hinault

But currently riders make winning a GT their primary goal for the year and tend to participate in races that support that goal.

 

[avanti]

Going back a few decades all-round cyclists could win GTs and one-day races - Merckx, Bobet, Anquetil, LeMond, Hinault

But currently it seems like riders make winning a GT their primary goal for the year, and tend to participate in races that support that goal.

 

[LaFlorecita]

Re:

of course it's criminal. any grand tour should have around 100 km of ITT. it's horrible.

Jens that is cruel, Froome would win all 3 GT's every year

 

[Cookster15]

Re:

Most people are bored with riders like Wiggo or Martin. People tend to see explosive climbers who are winning GT's by attacking in the mountains. Instead of riders who dominating a TT and defend their lead in the remaining mountain stages.

Froome is the ultimate cyclist: a great climber and TT'er, and good in echelon and cobble stages. But riders who can climb and TT with the absolute best are rare. So spectators and eventually organizers always give the edge to pure climbers.

I agree. Having started following this sport in the Indurain years I rate higher riders who are equally strong climbing and in TT - a Grand Tour winner should be about the best overall rider - climbing, descending, TT, and on the flats. With specialisation it is increasingly rare to have a rider dominate Grand Tours and also win one day races. Those races are now done as part of the preparation. Of course organisers will try to give the edge to pure climbers as climbing stages are far less predictable and therefore more exciting than any race against the clock.

 

[Cookster15]

Re:

Going back a few decades all-round cyclists could win GTs and one-day races - Merckx, Bobet, Anquetil, LeMond, Hinault

But currently it seems like riders make winning a GT their primary goal for the year, and tend to participate in races that support that goal.

Yep, plus those that did win GTs in recent years won week long stage races as part of their preparation like Romandie, Tirreno-Adriatico, or Giro del Trentino - not one-day races.

 

[42x16ss]

Re: Re:

Pure climbers should be able to win GTs, but only if they earned it by taking advantage of the stages that suit them the same way time-trialists take advantage of the ITTs. Yes, 100 km of ITT should be more or less standard.

There is absolutely no strategy for a mountain goat with 100 TT especially if they are flattish. Please don't try to paint me a picture where there is a possibility because you will only find flawed ones, like Pantani. In the year when Cunego won there was no real strong TT in that Giro with decent climbing skills.

2007 TDF???

 

[MacBAir]

Re: Re:

Pure climbers should be able to win GTs, but only if they earned it by taking advantage of the stages that suit them the same way time-trialists take advantage of the ITTs. Yes, 100 km of ITT should be more or less standard.

There is absolutely no strategy for a mountain goat with 100 TT especially if they are flattish. Please don't try to paint me a picture where there is a possibility because you will only find flawed ones, like Pantani. In the year when Cunego won there was no real strong TT in that Giro with decent climbing skills.

2007 TDF???

Yeah, don't lose your time trying to make him see the light.

He's here only to defend the 50 kg wheelsuckers like Quintana, Rodriguez and so on.

Guys that rode for the kill, like Rasmussen, Pantani, Delgado, etc etc dont exist.

Anyway, a puny climber that is useless on any terrain besides mountains and is a wheelsucker, should win as many tours as Cav.

 

[gregrowlerson]

Re:

Yeah...Put 100km of TT and Froome will win the triple every year. When a rider like him is so much better than the rest, and has such a strong team, at least the parcours should favour his rivals.

This is ridiculous. Why go against the sound traditions of a sport just because an individual is too good for his rivals??

I know that they didn't win it all this season, but should the NBA remove the three-point line entirely because the Golden State Warriors are awesome at making them?

Yeah I know that even the three-point line hasn't been in existence forever, but after thirty-five years or so it's fair to say that it has it's place, and has encouraged balance (which is what we all want) between inside scoring and outside (the outside scoring is probably dominating too much now, so they could also look at moving the line out a fraction).

Back on topic. Froome probably should have won this Vuelta. Not because he was in any way unlucky on the ambush stage (that's racing), but because the amount of ITT was/is criminal. If that time trial is 55kms then he gains over three minutes on Quintana and you have an even closer race, and 55kms is still pretty criminal. 55kms should be amount as low as you go in terms of ITT kms in a GT. There should be some variation of course, but an average of about 90 kms of ITT is about right, with an occasional TTT thrown in. You could have 130 kms of ITT in some editions....Tony Martin is still not going to win the yellow jersey. Might give Tom Dumoulin a chance though, but still make the high mountains a little more decisive than the 2012 Tour.

Especially at the Tour, the yellow jersey has "traditionally" been about the rider who is the best combination of climber AND time trialler. But it hasn't always been about who has the strongest team. So don't remove ITT kms because of Froome, but make it harder for his team to control the race in the mountains by making seven or six man teams.

Andy probably would have raced the Pyrenees better in 2011 if there had been another long ITT.

If it really is true that television ratings are significantly lower for TT's, then fair enough that they don't have four of them (like in the '08 Giro, and Contador would not have won without all of those most likely), but they do still have them, so it you are going to have one, make it long!! The television coverage is not going to be any longer for a 60 km ITT than it is for a 40 km one, so there really is no excuse for having so little TT kms in a GT.

 

[Durden93]

It's fairly difficult for me to see a classics specialist winning a GT. Even top 20 GC riders concede 3-4 minutes on a hard climb. The next thing is, if you're an elite classics specialist, what's the point? If you're Sagan, Kristoff or Degenkolb (didn't include Boonen and Cancellara since this is about future GTs) what's the incentive to lose a few kilos for a potential GT podium when you're probably going to finish in the top 10 of MSR, Roubaix and RVV and have a good chance of winning one? Also, consider this: let's say we design a GT where the top 10 all-rounders/climbers and the top ten hardmen have an equal chance of winning. Would you rather A) Have a one in 20 chance of victory or B) Target the 3-4 breakaway stages knowing your competition will be tired? Easy choice for me.

 

[GenericBoonenFan]

Re: Re:

of course it's criminal. any grand tour should have around 100 km of ITT. it's horrible.

Jens that is cruel, Froome would win all 3 GT's every year

Dumoulin says hi