• We're giving away a Cyclingnews water bottle! Find out more here!

Rate the 2019 Giro d'Italia Route!

Rate the 2019 Giro Route

  • 10

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 9

    Votes: 8 13.3%
  • 8

    Votes: 17 28.3%
  • 7

    Votes: 23 38.3%
  • 6

    Votes: 6 10.0%
  • 5

    Votes: 4 6.7%
  • 4

    Votes: 2 3.3%
  • 3

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 2

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 1

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    60
Oct 19, 2015
474
3
3,285
First impressions - 1st week is forgettable, 2nd week is good to really good and the 3rd week (probably) mostly underwhelming. That Nivolet stage is harder than i thought while Anterselva, San Martino and Pinerolo are a bit to completely underwhelming. I'm perfectly fine with only Montoso even if it would be nice to also see Pramartino there. What i'm mostly interested in is that Pian del Lupo climb. Is it surfaced? 'Cause the streetview (from 2011) shows a dirt goat track.

This post might be edited in the future with more detailed observations/opinions.
 
it's a 7/10 for me.

- First week is sad
- S.Marino ITT should be longer
- stages 10 and 11 remind me of the old Petacchi days
- Pinerolo is a decent stage per se, but if you do it to celebrate Coppi, forget it.
- S.Martino di Castrozza....

+ Great mountain stages. The best set in a long time. Only stage 20 is not ideal. But it can work.
+ The sequence of stages from 12 to 17 is really good, also in terms of pacing. Shame that it kills the Pinerolo stage, tho.
+ The Ponte di Legno stage is a proper queen stage, of the kind that is way too rare nowadays
+ There are no hard MTFs in the high mountain stages, barring the Nivolet.
+ 7 stages 220+ km long
+ I gave 6/10 to way worse routes.
 
For me a 8. Could be better of course but still decent.

- First week (altough the fight for the pink jersey could be great)
- Cuneo Pinerolo
- San Martino

+ Length of stages
+ Courmayeur, Ponte di Legno, Lago di Serrù
+ The TT's
 
I have to look at it in more detail to properly rate it but my first impression is I like it. I also don't quite get the hate for the first week. No mountain stages till stage 13 isn't great but there aren't many flat stages either and a lot of those days in the first week have potential
 
Re: Re:

tobydawq said:
jmdirt said:
You guys kill me! :eek:

Its the best GdI since last year.
Best GdI since 13
Not as good as 14
The second week is better than 56
This is the most ridiculous period of the year on here. Nothing is ever good enough.
Quite a few routes have received a lot of praise.

This Giro has an absolutely great middle section, but the first 8 stages and thet last 5 stages just doesn't do it for me. Especially the end of the Giro is pretty disappointing for me cause either something absolutely crazy happens on Passo Manghen or the Giro fizzles out like a wet candle.

Seriously apart from Passo Manghen all the hard climbs are concentrated in 4 consecutive days.

Reminds me of what Libertine says of the 2011 Tour, which was the greatest Dauphine ever.
 
Re: Re:

Red Rick said:
tobydawq said:
jmdirt said:
You guys kill me! :eek:

Its the best GdI since last year.
Best GdI since 13
Not as good as 14
The second week is better than 56
This is the most ridiculous period of the year on here. Nothing is ever good enough.
Quite a few routes have received a lot of praise.

This Giro has an absolutely great middle section, but the first 8 stages and thet last 5 stages just doesn't do it for me. Especially the end of the Giro is pretty disappointing for me cause either something absolutely crazy happens on Passo Manghen or the Giro fizzles out like a wet candle.

Seriously apart from Passo Manghen all the hard climbs are concentrated in 4 consecutive days.

Reminds me of what Libertine says of the 2011 Tour, which was the greatest Dauphine ever.
I think the first week is fine, if very un-Giro-like, but yeah, there are a couple of weak mountain stages in the final week (17 and 19). However, that is ALWAYS the case. You never see a Grand Tour with off-the-charts action on eight mountain stages.

Also, I quite love stages 14, 15, 16 and 20.

In addition, stage 10 and 11 are a bit hilarious. What, is there around 250 altitude metres in those two stages combined?
 
The more I look at it, the more I think Stage 19 is actually just fine where it is. Some of the stages in Week 1 are good in isolation, but I would like to see an opportunity for meaningful GC action to whet the appetite. I mean, it might happen, but it probably won't.
 
Re: Re:

tobydawq said:
Red Rick said:
tobydawq said:
jmdirt said:
You guys kill me! :eek:

Its the best GdI since last year.
Best GdI since 13
Not as good as 14
The second week is better than 56
This is the most ridiculous period of the year on here. Nothing is ever good enough.
Quite a few routes have received a lot of praise.

This Giro has an absolutely great middle section, but the first 8 stages and thet last 5 stages just doesn't do it for me. Especially the end of the Giro is pretty disappointing for me cause either something absolutely crazy happens on Passo Manghen or the Giro fizzles out like a wet candle.

Seriously apart from Passo Manghen all the hard climbs are concentrated in 4 consecutive days.

Reminds me of what Libertine says of the 2011 Tour, which was the greatest Dauphine ever.

In addition, stage 10 and 11 are a bit hilarious. What, is there around 250 altitude metres in those two stages combined?
That is the Giro showing they even do flat stages better than the Tour :D
 
7. And then I'm very generous. With more "standard" mountain stages than Courmayeur and Ponte di Legno this would have been a 4.

- The Cuneo-Pinerolo stage is awful.
- I would really liked to have seen Erbe on the Anterselva stage.
- Complete lack of proper mountain stages in the Apenninnes.
- St.Martino di Castrozza. Although this was expected.

With a better route on the Anterselva and Cuneo-Pinerolo stages and ONE proper mountain stages in the first 9 days, this would have been the best route in years. Now almost all the action will be concentrated on two, possibly three stages.
 
If anything, there's not going to be many dull flat days. And I like the inclusion of some of the new climbs (The ascent to Lago Serru in particular, even if it would have been more spectacular had they gone all the way up to the Colle).

I don't really have a clue how the racing is going to be. I think that cycling fans, in general, have a tendency to overestimate the impact of route designs on how races unfold. Rather, I think the causality is often opposite. Fans praise the route after the race is held, because they don't always hit accurately with their predictions. So the strong correlation between good routes and good races is not univocal. Although there are trends, ofcourse.

With that in mind I'll just give it a 9.
 
Re:

Cance > TheRest said:
.

I don't really have a clue how the racing is going to be. I think that cycling fans, in general, have a tendency to overestimate the impact of route designs on how races unfold. Rather, I think the causality is often opposite. Fans praise the route after the race is held, because they don't always hit accurately with their predictions. So the strong correlation between good routes and good races is not univocal. Although there are trends, ofcourse.
Well, you could compare the action on stages including climbs like Mortirolo, Finestre and similar to stages where there is 30 kms of flat before the last tough MTF.......

A stage like this year's Sappada stage were pointed out as good stage design immidiately after the presentation last year. And that stage certainly delivered!

If that route is a 9, the scale should go far higher than 10.
 
Re: Re:

OlavEH said:
Cance > TheRest said:
.

I don't really have a clue how the racing is going to be. I think that cycling fans, in general, have a tendency to overestimate the impact of route designs on how races unfold. Rather, I think the causality is often opposite. Fans praise the route after the race is held, because they don't always hit accurately with their predictions. So the strong correlation between good routes and good races is not univocal. Although there are trends, ofcourse.
Well, you could compare the action on stages including climbs like Mortirolo, Finestre and similar to stages where there is 30 kms of flat before the last tough MTF.......

A stage like this year's Sappada stage were pointed out as good stage design immidiately after the presentation last year. And that stage certainly delivered!

If that route is a 9, the scale should go far higher than 10.
People also raged about the waste of the Finestre, as it should never be so early in a stage. But I think that stage delivered a little bit more than the Sappada stage.

Regarding your last point: People have a tendency to use some sort of weird logarithmic stage where every tiny little thorn in their eyes costs a point, quickly reducing the grade to 1-3, which frankly is ridiculous, when 1 should be for the worst route imaginable (21 flat stages, no TT, a confirmation by the organisers that stages will be cancelled in the event of wind).
 
Re: Re:

tobydawq said:
People also raged about the waste of the Finestre, as it should never be so early in a stage. But I think that stage delivered a little bit more than the Sappada stage.

Regarding your last point: People have a tendency to use some sort of weird logarithmic stage where every tiny little thorn in their eyes costs a point, quickly reducing the grade to 1-3, which frankly is ridiculous, when 1 should be for the worst route imaginable (21 flat stages, no TT, a confirmation by the organisers that stages will be cancelled in the event of wind).
Still, the Sappada stage was one of the better mountain stages the last years. It's not much likely we'll see action more than the last few kms on the Lago di Serru stage and the Anterselva stage. Probably not on the Croce di Aune stage either. And we're still missing a Apenninne mountain stage.

It's almost equally ridiculous that people rates this as a 9/10. That implies the there is little room for a better route. And that is NOT the case.
 
Re: Re:

OlavEH said:
tobydawq said:
People also raged about the waste of the Finestre, as it should never be so early in a stage. But I think that stage delivered a little bit more than the Sappada stage.
Still, the Sappada stage was one of the better mountain stages the last years. It's not much likely we'll see action more than the last few kms on the Lago di Serru stage and the Anterselva stage. Probably not on the Croce di Aune stage either. And we're still missing a Apenninne mountain stage.
You could also say that it was good because Yates was still in insane form and Froome had a bad day. If they had been more normal, the stage would not have been good, and then retrospectively the route would maybe have been proven to not be as well-designed as people had thought.

Sometimes, people forget that what we see play out may be an outlier - it's just a bit difficult to know what the norm is for every single stage as it is only ridden once.
 
Re: Re:

tobydawq said:
You could also say that it was good because Yates was still in insane form and Froome had a bad day. If they had been more normal, the stage would not have been good, and then retrospectively the route would maybe have been proven to not be as well-designed as people had thought.

Sometimes, people forget that what we see play out may be an outlier - it's just a bit difficult to know what the norm is for every single stage as it is only ridden once.
Still, the stage delivered. If you have stages with one single big climb as a MTF and where the steepest sections are on the last few kms, or long sections of flat terrain between the second last and the last climb, you'll almost never have any action before that.

A rating of 9 or 10 should be reserved for almost perfectly designed routes. IMO that means a balanced route of ITT and mountain stages, few flat stages, at least 5 high mountain stages spread throughout the tour and a couple of tough medium mountain stages in addition. This route doesn't deliver of any of this points, except for the two stages to Coeurmayeur and Ponte di Legno.

It's not a coincidence that some of the highest rated stages in the Giro the last 10-15 years are stages including Mortirolo, Finestre, Montelcino in 2010 or the Gardaneccia stage in 2011.
 
Re: Re:

OlavEH said:
tobydawq said:
You could also say that it was good because Yates was still in insane form and Froome had a bad day. If they had been more normal, the stage would not have been good, and then retrospectively the route would maybe have been proven to not be as well-designed as people had thought.

Sometimes, people forget that what we see play out may be an outlier - it's just a bit difficult to know what the norm is for every single stage as it is only ridden once.
Still, the stage delivered. If you have stages with one single big climb as a MTF and where the steepest sections are on the last few kms, or long sections of flat terrain between the second last and the last climb, you'll almost never have any action before that.

A rating of 9 or 10 should be reserved for almost perfectly designed routes. IMO that means a balanced route of ITT and mountain stages, few flat stages, at least 5 high mountain stages spread throughout the tour and a couple of tough medium mountain stages in addition. This route doesn't deliver of any of this points, except for the two stages to Coeurmayeur and Ponte di Legno.

It's not a coincidence that some of the highest rated stages in the Giro the last 10-15 years are stages including Mortirolo, Finestre, Montelcino in 2010 or the Gardaneccia stage in 2011.
Sorry, what is your complaint regarding this year and the reference to Montalcino 2010? I don't quite see?
 
Re: Re:

Cance > TheRest said:
Sorry, what is your complaint regarding this year and the reference to Montalcino 2010? I don't quite see?
The point is that you'll very rarely see much action in poorly designed stage, no matter what. The logic about "it's the riders that makes the race" is true, but that requires that there is actually terrain where it's possible to attack.

A well designed stage doesn't guarantee action, but a poorly designed stage almost certainly guarantees little or no action.

A 10/10 route has to be almost perfectly designed. This route is FAR from being that. Also far from being a 9/10 route.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts