Rate the 2015 Giro route!

[damian13ster]

The longer I look at the route, the more I like it. It's one ITT away from being as perfect as we can get.

Agreed. Its missing that 30km pancake flat TT (was it in 2011 or 2012 at last stage?). Otherwise I really like it. At least one of Nibali/Froome has to show up though to make this race interesting.

Btw, Majka and Contador as co-leaders in Tour? Of course Contador playing first fiddle, but no more time dropping by Rafal in case Contador crashes again or isnt in shape. If thats not the case then you might have one disgruntled rider on the team

 

[Jspear]

Agreed. Its missing that 30km pancake flat TT (was it in 2011 or 2012 at last stage?). Otherwise I really like it. At least one of Nibali/Froome has to show up though to make this race interesting.

Btw, Majka and Contador as co-leaders in Tour? Of course Contador playing first fiddle, but no more time dropping by Rafal in case Contador crashes again or isnt in shape. If thats not the case then you might have one disgruntled rider on the team

Ya....or maybe Majka could be given leadership in the Vuelta....

 

[Netserk]

The longer I look at the route, the more I like it. It's one ITT away from being as perfect as we can get.

Yeah, maybe I should've given it an 8. Replace the last stage with a mid length ITT (or even better have it in the first week and make it a little longer), add a few mountains (San Pellegrino in Alpe, Moncenisio and perhaps Tze Core) and have a strade bianche stage. Then it'd be 9+.

 

[damian13ster]

Ya....or maybe Majka could be given leadership in the Vuelta....

Probably. It doesnt suit him very well though. Still, he is riding TdF as a main domestique, thats for sure. And I think he will not lead the train giving it 100% to drop minutes in last couple of kilometres, he will try to get the best result possible so Tinkoff-Saxo has two weapons.
Just my opinion though and what I would like to see. With Sky train doing its job, Tinkoff won't have to.

 

[coimbrawu]

I really like this route, not only the long ITT, the decent medium mountain stage, but also the high mountain stage.

Stage 5: yes, it is a pity that no Pradaccio is not included. But why should there be a hard stage so early? If AC wins in a hard stage, then there will be 16 meaningless stages?

Stage 8: If you consider stage 7's 263 km in rider's leg, this 188 km stage will hurt those rider without good recovery.

Stage 15: A 59 km ITT and plus this stage, Passo Daone for 8.4km average 9.2%, Madonna di Campiglio will be harder than it actually be.

Stage 16: no flat road for 175 km and with Mortirolo + Aprica, that's enough.

GC contenders also have opportunities to earn time in stage 4, stage 9, stage 12 and stage 18. It means those stages won't be gift for breakaway riders or sprinters only.

If we consider those bad weather, this route can be very hard.

 

[Eshnar]

Are you guys: dolomite, lemon cheese cake and Sciocco related to Descender?

I'm pretty sure Descender will like this route. He'll give it at least a 5.

 

[Cannavaro]

Don't underestimate Aprica. If Mortirolo is climbed at a very high pace, and a group survives it, there will be riders dropping on way to Aprica. Remember 2006 ?

It is also not the usual motorway up to aprica, but a small local track. There seems to be a part of 1.2 km with 11%.

 

[Eshnar]

It is also not the usual motorway up to aprica, but a small local track. There seems to be a part of 1.2 km with 11%.

it's the same they used in 2010, which was different from 2006.

 

[guncha]

Perfect route to me because long ITT is balanced with the mountains which are not overdone. I also like that long ITT is placed late in second week, just before the main GC tests.
The MTFs of first week are nice for the start of the race. I really like the combo of two climbs in stage 15 and the final week is full classical climbs.
9/10 or even 10/10

 

[jens_attacks]

i'm really curious if ivan decides to step up and go for podium. it would be awesome

1-2 on mortirolo!

 

[LaFlorecita]

i'm really curious if ivan decides to step up and go for podium. it would be awesome

1-2 on mortirolo!

you forgot about Majka and Kiserlovski

 

[barmaher]

I think Hugo Koblet summed it up pretty well earlier in the thread. I'll use his comments as a basis for mine, with my additions bolded:

Stage 1: 1/10. I just don’t get the idea behind a TTT on the opening day. Anything else would be better.
Although I agree to an extent, I like the way that (for once) it is a route for power (very few turns). Given the rest of the route, it balances it somewhat. And although I don't like TTT to kick off a race, I prefer them to a sprint stage. 3/10
Stage 2: 5/10. It’s a flat stage. But for a flat stage it looks OK’ish.
Agree again. 5/10
Stage 3: 7/10. I like the design. Nice stage for a break away with opportunities for different type of riders.
I really like this design. I really like the flat bits at the end which will drive some on here crazy. I would prefer if it were a little longer, but I like it 8/10
Stage 4: 9/10. Great design! Will see a lot of action. It could have been longer, though, but I really like it.
A stage this short of this type can only get 8/10. It is very well designed though
Stage 5: 5/10. I’m not a big fan of stages like these. Can’t really put my finger on what it is, but I don’t really like the design.
Agree, but I lob on a few bonus points for the fact it is in the first week. As a few have already mentioned, I hate waiting until stage 14 or whoever to start the GC battle. 8/10
Stage 6: 5/10. The potential is there but what’s up with the 40 km’s of flat before the finish?
It is fine with me; we need to have sprint stages 6/10
Stage 7: 8/10. Good design. Looks like a lot of different riders can win here.
I would say an excellent stage design. One of the best. And the finish is enough to keep GC guys on their toes. Nice long stage, too. 9/10
Stage 8: 7/10. I like it. The part before the final climb is probably too easy, though.
No matter what they put there, it would not be used. Good enough final climb. It's not a particularly exciting stage, however. Odds on for a GC sprint at the end 6/10
Stage 9: 9/10. Great design again. Looks like chaos in the making.
I'd need to have a closer look at the finale, but it looks like an okay stage to me. Certainly not close to the best stage in the race. Maybe I am wrong. 7/10
Stage 10: 1/10. 200 km’s of crap.
We need flat stages. We need to go north. It is not going to be exciting, though 4/10
Stage 11: 8/10. Short and difficult stage. Looks fun.
Yes, agree fully. 8/10
Stage 12: 6/10. Don’t quite know what to make of this. The second half of the stage looks interesting but the final bump is probably hard enough that nothing will happen before then.
Yeah, more or less agree. But variety is the spice of life. 7/10 as we will see something we don't see in this Giro often (Glibert v Sagan v Kwiatko type stage). 7/10
Stage 13: 2/10. The only good thing about this is that it’s only 150 km’s.
Again, we need stages like this. No issues with me 5/10
Stage 14: 10/10. I like a really long ITT and this one looks brutal. Gaps will be enormous.
Yes, 10/10
Stage 15: 7/10. Good stage but I fear that the final climb won’t be very selective.
But look at the day before. This stage could be the best of the Giro in my view, as some riders could be put in trouble on Daone. 9/10
Stage 16: 9/10. Now this looks like a great stage! Interesting finish, and I have no idea how this will play out but I’m a fan.
I don't get the big deal with Aprica (and I am aware of the history). I think on the balance of probability, this stage will suck. 6/10
Stage 17: 6/10. Finally a well designed flat stage. It’s short and has a few obstacles.
Yep, it's fine. 6/10
Stage 18: 8/10. Monte Ologno looks brutal and I like the finish. Should be an entertaining last 35 km’s.
Yes, I love it. 8/10
Stage 19: 8/10. Looks like a good stage and will surely be one of the decisive stages.
Agreed, let's not look at what we could have had. Look at what we have. A very good stage, and the last 85km look perfect to me. 9/10
Stage 20: 7/10. Iconic climbs and will surely be entertaining but a disappointing lead into the climbs.
Yeah, I think the grand finale stage should be better. Still, I will be watching. 7/10
Stage 21: 6/10. Well, it’s a flat stage but on the last day it’s OK. Hard to rate.
Yes, 6/10

I think I have given it around 7.3 average, and I am tempted to round it up to 8/10, as I love the geographical route it takes through Italy, and I love the way it is all in Italy, and I like the balance of stage types and I love the way that transfers are kept to a minimum.

 

[Cance > TheRest]

It is also not the usual motorway up to aprica, but a small local track. There seems to be a part of 1.2 km with 11%.

The first part of the climb is different, and more varied in steepness as you say, but the remaining 7 kms of the climb (when they hit Corteno Golgi) is the same as they used in 2006. Nevertheless, that 11% section can only make it more selective

 

[cineteq]

I think I have given it around 7.3 average, and I am tempted to round it up to 8/10, as I love the geographical route it takes through Italy, and I love the way it is all in Italy, and I like the balance of stage types and I love the way that transfers are kept to a minimum.

Good analysis btw. Do you mean all the stages carry the same weight for you? If not, then I don't think you need to round it up

I'm pretty sure Descender will like this route. He'll give it at least a 5.

He has to give it at least a 3!

 

[Hugo Koblet]

I think Hugo Koblet summed it up pretty well earlier in the thread. I'll use his comments as a basis for mine, with my additions bolded:

I agree with much of what you write and I do come off a bit harsh in my critisism of the flat stages but I really do think that they could make them more interesting like stage 2.

 

[veji11]

I think Hugo Koblet summed it up pretty well earlier in the thread. I'll use his comments as a basis for mine, with my additions bolded:

Stage 1: 1/10. I just don’t get the idea behind a TTT on the opening day. Anything else would be better.
Although I agree to an extent, I like the way that (for once) it is a route for power (very few turns). Given the rest of the route, it balances it somewhat. And although I don't like TTT to kick off a race, I prefer them to a sprint stage. 3/10
Stage 2: 5/10. It’s a flat stage. But for a flat stage it looks OK’ish.
Agree again. 5/10
Stage 3: 7/10. I like the design. Nice stage for a break away with opportunities for different type of riders.
I really like this design. I really like the flat bits at the end which will drive some on here crazy. I would prefer if it were a little longer, but I like it 8/10
Stage 4: 9/10. Great design! Will see a lot of action. It could have been longer, though, but I really like it.
A stage this short of this type can only get 8/10. It is very well designed though
Stage 5: 5/10. I’m not a big fan of stages like these. Can’t really put my finger on what it is, but I don’t really like the design.
Agree, but I lob on a few bonus points for the fact it is in the first week. As a few have already mentioned, I hate waiting until stage 14 or whoever to start the GC battle. 8/10
Stage 6: 5/10. The potential is there but what’s up with the 40 km’s of flat before the finish?
It is fine with me; we need to have sprint stages 6/10
Stage 7: 8/10. Good design. Looks like a lot of different riders can win here.
I would say an excellent stage design. One of the best. And the finish is enough to keep GC guys on their toes. Nice long stage, too. 9/10
Stage 8: 7/10. I like it. The part before the final climb is probably too easy, though.
No matter what they put there, it would not be used. Good enough final climb. It's not a particularly exciting stage, however. Odds on for a GC sprint at the end 6/10
Stage 9: 9/10. Great design again. Looks like chaos in the making.
I'd need to have a closer look at the finale, but it looks like an okay stage to me. Certainly not close to the best stage in the race. Maybe I am wrong. 7/10
Stage 10: 1/10. 200 km’s of crap.
We need flat stages. We need to go north. It is not going to be exciting, though 4/10
Stage 11: 8/10. Short and difficult stage. Looks fun.
Yes, agree fully. 8/10
Stage 12: 6/10. Don’t quite know what to make of this. The second half of the stage looks interesting but the final bump is probably hard enough that nothing will happen before then.
Yeah, more or less agree. But variety is the spice of life. 7/10 as we will see something we don't see in this Giro often (Glibert v Sagan v Kwiatko type stage). 7/10
Stage 13: 2/10. The only good thing about this is that it’s only 150 km’s.
Again, we need stages like this. No issues with me 5/10
Stage 14: 10/10. I like a really long ITT and this one looks brutal. Gaps will be enormous.
Yes, 10/10
Stage 15: 7/10. Good stage but I fear that the final climb won’t be very selective.
But look at the day before. This stage could be the best of the Giro in my view, as some riders could be put in trouble on Daone. 9/10
Stage 16: 9/10. Now this looks like a great stage! Interesting finish, and I have no idea how this will play out but I’m a fan.
I don't get the big deal with Aprica (and I am aware of the history). I think on the balance of probability, this stage will suck. 6/10
Stage 17: 6/10. Finally a well designed flat stage. It’s short and has a few obstacles.
Yep, it's fine. 6/10
Stage 18: 8/10. Monte Ologno looks brutal and I like the finish. Should be an entertaining last 35 km’s.
Yes, I love it. 8/10
Stage 19: 8/10. Looks like a good stage and will surely be one of the decisive stages.
Agreed, let's not look at what we could have had. Look at what we have. A very good stage, and the last 85km look perfect to me. 9/10
Stage 20: 7/10. Iconic climbs and will surely be entertaining but a disappointing lead into the climbs.
Yeah, I think the grand finale stage should be better. Still, I will be watching. 7/10
Stage 21: 6/10. Well, it’s a flat stage but on the last day it’s OK. Hard to rate.
Yes, 6/10

I think I have given it around 7.3 average, and I am tempted to round it up to 8/10, as I love the geographical route it takes through Italy, and I love the way it is all in Italy, and I like the balance of stage types and I love the way that transfers are kept to a minimum.

Funny to see that you rate the Cervinia stage very high when, to me, it is my only real disappointment : this stage was perfect in its length and placement for a descent finish.

Regarding the flat stages, I find lots of you quite harsh saying that something could have been done to make such an such stage more interesting. To me it is perfectly normal in a GT to have a handful of boringly panflat stages. it is part of a GT with 21 days of racing : You just can't have 21 days of ITT, moutain stages, hilly stages, echelon stages, cobbles stages, etc... Pan flat boring 200ks in a straight line are part of cycling. Not the part we love mind you, but if they also help giving shade and light to the most interesting parts of the race.

In that regard the first 2 weeks of this Giro are very well done : There are some panflat sprint stages as should be, but some cleverly designed tricky stages as well, a couple of early mountain tests etc.

A bit long and windy but my point was a flat sprint stage in a GT does not need to be made interesting, its very existence is part of what a GT is. when you have 3/5 of those it's cool. When you have 10/12 of those like some TDFs in the past did, then it sucks.

EDIT : Barmaher, I meant my comments about flat stages for Hugo Koblet of course, I agree with you.

 

[barmaher]

I am fine with (at most) 3 pan-flat stages in a Grand Tour.

Cineteq, no weighting attached.

 

[veji11]

I am fine with (at most) 3 pan-flat stages in a Grand Tour.

fair enough. To me 4/5 pan flat stages is acceptable, the key is the rest of the route.

 

[Hugo Koblet]

Funny to see that you rate the Cervinia stage very high when, to me, it is my only real disappointment : this stage was perfect in its length and placement for a descent finish.

Regarding the flat stages, I find lots of you quite harsh saying that something could have been done to make such an such stage more interesting. To me it is perfectly normal in a GT to have a handful of boringly panflat stages. it is part of a GT with 21 days of racing : You just can't have 21 days of ITT, moutain stages, hilly stages, echelon stages, cobbles stages, etc... Pan flat boring 200ks in a straight line are part of cycling. Not the part we love mind you, but if they also help giving shade and light to the most interesting parts of the race.

In that regard the first 2 weeks of this Giro are very well done : There are some panflat sprint stages as should be, but some cleverly designed tricky stages as well, a couple of early mountain tests etc.

A bit long and windy but my point was a flat sprint stage in a GT does not need to be made interesting, its very existence is part of what a GT is. when you have 3/5 of those it's cool. When you have 10/12 of those like some TDFs in the past did, then it sucks.

EDIT : Barmaher, I meant my comments about flat stages for Hugo Koblet of course, I agree with you.

I don't mind flat stages per se. But I don't like that we all know how the stage will pan out before it has started. I think that a break away should at least have a chance to win - the way it is now, there's almost zero percent chance of that happening. That said, this Giro is definitely a step in the right direction regarding the number of flat stages.

 

[roundabout]

No, but I admire his attitude towards routes.

Really, expect the worst and maybe you will get some decent racing. Also, I work M-F without fail so the only stages I get to see the majority of are on weekends. Nothing worse than waking up saturday/sunday morning only to get to watch terrible flat stages. I missed out on some great stages this year and expect the same as next year. To be fair, I enjoy reading the CN ticker and stage threads in these forums while I am at work.

Ugh, thanks for the reminder.

TTT and a flat stage

Campitello Matese and a hilly stage

TT and Madonna di Campiglio

Finestre and a flat stage

It's the Giro so probably only the 3rd weekend ****es me off, but still not ideal

 

[18-Valve. (pithy)]

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?p=1590126#post1590126

I don't know how I missed this, but if Nibali is really racing this then the route just became a whole lot better.

 

[LaFlorecita]

The route misses a MTT for me, I always really enjoy those. Maybe a Strade Bianche stage. 8/10 for me. But as usual the riders make the race.

 

[SafeBet]

First week: 7
Second week: 5
Third week: 9

Overall: 7

I dig the long TT and most of the mountain stages. Second week is really easy though.

 

[gregrowlerson]

9 for me.

Stages 10-13 are a little meh, but great variety in week 1 and excellent mountains in week 3 (you really don't need other monster climbs in stages that already have Mortirolo and Finestre). Could have done with an ITT instead on stage 1, and if stage 3 was 20kms shorter than it could have been the stage of the race! But stage 18 does a good job in making up for that flat run in

As many have said, the regular combo of a harder penultimate climb to the final one should make for good racing.

 

[Flamin]

Very good route. Really happy that the hilly stages are back, and thank god, no brutal MTFs (although some mountain stages could definitely be better).