Rate the 2016 Giro route!

[Burkni]

I went for a 9, as I am a hopeless Giro romantic.

What is really working well for me is the following:
* Apart from the flight transfer from the (hopeless kickoff in the) Netherlands, other transfers seem to be at an all-time low.
* The route in general seems balanced enough to attract a variety of contenders on all terrain, both the pure climbers and the Dumoulin types. Additionally, the last week is not ridiculously back-loaded and there may actually quite a few sprinters make it to Torino. I think the whole balance thing is done to encourage the Rio 2016 hopefuls to consider the Giro instead of the Tour, at least that is the chatter at the moment.

 

[Marco Pantani]

Absolutely brutal route. Only Zoncolan missing.

 

[Hugo Koblet]

At first sight probably a 7 but I'll have to examine a bit further. Stage 14 looks absolutely brilliant. Stage 10 is a piece of beauty as well. Kinda wished that one was the last stage of the race.

 

[18-Valve. (pithy)]

Re:

Hit and miss.

7/10, weather permitting.

I like the high and medium mountain stages much better overall than those of this year's overhyped course (and race). Apart from Aprica, that is. Anyway, great stuff for the most part, but the TTs suck and there's too much filler. The stages in the second week don't "flow" that well, either.

Not quite sure about the Agnello - Risoul stage, but then Agnello is definitely harder than Finestre *in practice* (yes, "facts" say otherwise) so even that stage could be good if Astana or Sky set a high pace.

 

[More Strides than Rides]

The race is set up for a Dumoulin-esque coup. Those first hilly stages, really through stage 13 will see the GC favorites let the seeming stage hunters battle it out while hanging in the wings. But if one of them comes ready to fight for the GC, we could have another thrilling battle as the true GC guys make up for lost time in the later stages.

The only issue is who shows up. The vuelta has an advantage of being late in the game, when GC riders are tired and the lower-tier guys finally have an opportunity to shine. The rosters don't exactly shape up that way for the Giro.

Either way. I do think it will be a great GC battle. I'm being optimistic, but I'm reminded of 2010, when the first half was Wiggans vs. Evans. Vs. Vino how-long-can-they-last-in-pink battle played out, before the Basso vs. Scarponi (vs. Arroyo) who's-actually-going-to-take-home-the-bacon battle. Less epic stages obviously, but the tension will be similar.

(I hope)

 

[GP Blanco]

Nice stages, more TT than an average GT (nowadays) and positive they use the south as well.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Stage 1: good. Long enough but not too long.
Stage 2: meh. Shame about the additional loops.
Stage 3: meh. I get the feeling "meh" could be the overarching theme here.
Stage 4: this looks pretty decent, could be some useful action in the closing kilometres.
Stage 5: lol at some of the uncategorized climbs here given the ones categorized in the Netherlands. Hopefully Sagan doesn't show up.
Stage 6: if they climbed the traditional side of Rionero Sannitico this would be excellent. It's the early contenders-from-pretenders gradual climb.
Stage 7: could be ok, might be one for the break.
Stage 8: this is a very promising stage. I like the look of this one.
Stage 9: a decent length ITT in the first half of a Grand Tour, I thought they were extinct!!!!! Put a second one in somewhere and then we'll be cooking on gas...
Stage 10: I quite like this one actually, steep ramps at the end of the penultimate climb and an easyish final ascent. The descent is quite tricky too.
Stage 11: every Giro has one of these stages, the Po Valley with a small ramp near the end. Could be interesting, might be a pure sprint. We'll see.
Stage 12: unfortunately, every Giro has one of these stages too, the Po Valley without a small ramp near the end.
Stage 13: this is a very promising stage, those climbs are fairly steep and the riders will be well rested after those flat stages.
Stage 14: actually, I don't like this one and not for the Fedaia (Fedaia!) reasons either. With an MTT the following day meaning attacks on Giau are pretty unlikely and with Valparola not being all that hard it's likely to be a bit like the extremely disappointing Cortina stage in 2012. Given the possibilities in the Dolomites, this is a pretty uninspiring stage.
Stage 15: *sigh*
Stage 16: I like the little ramps near the end here, short enough that maybe Fai della Paganella will see some action. I hope. Too short though.
Stage 17: typical week 3 transition stage for the sprinters
Stage 18: promising, but another lead-in climb had been rumoured. Following stages may neuter the GC action, unfortunately.
Stage 19: thank Christ Agnello is the Cima Coppi, otherwise this stage could have been really bad, Risoul is not all that tough a final climb, but the competition for the Cima Coppi should incite some earlier action here.
Stage 20: hey, super short mountain stages on the final few days worked in the 2011 Tour, it should surely work in EVERY race EVER!
Stage 21: really?

 

[Gigs_98]

Re: Re:

Hit and miss.

7/10, weather permitting.

I like the high and medium mountain stages much better overall than those of this year's overhyped course (and race). Apart from Aprica, that is. Anyway, great stuff for the most part, but the TTs suck and there's too much filler. The stages in the second week don't "flow" that well, either.

Not quite sure about the Agnello - Risoul stage, but then Agnello is definitely harder than Finestre *in practice* (yes, "facts" say otherwise) so even that stage could be good if Astana or Sky set a high pace.

Agnello harder than Finestre? Not even on paper. Agnello is only 4 kilometers longer, but finestre is almost 3 % steeper and it has freakin' sterrato. Moreover the big difference is the huge gap between Agnello and Rissoul which means that nobody will attack on the penultimate climb, so the difficulty doesnt even matter that much in this case.

 

[The Hitch]

Wtf did giro suddenly move to august? I've seen gts go 3 weeks without breaking the 2000m barrier. And this one, which takes place during skiing season, intends to make repeated trips above 2500?

 

[Gigs_98]

http://www.gazzetta.it/Ciclismo/05-10-2015/giro-italia-2016-9-edizione-percorso-tappe-altimetrie-salite-130388549168.shtml
I think there hasn't been a link to all the profiles.

 

[The Hitch]

stage 1: 7/10, opening ITT of 10 kilometers is decent
stage 2: 5/10 WHY DID THEY HAVE TO DO 3 LAPS IN NIJMEGEN? however a flat stage after the opening TT still is okay
stage 3: 2/10 A second one definitely isnt
stage 4: 8/10 Thats what an early giro stage is supposed to look like
stage 5: 4/10 Another flat stage? At least the first half is hilly
stage 6: 7/10 Why not the normal Rionero Sannitico ascent? That would make it way harder
stage 7: 4/10 like stage 5
stage 8: 8/10 If it rains it will be carnage, but even without a very good stage
stage 9: 6/10 Meh
stage 10: 9/10 Absolutely awesome, especially because there should already be gaps after 50 TT km's, sterrato and Roccaraso
stage 11: 7/10 At least the finish is brutal and should prevent a bunch sprint
stage 12: 1/10 I don't want to give a stage 1/10 but this one just deserves it
stage 13: 9/10 Steep climbs, narrow descents, only the flat part at the end is a little bit too long
stage 14: 10/10 Its definitely the best stage of the race so I had to give it one more point than the stage before
stage 15: 5/10 At least it isnt too long
stage 16: 8/10 I'm really surprised by this stage because it has only three stars, but thats a proper mountain stage
stage 17: 5/10 I'm kind to this stage because a hard one would have been a mistake.
stage 18: 8/10 probably deserves less but I love the eastern Pramartino side
stage 19: 6/10 Very good climbs but it just doesnt fit in that well
stage 20: 7/10 I'm still not sure if I like this stage so I gave it an average score
stage 21: 3/10 I don't complain about sprint stages at the end of a gt, but you can still do more than the giro organizers did here.

that means a score of 6.14/10

Without considering every stage I'd say 7/10

Imo, not every stage should be considered when rating the overall gt. These days 50-70% of any gt is a write off anyway. Any gt that has 3 9/10 stages is already easily a 7 or 8 overall.

 

[Red Rick]

I think it's also obvious that the province of Gelderland payed for the Giro start. They're even going to the Achterhoek. There's nothing there, nothing to see, nothing to do, no major towns, or anything. Let's show the best the province has to offer and go right to the middle of nowhere and back again. Sure, greatest idea ever, and that's coming from a guy who grew up in that area

 

[Gigs_98]

Imo, not every stage should be considered when rating the overall gt. These days 50-70% of any gt is a write off anyway. Any gt that has 3 9/10 stages is already easily a 7 or 8 overall.

Well thats why I added another score because I don't think that 6.14 points mean a lot, I just wrote it because calculating the average was kind of obvious. The 7/8 I wrote also have nothing to do with the calculation before.

Btw, I just noticed that they made an unnecessary lap in the Arezzo stage too. The two climbs would normally come almost directly after each other. Why don't they just put in some extra kilometers earlier, instead of ruining the finish
Some other things which are maybe worth mentioning:
-Mür dl Giat is really in the final of stage 14 (yay )
-The final descent from the lombarde has 5 switchbacks, so it isnt very technical but also not a pure downhill descent.
-The climb on the third stage is 2.2 kilometers long with an average gradient of 2.8%...impressive

 

[Brullnux]

Stage 4,6,8 and 10 are really good, 13 and 14 are really nice too. Stage 15 is scenic but unnecessary. Stage 16 is also nice, short though. Stage 19 I don't like that much and stage 20 is short. Too short. And too high. But stage 19 is too high too. OTOH usually not much snow in that region.

 

[Valv.Piti]

Re:

I think it's also obvious that the province of Gelderland payed for the Giro start. They're even going to the Achterhoek. There's nothing there, nothing to see, nothing to do, no major towns, or anything. Let's show the best the province has to offer and go right to the middle of nowhere and back again. Sure, greatest idea ever, and that's coming from a guy who grew up in that area

Imo, I couldnt care less about what the province has to show or what towns it passes, I just think it sucks starting in NL. Couldnt really care less since its flat anyways...

But Im pretty optimistic overall. The route helps tremendously in order to make a good show, but in the end, it all comes down to the riders in the race. And with Nibali and Landa, I think it bodes well honestly. Landa will need to gain time, presumeably 2.30 - 4.00 minutes, and Nibali is just a great rider and isnt afraid to go hard, just like Aru. To it may turn out to be a blessing in disguise that he signed for Sky!

Also, it will be interesting to look out for who will be going. Rumours about Pinot, it would be great for the race should he be going, but I honestly dont think the route is too spicy for him. Got the impression he likes the hard MTF's more, but guy has learned to go downhill, so who knows.

 

[Bavarianrider]

TT is a joke. Looks like it was designed to minimize gaps.
MTT after the best stage of the Giro is a horrible idea. The MTT itself is too short. Marginal gaps, a waste of a race day that only spoils the previous stage.
The last two Mountain stages are pretty silly. Chances that they will be cut due too snow are at least 35%.

 

[sir fly]

The route is simply too high to be ridden (raced) in entirety. Even in July it would be risky.
I don't like this grandiose RCS's approach. Creates doubts in sincerity similarly to political marketing.

 

[Tour_de_Calvados]

I gave it a 7 - several really nice stages with potential for lots of action.

Hope Col de la Bonette is rideable in May but not sure why the Giro needs to use so many climbs in France, given the plethora available at home.

Still wishing the Giro would visit Punta Veleno after that epic Trentino stage from 2012 but I guess it is just too narrow and steep...

 

[staubsauger]

Re:

I think it's also obvious that the province of Gelderland payed for the Giro start. They're even going to the Achterhoek. There's nothing there, nothing to see, nothing to do, no major towns, or anything. Let's show the best the province has to offer and go right to the middle of nowhere and back again. Sure, greatest idea ever, and that's coming from a guy who grew up in that area

Achterhoek (and Twente) are actually pretty nice places to cycle around for me!

 

[Jancouver]

I didn't even see the route as it is pointless to judge it at this time. As always, it will come down to who will show up and how it will be raced. No course gonna do you any good if the best riders won't show up.

I do prefer the "best riders" riding an "average" course over the "best course" filled with only "average" riders. If Froome, Contador, Quintana etc are not there, and while Landa vs Nib may be entertaining, we all know that you are only watching "Seria B" as the best players are playing the "Seria A".

 

[Flamin]

Not bad, not great either. I give it a 6,5. The MTT is just a major letdown.

 

[gregrowlerson]

I gave it a 9. I am probably easily impressed, but it just seems like a well balanced route to me, and the 9 is based on no high mountain cancellations, which is obviously questionable.

For me MTT's are underused in grand tours, so great to see the Giro come to the party again here. And from my hazy memory, I'm not sure if it will minimise the racing on stage 14. Unless these other examples had rest days before the MTT, then I can think of Chamrousse 2001 where the riders certainly didn't hold back on the previous stage to Alp duez, and that was with three ridiculous Pyrenean stages coming immediately afterwards! The 2004 Alp MTT would have expected to put a dampener on the previous stage, more of a medium mountain alpine one than high. Yet the GC guys (thanks to Ullrich) still went for it. A MTT the next day? Never mind that, I'll attack with sixty kms to go!

More recently I don't recall the racing being too tame on stages 13, 14 and 15 of the 2011 Giro because there was a MTT on stage 16.

That TT was much tougher than next years one too. And on next years route we have 50 kms (FIFTY!) of flattish TT before we even get to the really high mountains. I don't think that riders are going to hold back on stage 14 (where they could gain minutes) just so they can gain 30-60 seconds the following day.

Loving the mix of climbs on stage 6, 8 and 10. The dolomites are good enough (they will be showcased even more in 2017), as are the French stages. Too short - once again - but climbs like Bonette and Agnel are epic!!

 

[42x16ss]

Could be better, could be a whole lot worse. There's not much to add, the MTT is straight after the best mountain stage - WTF? Then there's the amount of racing at altitude. Didn't RCS learn anything from 2013/14? They are taking a few too many risks. No Fedaia

Also, not happy with the amount of uncreative flat stages, with the small hills at the start. I guess that if they want to attract any big sprinters it's necessary, otherwise it will just be Viviani vs. 2nd tier guys.

Still, there's enough there to provide a good race and it's not quite as backloaded as recent GTs so I'll round up to a 7.

 

[Eshnar]

Re:

More recently I don't recall the racing being too tame on stages 13, 14 and 15 of the 2011 Giro because there was a MTT on stage 16.

Well, there was a rest day after stage 15 you know. The only thing comparable in the recent Giros I guess was the Oropa MTT 2007, which luckily didn't hamper the previous stage to Briancon. But then again those were the days... Not sure what the riders would think nowadays.

 

[18-Valve. (pithy)]

Re: Re:

Hit and miss.

7/10, weather permitting.

I like the high and medium mountain stages much better overall than those of this year's overhyped course (and race). Apart from Aprica, that is. Anyway, great stuff for the most part, but the TTs suck and there's too much filler. The stages in the second week don't "flow" that well, either.

Not quite sure about the Agnello - Risoul stage, but then Agnello is definitely harder than Finestre *in practice* (yes, "facts" say otherwise) so even that stage could be good if Astana or Sky set a high pace.

Agnello harder than Finestre? Not even on paper. Agnello is only 4 kilometers longer, but finestre is almost 3 % steeper and it has freakin' sterrato. Moreover the big difference is the huge gap between Agnello and Rissoul which means that nobody will attack on the penultimate climb, so the difficulty doesnt even matter that much in this case.

Uh, I just said that Finestre looks harder on paper. If both were an MTT though I'd expect bigger gaps on Agnello. The profiles don't really do it justice. The hardest part, although much shorter than Finestre, but still plenty long, is at high altitude. I don't think there's a climb in the Alps outside of Austria that can match that. It's a monster climb from the Italian side.

I don't expect any meaningful attacks, but a strong team could do some damage there - and may need to if they still want to win the race. That is interesting to me, so I'll def. be tuning in for that.