• 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!

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

Page 3 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.

What is your opinion about how a GT winner should be?

  • It should be a complete, cunning and strong rider, with the ocasional upset (pantani, 98)

    Votes: 43 50.6%
  • Mountain goats should be the main favorites and 9 out of 10 guys in GC should weight less than 65 Kg

    Votes: 13 15.3%
  • It should be all about the rider that can put more watts over 100km. Tony and Fabian should have won

    Votes: 3 3.5%
  • Riders like Cav don't put their faces in the wind because they are shy. Shy riders should have a cha

    Votes: 8 9.4%
  • The Northern classics are a way of life. Riders like GVA, Sagan should have the conditions to bring

    Votes: 18 21.2%

  • Total voters
    85
So what percentage of GTs are actually won by "pure" climbers?

Going back to 2013 there's Quintana and Aru. Other GTs are won by Horner, Contador, Froome and Nibali. Nibali is still well able to win GTs in the current cycling environment yet he is also a classics rider (won Lombardia, does well in spring classics though lacks sprint to be a real favorite) and he beat everyone bar nearly none on the cobbles.

I don't see the big issue with a guy like Quintana winning GTs. One the one hand there's Nibali (probably the least "climber" of the GT contenders), on the other there's Quintana. That's not a bad spectrum. I don't really see anyone else featuring unless you massively mix things up (i.e. no MTFs).

By the way Quintana looks a lot more healthy and well-fed than Froome.

And remember GTs where the winner wins the TT and then defends in the mountains are really boring. Example: the 2016 TDF. Cycling happens now, not in some sort of should be imaginary world. The sport has evolved since its inception and it will probably change in future, too.
 
Why wouldn't Horner count as a pure climber?
GTs where the winner wins the TT and then defends in the mountains are really boring. Example: the 2016 TDF.
The 2016 TDF was super boring because the only rider who bothered trying was precisely the best time-trialist and the only one who didn't absolutely need to try anything. The ITTs are not there so that the time-trialist can light up the race, but so that the climbers are *forced* to light up the race.
 
Sep 19, 2013
345
0
0
Visit site
Re: Re:

gregrowlerson said:
pink_jersey said:
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??
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.

The thing with TT's they tend to favour non climbers more, especially long 50-60km efforts. As for the TTT I mean these really suck. Take Sky's Tour team a roster of power houses and exceptional climbers that would TT minutes into weaker teams. Basically money talks there. The only way to counter a teams dominance is by placing TT's strategically throughout the race. I'd personally have a shortish TT near the start, maybe just the prologue so that the mountain men have to claw back some deficits. The bigger TT needs to be placed later on in the race and I'm all for a 50km effort here as long as the mountains preceding this are well planned and brutal enough to to cause long range drama. One big HC climb after a rest day is not for me. That needs to be shelved along with the TTT. The 3rd week is right for the last TT and then the transfer.
 
Re: Re:

Campervan man said:
As for the TTT I mean these really suck. Take Sky's Tour team a roster of power houses and exceptional climbers that would TT minutes into weaker teams.
TTTs have their own strategic value: even Sky might be forced to switch a few climbers for strong rouleurs, which would have an impact on their mountains train.
 
Re:

hrotha said:
Why wouldn't Horner count as a pure climber?
GTs where the winner wins the TT and then defends in the mountains are really boring. Example: the 2016 TDF.
The 2016 TDF was super boring because the only rider who bothered trying was precisely the best time-trialist and the only one who didn't absolutely need to try anything. The ITTs are not there so that the time-trialist can light up the race, but so that the climbers are *forced* to light up the race.

Honer is his own class :)

Fair enough. That's what this time trial of 44km did though - if gaps in the mountains become increasingly smaller due to competitiveness, TTs should be adjusted accordingly.

Arguably the current Vuelta parcours isn't great (there should be less walls and MTFs and more medium mountain stages) but it's not realistic to expect multiple stage-long escapes with large time gaps between favorite no matter the stage design, not unless the team size and structure is drastically changed (this should be a higher priority than the length of TTs, by the way).
 
Re: Re:

Campervan man said:
gregrowlerson said:
pink_jersey said:
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??
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.

The thing with TT's they tend to favour non climbers more, especially long 50-60km efforts. As for the TTT I mean these really suck. Take Sky's Tour team a roster of power houses and exceptional climbers that would TT minutes into weaker teams. Basically money talks there. The only way to counter a teams dominance is by placing TT's strategically throughout the race. I'd personally have a shortish TT near the start, maybe just the prologue so that the mountain men have to claw back some deficits. The bigger TT needs to be placed later on in the race and I'm all for a 50km effort here as long as the mountains preceding this are well planned and brutal enough to to cause long range drama. One big HC climb after a rest day is not for me. That needs to be shelved along with the TTT. The 3rd week is right for the last TT and then the transfer.

No, it's not riduculous. Put a 55km long ITT and Froome will beat Quintana with more than 3 minutes...Where can Nairo recover this deficit? You can't go long in TdF. Not with Sky team. It's impossible. They are too much stronger than the rest. Imagine a team with Froome, Landa, Poels, Henao, Thomas and Kwiatkowski, Stannard, Rowe and Kiry/Puccio ..Where you can attack Froome? Flat?No. Hillier stages?No. Medium mountain stages?No. Long range attack in a multi mountain stage?No. Even if you're Quintana, Thomas, Henao, Poels and Landa will bring you back. The only solution is to beat Froome mano a mano on the last climb. That's why I want a GT with 1 Prologue/or TTT, one ITT with <40km and a very hilly one(like Embrun 2013).

And Froome didn't lost the Vuelta due to ITT kms. He lost because he didn't covered Contador move. And was all his fault. If he covered Contador attack, he would've won this easily. It's impossible to gap someone like him on Formigal, so Quintana would've need to put more than 1 minute on him on Mas de la Costa and Aitana...Impossible if you ask me.
 
Re:

Eclipse said:
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 >_>

Agree - Much rather have a team TT than an individual TT - Let's see how strong the teams are - May lead to different teams being selected.
 
Re:

yaco said:
Froome TT'ed in 2 at another level in the 2016 time trials - Have this happen for the next 3 years will continue to win, barring unforseen circumstances.

I am unsure this is how I'd like to see cycling.

+1 with the exception that I still want Froome to win.
Also, what can be more funny than to beat your biggest rival every year, even if the parcours doesn't suit you(I also need to say, that, the way TdF is ridden, even if there's no TT at all, Froome still is the biggest favourite. That crazy pace on the flat stages is killing Quintana. The wind stages in north and western France, as well)
 
Re:

PremierAndrew said:
Doesn't change the fact that courses these days are anti-Froome. It's understandable that organisers want a spectable so try to give other guys a chance but they had no problem giving Indurain 100km of TTing every time

A course that is anti-Froome would have 20kms or less of TT - You are making things up.
 
Re: Re:

yaco said:
A course that is anti-Froome would have 20kms or less of TT - You are making things up.
Or be nothing but 20 Paris-Roubaix stages. Come on, they still have to keep it somewhat acceptable in light of the sport's history and the past courses.

Although hey, even by your definition, the 2015 Tour qualifies.
 
Feb 21, 2016
104
0
0
Visit site
Re: Re:

pink_jersey said:
yaco said:
Froome TT'ed in 2 at another level in the 2016 time trials - Have this happen for the next 3 years will continue to win, barring unforseen circumstances.

I am unsure this is how I'd like to see cycling.

+1 with the exception that I still want Froome to win.
Also, what can be more funny than to beat your biggest rival every year, even if the parcours doesn't suit you(I also need to say, that, the way TdF is ridden, even if there's no TT at all, Froome still is the biggest favourite. That crazy pace on the flat stages is killing Quintana. The wind stages in north and western France, as well)

It's difficult, but as I said in another thread we can't go penalising riders just because they happen to be high class when it comes to climbing mountains and also against the clock. Surely right there that is a description of the great Tour riders of all time. I'm not at all comfortable with the thought that ASO/Prudhomme may try for a gimmicky route in 2017 (like 2015? Only 14km of ITT against 8 MTF) to increase the chances of riders like Quintana, Bardet. I guess we'll find out soon enough but anything other than a balanced route will be disappointing from a sporting viewpoint.

Saw this after this years Tour (might even have been on this forum).

Froome vs. Quintana (Tour de France)

2013: 2xITT, 65km. 4xMTF. Froome wins by 5:03 (GC St.20)
2015: 1xITT, 14km. 8xMTF. Froome wins by 1:12 (GC Final)
2016: 2xITT, 55km. 4xMTF. Froome wins by 4:21 (GC Final)
 
Sep 19, 2013
345
0
0
Visit site
Re: Re:

pink_jersey said:
Campervan man said:
gregrowlerson said:
pink_jersey said:
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??
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.

The thing with TT's they tend to favour non climbers more, especially long 50-60km efforts. As for the TTT I mean these really suck. Take Sky's Tour team a roster of power houses and exceptional climbers that would TT minutes into weaker teams. Basically money talks there. The only way to counter a teams dominance is by placing TT's strategically throughout the race. I'd personally have a shortish TT near the start, maybe just the prologue so that the mountain men have to claw back some deficits. The bigger TT needs to be placed later on in the race and I'm all for a 50km effort here as long as the mountains preceding this are well planned and brutal enough to to cause long range drama. One big HC climb after a rest day is not for me. That needs to be shelved along with the TTT. The 3rd week is right for the last TT and then the transfer.

No, it's not riduculous. Put a 55km long ITT and Froome will beat Quintana with more than 3 minutes...Where can Nairo recover this deficit? You can't go long in TdF. Not with Sky team. It's impossible. They are too much stronger than the rest. Imagine a team with Froome, Landa, Poels, Henao, Thomas and Kwiatkowski, Stannard, Rowe and Kiry/Puccio ..Where you can attack Froome? Flat?No. Hillier stages?No. Medium mountain stages?No. Long range attack in a multi mountain stage?No. Even if you're Quintana, Thomas, Henao, Poels and Landa will bring you back. The only solution is to beat Froome mano a mano on the last climb. That's why I want a GT with 1 Prologue/or TTT, one ITT with <40km and a very hilly one(like Embrun 2013).

And Froome didn't lost the Vuelta due to ITT kms. He lost because he didn't covered Contador move. And was all his fault. If he covered Contador attack, he would've won this easily. It's impossible to gap someone like him on Formigal, so Quintana would've need to put more than 1 minute on him on Mas de la Costa and Aitana...Impossible if you ask me.

If talking specifically Froome and Tour, then for me 3-4 days of mountains rest day, then 2 more transitional stages before 3-4 last mountain stages of which 2 are more than just final mountain stages. Then the 50km TT. 3rd weak fatigue and brutal stages can create chaos. Even Sky's super doms may crack. If and when Froome becomes isolated damage can be inflicted, no one is unbeatable.
 
Re: Re:

pablopaul said:
pink_jersey said:
yaco said:
Froome TT'ed in 2 at another level in the 2016 time trials - Have this happen for the next 3 years will continue to win, barring unforseen circumstances.

I am unsure this is how I'd like to see cycling.

+1 with the exception that I still want Froome to win.
Also, what can be more funny than to beat your biggest rival every year, even if the parcours doesn't suit you(I also need to say, that, the way TdF is ridden, even if there's no TT at all, Froome still is the biggest favourite. That crazy pace on the flat stages is killing Quintana. The wind stages in north and western France, as well)

It's difficult, but as I said in another thread we can't go penalising riders just because they happen to be high class when it comes to climbing mountains and also against the clock. Surely right there that is a description of the great Tour riders of all time. I'm not at all comfortable with the thought that ASO/Prudhomme may try for a gimmicky route in 2017 (like 2015? Only 14km of ITT against 8 MTF) to increase the chances of riders like Quintana, Bardet. I guess we'll find out soon enough but anything other than a balanced route will be disappointing from a sporting viewpoint.

Saw this after this years Tour (might even have been on this forum).

Froome vs. Quintana (Tour de France)

2013: 2xITT, 65km. 4xMTF. Froome wins by 5:03 (GC St.20)
2015: 1xITT, 14km. 8xMTF. Froome wins by 1:12 (GC Final)
2016: 2xITT, 55km. 4xMTF. Froome wins by 4:21 (GC Final)

That's because Quintana in the Tour has a phobia of attacking (and 2013 he was still young and green)
 
Re: Re:

pablopaul said:
Saw this after this years Tour (might even have been on this forum).

Froome vs. Quintana (Tour de France)

2013: 2xITT, 65km. 4xMTF. Froome wins by 5:03 (GC St.20)
2015: 1xITT, 14km. 8xMTF. Froome wins by 1:12 (GC Final)
2016: 2xITT, 55km. 4xMTF. Froome wins by 4:21 (GC Final)
This statistic completely misses the point though.

First of all it's nonsense that the tdf 2015 had so many mtf's. Actually there were 4 real ones (LPSM, Plateau de Beille, La Tousuirre, and AdH) + Pra Loup which is only a very easy mtf, and then 3 different 3rd category "mtf's", which were Cautarets, Mur de Huy and Mur de Bretagne. Counting these climbs as mtf's is simply nonsensical. Actually this years route had way more mountains. All 4 mtf's were real mtf's and besides that there were still 4 more real mountain stages with a descent finish. Maybe worth mentioning that in at least 3 of these cases gaining time was easier than on 4 of the "mtf's" in the tour de france 2015. Moreover one of the TT's in 2016 was a MTT which also suited climbers.

And generally the only reason why Quintana was so much closer to Froome in 2015 wasn't because of the lack of ITT's, but because Quintana was simply better than in the other years, since he also lost 1.5 minutes in the crosswinds 2015 which is the time he would usually lose in a flat ITT. Therefore the race back then was ridden as if Quintana would have lost time in a TT, although he simply lost the time somewhere else.
 
Feb 20, 2016
242
0
0
Visit site
The latest Gts at least Tour/Vuelta have been "anti-Froome". ASO even said so the last few years. Even though the addition of flat classics stages in the tour sorta gives the same neutralization as a TT should give.

No TTT, at least 100Km of TT and varied terrain all over for me - let's quit the double digits MTF or sprints as have on and off been "the solution".

I don't get the dislike TT gets from some fans - truest type of cycling - your legs against your brain. Certainly deserves a spot in a GT, greater than last few years anyhow.
 
Jul 4, 2015
658
0
0
Visit site
Tbh, I decide how good a gt route is by the winner of its nibali, froome or Alberto (although that will likely never happen again) I can safely assume the route was good and well balanced but if Quintana aru or one of those other pure climbers wins I can safely assume the route was awful and biased towards them. Imo those riders should be fighting for the king of the mountains jersey like the sprinters fight for the points jersey let the gt be for riders good in wind cobbles descents ascents flat tt ( basically froome and nibali). So to answer the question the vuelta is an awful route the tour and the giro are good
 
Re:

Ramon Koran said:
Tbh, I decide how good a gt route is by the winner of its nibali, froome or Alberto (although that will likely never happen again) I can safely assume the route was good and well balanced but if Quintana aru or one of those other pure climbers wins I can safely assume the route was awful and biased towards them. Imo those riders should be fighting for the king of the mountains jersey like the sprinters fight for the points jersey let the gt be for riders good in wind cobbles descents ascents flat tt ( basically froome and nibali). So to answer the question the vuelta is an awful route the tour and the giro are good

A route is only well balanced if Nibali, Froome or Contador wins? You'll be lost once they retire ;)

The points jersey isn't a sprinters jersey so no issues if non sprinters challenge for it, Quintana isn't a pure climber and more of a climbing stage racer, if he was a pure climber then he'd lose more time in TT's than he does.

As to the thread well the poll is awful but the conversation makes sense, it's obvious that we need more TT k's in the GT's and I absolutely love TT's but in general they don't play well as a spectacle for the TV audience, TV is a big deal to ASO so having a long flat TT will most likely not do well for viewing numbers but if a strong TT ride like Froome destroys it then the spectacle isn't there for the stages afterwards as the race is over. Same goes for RCS
 
Stryder has hit the nail on the head - TT's are boring spectacles for TV which is reflected by TV audience numbers - Personally I find TT's mind numbingly boring - I'd prefer Team TT's to ITT's. After all it's the team's that set up the winning riders.
 
Feb 20, 2016
242
0
0
Visit site
So you think the average GT stage is very fun spectacles for TV?

Which GTs are you watching, can I have a look too?

TTTs can have demolishing effects even if it's not trying to, have no place in a GT. It is an individual effort, helped by some team. (GTs I mean edit)
 

TRENDING THREADS