Rate the "epic mediocrity" of the 2011 Vuelta a España route

[The Hitch]

Are you another jealous Brit?

Cycling is one thing, but I can't see how doping would substantially improve Spain's performance especially seeing their style.

To me, right now, Anton is the favourite. But there's a whole season to go still.

Im not British and im not jealous. Im not saying it helped them, im just saying they did it .
There are plenty of threads in the clinic about this. None started by me btw. We cant discuss this here, but feel free to pop in there and we can.

 

[Timmy-loves-Rabo]

I cant see Evans factoring much here. If he goes hard in the Ardennes and hard in the Tour (which will be hard this year) i dont know that he can get a second peak in time for the Vuelta. Espeically since theres a week less between the 2.

evans will still be up there, consistency and ability to be good almost all season is one of his strengths. It helps that the vuelta isn't ridden at such a rapid pace either.

decent course.

 

[Moondance]

Pretty good... Given that, besides the Angliru obviously, the course is short on very steep finishes I don't think Anton is a slam dunk... TBH I don't think Evans is completely out of it here. 40km of practically flat TT would be enough for Evans to win back the time he will later lose on the Angliru, and then some, over the likes of Anton or Rodriguez. If he's in form Evans could very well podium, or better.

The man who I think this course is good for is the reigning champ... Nibbles. I could see him repeating on this course, and maybe even beating Anton without help from the tarmac. Samuel Sanchez won't be disappointed by the course either, even if there aren't ant Tour-esque descent finishes.

But, of course, this is all moot since Bobby Gesink will be completing the 2nd half of the Tour-Vuelta double on this parcours next year (although in all seriousness this isn't a bad course for Gesink either).

 

[The Hitch]

Pretty good... Given that, besides the Angliru obviously, the course is short on very steep finishes I don't think Anton is a slam dunk... TBH I don't think Evans is completely out of it here. 40km of practically flat TT would be enough for Evans to win back the time he will later lose on the Angliru, and then some, over the likes of Anton or Rodriguez. If he's in form Evans could very well podium, or better.

The man who I think this course is good for is the reigning champ... Nibbles. I could see him repeating on this course, and maybe even beating Anton without help from the tarmac. Samuel Sanchez won't be disappointed by the course either, even if there aren't ant Tour-esque descent finishes.

But, of course, this is all moot since Bobby Gesink will be completing the 2nd half of the Tour-Vuelta double on this parcours next year (although in all seriousness this isn't a bad course for Gesink either).

Samu says its all about a tdf podium next year. Even though im his biggest cheerleader on here, i cant see him going for it after that very hard tour. Especially with a rested Fuji probably being the better bet on his team.

Also last year the TDF course wasnt as hard, he had a week extra to rest, and he had very little competition at the Vuelta and he still didnt do it. That was his best chance to win a gt and he skipped it then. If he didnt take advantage in 10 i cant see him taking on a more difficult task in 11. Hope im wrong though.

 

[auscyclefan94]

The mountain stages seem to lack climbs before the MTF.

Stage 4 - big gap between the 1st climb and the Sierra nevada climb which is only about 5.5%

Stage 9 - Final climb averages 6% (assuming it officially starts right in Bejar)

Stage 11 - the final climb is a beast with length but not sure of the gradient

Stage 14 - looks like a toughy but a cat 1 and a cat 2 before main climb. Looks like the toughest overall stage.

 

[auscyclefan94]

Stage 15 - this stage will decide la vuelta but only 1 significant climb before the angliru and it seems to be a short climb. Where does the climb finish lie in relation with the stage finish? I just guessed it was a km out

Stage 17 - 2x cat 2 climbs before Pena Carbarga. Not too much harsh terrain to deal with before the main climb which is a short climb. Does anyone know the average gradient for that climb?

The other stages I don't see much happening which is a shame because it would of been better to have a 20-30km tt in Madrid or have a tt the day before madrid. Seems anti-climatic. I think it pulls it's punches.

Because quite a few mtn stages don't have as many undulations before the MTF's. So does this suit any rider?

 

[Descender]

All those MTFs are legit HCs, except Farrapona and Peña Cabarga.

San Lorenzo is a HC (again, 1st cat is the highest category for a climb in the Vuelta now), Cordal is a tough climb.

Average gradient for Peña Cabarga is 9.4%.

You don't see much happening in the other stages? Really??

 

[auscyclefan94]

All those MTFs are legit HCs, except Farrapona and Peña Cabarga.

San Lorenzo is a HC (again, 1st cat is the highest category for a climb in the Vuelta now), Cordal is a tough climb.

Average gradient for Peña Cabarga is 9.4%.

You don't see much happening in the other stages? Really??

I never said that but I think that with less or no climbs before the MTF that riders will be a lot fresher. I am just wondering what difference that will make?

Stage 17 has two cat 2 climbs before finish, Angliru stage has only 1 short climb before it, stage 11 has 3 cat 3's before main climb, sierra nevada is a long but not overly steep climb and there is a big distance between the first and last climbs. Stage 9 has only 1 climb. Stage 14 looks the toughest but the Farrapona is not a HC like the others are.

Not saying it isn't a tough route and the riders won't be tired but the stages seem to leave it all till the last climb

 

[luckyboy]

Last couple of stages are a bit disappointing seeing as how we're used to a MTF or a TT in the last two days.

Another TT would've been nice, even if it was only 20km. Seems flatter than last year, 5 big MTFs + Pena Cabarga is better than the Tour though. Just looked at Wiki and 5 big MTFs + Pena Cabarga is the same as last year, so its just the final test on the penultimate stage missing.

Couple of nice hilly finishes as well - Jaen like last year + San Lorenzo de el Escorial.

7.5/10 seems about right. Give it an 8 because the racing should be fun to watch.

 

[Ferminal]

I like it.

Stage 1: Is this an ITT or TTT?
Stage 2: Token early sprinters stage
Stage 3: Cat 3 will drop the heaviest sprinters
Stage 4: Sierra Nevada... let's go racing
Stage 5: Valdepenas de Jaen!!!!!!!!!!
Stage 6: Another one for tough sprinters
Stage 7: Bunch sprint
Stage 8: Great undulating day, could be good one for the break but GC gaps may appear (what is the gradient at the finish?)
Stage 9: Nice HC MTF.
Stage 10: Token long/flat ITT
Stage 11: Another MTF (not so steep this one?)
Stage 12: Happy day for the sprinters at sea level for most of it.
Stage 13: Some tough climbing but the descent seems to long to be of any real significance.
Stage 14: Very tough penultimate climb and the last few kms of La Farrapona should hurt.
Stage 15: Anglirulurlurlurlu
Stage 16: Happy day for sprinters
Stage 17: Another good steep uphill finish
Stage 18: Perfect day for the break...
Stage 19: Seems suited to the break or someone giving it a final shot for GC
Stage 20: Suicidal attack to gain some GC time?
Stage 21: Madrid

It is a bit weird there are no huge MTFs in the last 6 stages, given what we've been accustomed to with "Epic Finishes", but there's no reason which says that has to be the case. There is still the tough uphill climb on Stage 17, and 18/19/20 are all undulating enough to provide intriguing racing.

By my count:

2 TTs (I wouldn't argue with 3)
5 genuine sprint days (I like this amount)
7 undulating days which could be shared amongst tough sprinters, the break, puncheurs and the GC men
7 tough uphill/MTF stages where all eyes will be on the GC.

I very much like this blend and this seems to continue the trend from last year where we had more stages where we couldn't predict whether it would be a bunch sprint, a reduced sprint, or a late attack. I don't have a problem with the MTFs either, most of them seem tough enough.

I give it an 8. What could be better? Maybe one more TT (a 20-30km undulater), a short descent finish (13 is a bit long) and possibly one more of the big mountain stages being a bit harder.

acf - You do realise the last ~6km of La Farrapona is avg. ~9%?

 

[luckyboy]

2 TTs (I wouldn't argue with 3)
5 genuine sprint days (I like this amount)
7 undulating days which could be shared amongst tough sprinters, the break, puncheurs and the GC men
7 tough uphill/MTF stages where all eyes will be on the GC.

From the looks of it, stage 8 could be in that last category along with Pena Cabarga, Jaen + 5MTFS. It looks a little shorter than Jaen, but steeper.

Unless you were counting Jaen as undulating, and San Lorenzo as tough uphill.

 

[Ferminal]

From the looks of it, stage 8 could be in that last category along with Pena Cabarga, Jaen + 5MTFS. It looks a little shorter than Jaen, but steeper.

Yeh those were my 7 tough stages. Is 8 really steeper than Jaen? Crazy if it is, and it will make an awesome stage with some unforgiving terrain before it.

Perhaps Descender knows about it!

 

[luckyboy]

The profile looks a little steeper. It must be a street in the town rather than Mount Abantos behind the town.

 

[auscyclefan94]

I like it.


It is a bit weird there are no huge MTFs in the last 6 stages, given what we've been accustomed to with "Epic Finishes", but there's no reason which says that has to be the case. There is still the tough uphill climb on Stage 17, and 18/19/20 are all undulating enough to provide intriguing racing.

By my count:

2 TTs (I wouldn't argue with 3)
5 genuine sprint days (I like this amount)
7 undulating days which could be shared amongst tough sprinters, the break, puncheurs and the GC men
7 tough uphill/MTF stages where all eyes will be on the GC.

I very much like this blend and this seems to continue the trend from last year where we had more stages where we couldn't predict whether it would be a bunch sprint, a reduced sprint, or a late attack. I don't have a problem with the MTFs either, most of them seem tough enough.

I give it an 8. What could be better? Maybe one more TT (a 20-30km undulater), a short descent finish (13 is a bit long) and possibly one more of the big mountain stages being a bit harder.

acf - You do realise the last ~6km of La Farrapona is avg. ~9%?

I do understand that. I was just saying that from the info Descender game me. btw, 7 mtf's is too much. I think 6 with an undulating tt and a long flat tt is good.

 

[craig1985]

the MTF's on stages 9, 11, and 14 look absolutely mental. And let's not forget stage 15...

 

[Mellow Velo]

Yeh those were my 7 tough stages. Is 8 really steeper than Jaen? Crazy if it is, and it will make an awesome stage with some unforgiving terrain before it.

Perhaps Descender knows about it!

The profile looks a little steeper. It must be a street in the town rather than Mount Abantos behind the town.

Very similar finishes, IMO.
I seem to recall that much of the run in is an uphill drag over cobbles, then it's a sharp left hand turn into the "wall".
As it goes up, it gets steeper and narrower, but the cobbles eventually die out.

It a longer climb, but not quite as steep, I would say; just under the 10% mark for 1.5-2kms. Maximum ramp I'd guess to be around 18-20%.


Again, I would stress this is from memory, so not necessarily gospel.

I see that the official site has withdrawn the route, so I expect some web wizard will be for the Johan. (Tschopp )

 

[Lanark]

Gave it a six. I'm sure Uniplublic is doing the best they can, but Spain just doesn't have the great mountains of Italy and France.

 

[theyoungest]

Gave it a six. I'm sure Uniplublic is doing the best they can, but Spain just doesn't have the great mountains of Italy and France.

Where's the French Angliru?

 

[Lanark]

Where's the French Angliru?

There isn't one, but one mountain that pops up every 3 or 4 years isn't the only relevant factor. Spain has a couple of mountain with some very steep sections (Angliru, Pandera, Bola del Mundo, Abantos), and a lot of long mountains with average gradient (6%). They barely have any good mountain ranges (you rarely see a quick succesion of dificult mountains), and most mountains barely breach 2000 meters.

France is filled with long mountains with a well above average gradient (8% or so), e.g. Mt Ventoux, Alpe D'Huez, Platteau de Beille, Aubisque, Tourmalet, Joux Plane, Madeleine, Luz Ardiden. Sure, the ASO is the most boring race designer in the world, so they barely do anything with their great mountains, but they are there nonetheless.

Italy of course has the best of both worlds. Short and steep, long and steep, long and high gradient. Couple that with those crazy guys at RCS, and it's no wonder the Giro is the best GT every year.

 

[Captain_Cavman]

Gave it a 2, a Grand Tour in name alone.

Are potential winners only tested for their ability to go uphill? What about descending? And a total of 40K ITTing is pathetic. (Do we know what form stage 1 will take yet? Even so, 40k or 56k, the point's the same).

The winner will be a rider who is shepherded to the bottom of the final climb on stages 4, 9, 11, 14 & 15 and then rides quickest to the top. And that's it. Hardly a great test of all round cycling ability.

There are a number of lumpy stages which should lead to exciting racing but these will have no bearing on GC.

 

[Descender]

The finish at San Lorenzo del Escorial is at the top of the Cañada Nueva street:

It's roughly 1km at 13%.

 

[Descender]

Gave it a six. I'm sure Uniplublic is doing the best they can, but Spain just doesn't have the great mountains of Italy and France.

There isn't one, but one mountain that pops up every 3 or 4 years isn't the only relevant factor. Spain has a couple of mountain with some very steep sections (Angliru, Pandera, Bola del Mundo, Abantos), and a lot of long mountains with average gradient (6%). They barely have any good mountain ranges (you rarely see a quick succesion of dificult mountains), and most mountains barely breach 2000 meters.

France is filled with long mountains with a well above average gradient (8% or so), e.g. Mt Ventoux, Alpe D'Huez, Platteau de Beille, Aubisque, Tourmalet, Joux Plane, Madeleine, Luz Ardiden. Sure, the ASO is the most boring race designer in the world, so they barely do anything with their great mountains, but they are there nonetheless.

Italy of course has the best of both worlds. Short and steep, long and steep, long and high gradient. Couple that with those crazy guys at RCS, and it's no wonder the Giro is the best GT every year.

Ah the old unfounded cliché once again... oh well, I'll try it again.

France and especially Italy might have more big mountains, but Spain has enough tough mountain passes and MTFs to design three or four routes harder than this one without repeating once. And of all kinds, short and steep, long and winding, above 2000m (Pradell, Bola del Mundo, Calar Alto, Pal, Sabinas...), did you know the highest asphalted road in Europe is in Spain (the Pico Veleta in Sierra Nevada peaking at 3367 metres, 44 kilometres at 5,8% gradient, how about that?)? The fact that many of them have not been used does not mean they aren't there and raceable. Read my first two posts in this thread for some of them:

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=11538

They climb Ancares from another side this year, very hard too, HC, but not as hard as the one I posted.

Again, those are only the ones that have never been climbed in the Vuelta, to these we should add all the tough climbs that we all know already. There are others, like Cobertoria east, descended but never climbed and also a legit HC:

Or these two sides of Haza de Lino:

And that's not all, there's La Marta, Llano de las Ovejas, Ermita del Alba, Collado Puerco, Venta Luisa, Fumanya-Pradell... and I'm talking only about the real tough ones, not just standard 1st cat. Oh and I'm not taking into consideration the climbs in the Canary Islands, with plenty of truly monster climbs.

 

[Sophistic]

7-8 for me, what i like is that is really a 3 week tour and not just a one week affair with a 2 week warm-up, although they should have saved one tough finish or TT for the last 2-3 days.

 

[hrotha]

Almost no ITT kms + Angliru as the last real mountain stage = snooze fest with everyone saving themselves for stage 15.

 

[icefire]

I'll skip the images to keep my message short

Ah the old unfounded cliché once again... oh well, I'll try it again.

France and especially Italy might have more big mountains, but Spain has enough tough mountain passes and MTFs to design three or four routes harder than this one without repeating once. The fact that many of them have not been used does not mean they aren't there and raceable. Read my first two posts in this thread for some of them:

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=11538

They climb Ancares from another side this year, very hard too, HC, but not as hard as the one I posted.

Again, those are only the ones that have never been climbed in the Vuelta, to these we should add all the tough climbs that we all know already. There are others, like Cobertoria east, descended but never climbed and also a legit HC:
...
Or these two sides of Haza de Lino:
...
And that's not all, there's La Marta, Llano de las Ovejas, Ermita del Alba, Collado Puerco, Venta Luisa, Fumanya-Pradell... and I'm talking only about the real tough ones, not just standard 1st cat.

Just one correction:
That profile of Cobertoria east is before the road was 'improved'. The climb is now a bit shorter and steeper.

And one addition:
The stage to Sierra Nevada this year features for the first time what they call Alto de los Filabres. Its south side (the one they'll descend) also deserves honour as a hard climb (long but not very steep) which could be preceded by either La Ragua or Velefique + Venta Luisa, with the option to have a downhill stage finish at Baza.

http://www.altimetrias.net/aspbk/verPerfilusu.asp?id=767