Rate the 2012 Tour route

[Old School]

It's an 8.

The great news is that the pure climbers aren't going to have the victory handed to them. Or in Andy 's case, second place handed to them.

The pacing of the definitive stages is much better than in recent years as is the amount of time-trialling. maybe we'll even see attacks from further out than the last few Kms of a climb on this one.

It's a clear improvement on recent Tours so gets an 8.

- Andy second!??!? You don't say. Bwahahaha, that was a good one.

 

[gregrowlerson]

It is certainly different from the previous few. It's good that there's a TT before the Alps. I'd say that stages 7 and 8 won't have any real effect on GC, especially as they're followed by a TT (apart from attrition among some of the minor contenders and some stage hunters gaining some time and a shot at the yellow jersey). The Grand Columbier stage looks interesting. There's not a lot of flat in the last 50km and as a hard medium mountain stage might cause some surprises. I like short high mountain stages with hardly any flat (the stage to Alpe d'Huez this year was classic, one of my all time favourites was the Millar/Delgado/Mottet breakaway stage to Luz Ardiden in '89, 140km, 4 cols and Bob Millar attacking almost from the gun). Hence, Stage 11 gets the thumbs up. The Schlecks will be a few minutes down after the TT, so they'll know they have to attack here. Stage 14 could possibly be very interesting. The final climb is VERY steep by TdF standards, but as Libertine says, the distance to the end might quench the instinct to attack. Stage 16 is full of classic climbs with a saw tooth second half, finishing on a descent . Since stage 17 is the final mountain stage, it seems a little lacking on difficulty at the beginning, but there is definitely a nice one-two punch at the end and fatigue will probably lead to the peloton breaking up very early on the Port de Bailes. Overall, a nice balance, with some classic climbs and quite a few new ones (at least to the tour), which might cause some surprises. If there are a few bumps close to the finish in week 1 (e.g. Stages 1 and 4 look to be good candidates), then this could be a very good parcours

I second this post.

 

[gregrowlerson]

To me, it appears to be a total cack of a course, unless you are a total, individual rider fanboy. (ITTers, dodgy climbers, getting a bit long in the tooth etc etc)

Kloden!!!

But at least there are TT's, some new climbs (including a 9.5% grade one to finish stage 7; since when did the TDF have that, apart from the much shorter Mende?), and it's not so backended, and did I mention TT's?

9/10

I would add in Col de Romme/Columbierre stage in the Alps, going alongside Le Touisseirre and turfing out the useless Alps stage.

And another question. Is stage 14 into Foix actually in the Pyrenees? If so, what is the deal with stage 15 being totally flat?

 

[gregrowlerson]

Just looked at the other thread with details of all the climbs. Stage 7 is only 8.5% not 9.5% :-(

Stage 8 looks good (short 9.2% final climb), but final climb of stage 17 isn't much. And even the super steep climb on stage 14 is only 7.9%.

So I downgrade my rating to an 8, perhaps even a 7.5.

 

[luckyboy]

Had a closer look at profiles and the presentation..

I like La Planche des Belles Filles. Tough short climb that should encourage attacks. Hopefully there are GC attacks there, but I wouldn't bet on it.

The Grand Colombier stage seems to be wasting the climb a bit, as does the stage into Foix featuring the Mur de Péguère.

If the Grand Colombier stage finished on the Col de Richemond rather than descending, and if the 17th stage had a better mountain-top finish, then I think this Tour would be looking a lot better.

I see 8 sprint stages here - 2, 4, 5, 6, 13, 15, 18 and 20. One of them will probably be a breakaway win though.

Disappointing parcours overall.

And even the super steep climb on stage 14 is only 7.9%.

Most of the final 3.4km are all over 10%, with some sections of 18% and 16%, and the kilometres averaging 13%, 12.6% and 11%.

 

[Swede1]

I really like this route. I nice change from previous editions. It would be better if there was a Ventoux finish, but still pretty good. There are some pretty hard climbing stages in there that I didn't see before.

 

[Parera]

I think this course will produce some very interesting racing/tactics from different teams. At least it will force the Schlecks to take their chances rather than having them wait around for the middle of the third week to attempt anything meaningful.

 

[durhamwasp]

I really like this route. I nice change from previous editions. It would be better if there was a Ventoux finish, but still pretty good. There are some pretty hard climbing stages in there that I didn't see before.

I wonder if 2013 will host a Ventoux stage with it being the 100th tour. And then July 13th 2017...

 

[greenedge]

I think it should be good in the sense that riders are forced to attack who are pure climbers. Contador will have inclinations to attack as well. I like the long distance ( 06 and 07 ) had the right amount of distance but climbs. In this route i am not so sure but i understand why they are not going for a full on mountain war. ( Andy pretend every climb is like the Galibier for 2012 ) because otherwise you are screwed

Hopefully the riders animate the race.

 

[the asian]

After the two previous tours celebrated the Pyrenees and the Alps, and the 100th edition coming up in 2013, this type of course was expected.
Positives- more TT Kms, medium mountain stages, and new summit finishes.

Cons- Lack of a proper Queen stage( the mountain stages are too short), boring 3rd week, waste of mountain tops.

I expect a boring race and one of Contador, Wiggins or Evans for the win. Can't really look past these 3.

 

[Descender]

Gardeccia stage.

If that's an attack then Andy's ten metres accelerations are also attacks... Not that he needed it anyway.

But hey, I won't be the one dissing that stage. It was truly awesome. The only big flaw was the false flat at the start of the Marmolada where Nibali had to give up.

 

[just some guy]

Why the course on paper is a bit Meh is to me improves the more you look at it, wtf I Hear you say.

The reason is that it throws down the challenge to riders who can climb and not so great ITT , if you want to make up time you must attack hard and early, it also give descenders some chances to gain time although the distances to the finish maybe a bit long on 1 of those stages circa 40 km, but if it rains.

2 cross wind stages will add to the challenge.

It is 1 MTF to short, the distance to the finish after a descent are too long and the order of a couple of the stages are out but it is ok.

the only thin really wrong is the fact that the 1st 10 days will be like a classic everyday GC guys fighting for position with their teams so it will be a crash feast.

 

[hughmoore]

the only thin really wrong is the fact that the 1st 10 days will be like a classic everyday GC guys fighting for position with their teams so it will be a crash feast.

In years gone buy did the GC guys all hang at the back together with none staying near the front to avoid trouble, what has changed?



Hugh

 

[auscyclefan94]

Why the course on paper is a bit Meh is to me improves the more you look at it, wtf I Hear you say.

The reason is that it throws down the challenge to riders who can climb and not so great ITT , if you want to make up time you must attack hard and early, it also give descenders some chances to gain time although the distances to the finish maybe a bit long on 1 of those stages circa 40 km, but if it rains.

2 cross wind stages will add to the challenge.

It is 1 MTF to short, the distance to the finish after a descent are too long and the order of a couple of the stages are out but it is ok.

the only thin really wrong is the fact that the 1st 10 days will be like a classic everyday GC guys fighting for position with their teams so it will be a crash feast.

Your logic fails. How are the 1st 10 days of 2012 route different to any other year? If anything it will be less worse next year because the mountain stages come in earlier and there is a prologue so a 'pecking order' is developed from the start.

 

[El Pistolero]

If that's an attack then Andy's ten metres accelerations are also attacks... Not that he needed it anyway.

But hey, I won't be the one dissing that stage. It was truly awesome. The only big flaw was the false flat at the start of the Marmolada where Nibali had to give up.

There was still a relatively big peloton before he did that small attack. After that attack there was really only a small elite group left. Small? Yes. Like Andy? No.

 

[just some guy]

In years gone buy did the GC guys all hang at the back together with none staying near the front to avoid trouble, what has changed?



Hugh

Your logic fails. How are the 1st 10 days of 2012 route different to any other year? If anything it will be less worse next year because the mountain stages come in earlier and there is a prologue so a 'pecking order' is developed from the start.

Yes it will be worse than last year and the years before due to the fact that the Peloton make up has changed and BMC changed the way to protect a GC rider so others will follow it especially Saxo,Lotto,Sky who had GC riders 2011 tour destroyed by crashes - yes VDB2 was not the same but still a crash and yes Hitch Sammy as well but the EE riders are not going to get in the push and shove with the Classic riders they will lose and hit the ground hard.

This route lends attacks and time gains to ITT and 2- 3 mountain stages so no AFC the gaps will not be big until the 1st ITT and the script on how to protect a GC rider has changed.

 

[craig1985]

I really want to see some profiles of all the stages. This is pathetic by ASO.

 

[auscyclefan94]

Yes it will be worse than last year and the years before due to the fact that the Peloton make up has changed and BMC changed the way to protect a GC rider so others will follow it especially Saxo,Lotto,Sky who had GC riders 2011 tour destroyed by crashes - yes VDB2 was not the same but still a crash and yes Hitch Sammy as well but the EE riders are not going to get in the push and shove with the Classic riders they will lose and hit the ground hard.

This route lends attacks and time gains to ITT and 2- 3 mountain stages so no AFC the gaps will not be big until the 1st ITT and the script on how to protect a GC rider has changed.

BMC didn't change the way teams protect riders. Postal always did kept Armstrong right up the front, so did T-Mobile, CSC did for Sastre and Basso, etc. Nothing new here. I don't understand the "peloton make up has changed" argument. Who is to say that riders now are more reckless than they were a few years ago? Always teams have looked to keep their leaders up front but the fact is that weaker teams on the flats such as Saxo and EE aren't always the best at keeping their riders up front therefore they slip back down the peloton. You get the same situation every year and you still haven't explained why it is any different to other year.

 

[just some guy]

BMC didn't change the way teams protect riders. Postal always did kept Armstrong right up the front, so did T-Mobile, CSC did for Sastre and Basso, etc. Nothing new here. I don't understand the "peloton make up has changed" argument. Who is to say that riders now are more reckless than they were a few years ago? Always teams have looked to keep their leaders up front but the fact is that weaker teams on the flats such as Saxo and EE aren't always the best at keeping their riders up front therefore they slip back down the peloton. You get the same situation every year and you still haven't explained why it is any different to other year.

The approach of teams keeping riders at the front is much more aggressive than when UPS was a team and the amount of riders and team fighting for position is much more now - it is just the way it is.

 

[Dutchsmurf]

The approach of teams keeping riders at the front is much more aggressive than when UPS was a team and the amount of riders and team fighting for position is much more now - it is just the way it is.

Basically this started when getting a top 10 in the Tour became a result. Years ago only winning it counted, maybe top 3. Now if you are fighting for 9th place you are still in those first positions.

 

[guncha]

I really want to see some profiles of all the stages. This is pathetic by ASO.

This is the best link I've found so far. It also includes profiles of stages to Luchon and Peyragudes (both are not yet published in official website).
http://www.velochrono.fr/actu/2011/le-tour-2012-en-profils/

 

[movingtarget]

It's good to see the organisers using roads that have not been used before or not used much. Do we have to see the Alpe D'uez every two years ? Well it was in this year's edition so I guess it will be back next year. I prefer the Ventoux. Sure this route favours the allrounders and even though there are minimal high mountains, there is still plenty of hard medium stages. I don't agree with some other people that so many stages will be won by sprinters. This sort of route will encourage breakaways. 2013 is a TDF anniversary of some sort and they will probably go with a really mountainous route for that one. So Frank Schleck believes that the time trials won't be that significant ? Sounds like deja vu. He must be delusional or incredibly optimistic. But like someone else said, at least this route forces the Schlecks to attack more and should make the race more interesting. I would still be surprised to see either of the Schlecks on the podium. I expect another close race, not being decided until the final TT. Overall, a very different TDF route.

 

[karlboss]

I think this route offers something to
1. Contador
2. Evans, Wiggins
3. Sanchez, Nibali
4. leopard nissan trek, must attack unless Kloeden finds form of old.
and largely will depend on how these guys approach it.
Too many sprint stages for mine. But the addition of ITT km so frandy must attack gives it a 6.

 

[craig1985]

This is the best link I've found so far. It also includes profiles of stages to Luchon and Peyragudes (both are not yet published in official website).
http://www.velochrono.fr/actu/2011/le-tour-2012-en-profils/

Many thanks

What a waste of time is stage 14, easy to pick 'breakaway', or if not, Hushovd or EBH to get the win. I love stage 3, stage 7 isn't too bad, and stage 8 isn't easy.

 

[roundabout]

I want to like stage 14. It's like a third of Mortirolo stuck on top of an easier climb. Problem is Lers isn't Gavia or Trivigno and the terrain in the last 20k is flat.