Rate the TdF 2017 route

[Squire]

Re:

I want more TT's as well. I want Quintana to win it fair and square with the longer TT's. If he can't then that would be fair anyway.

Having said that the Colombians are not the only ones benefiting from this anyway. Think about the French riders.

I absolutely agree. If Quintana wins the Tour, I want it to be because he's so good in the mountains that he overcomes the likely deficit from the time trials. I don't want a rider to win because he's slightly better than the others at one thing, in this instance climbing. Of course with a satisfactory amount of TT we would need a couple of monster mountain stages to give the climbers a chance. For me there should be at least two 40+ km of relatively flat TTs. If that puts the likes of Quintana off and makes them not even bother to try for the win, then too bad for them. It never stopped Pantani and Rasmussen. If Froome wins it by 10 minutes, then it's also OK, it will be deserved (no matter how much I dislike him or Sky's racing style).

It would be awesome if someone like Wellens, Alaphilippe, Gallopin won this Tour. That would serve ASO right.

 

[boasson]

Re: Re:

C'mon Prudhomme, is it that hard to create a fair and spectacular tour?

We need:

- 4 real MTFs.
- 2 big Mountain stages with an downhill finish.
- 2 short uphill finishes.
- 1 flat Cross wind stage
- 2 TTs with 60-80 kms off TTling.
- 2-3 intermediate breakaway stages
- 6 flat sprinter stages.

Thats all. Why is it impossible to realise?????

 

[May0maniac]

The Izoard MTF is horrbile, but at least the 3 hardest mountain stages are all around 180km long and 2 of those stages go above 2000m of altitude and having Mont du Chat is awesome.
Those are the only nice things that I can say about the route, way too many horrible sprint stages, not enough km of ITT and having a sprint stage that finishes in Liege should be considered a crime against humanity.

 

[StryderHells]

It's a Meh route for what has become a Meh GT so feels like a perfect match for me..... Thank F#*K we have the Giro

 

[hfer07]

I still believe the last ITT should be longer, but I guess ASO has to make a compromise in allowing the race title to be more appealing to the non gifted TT'ers

Why would ASO have to make that compromise?

Because of the SKY effect - IOW they well know if there is a 55k ITT -lets say -late on the 1st week or early in the 2nd week- then the race will be over no matter how much obstacles the organizers throw at them. Now imagine having two of those lengthy ITT, the way it was back in the 80's & 90's........ is like handing over the title before the race even starts...

 

[barmaher]

9 traditional sprint stages. And actually I think of Rodez and and citadel as sprint stages. Just a little slower at the end.

ITT are important for the race but not not popular. How man stages have a chance of a spectacle?

 

[Pennino]

Re: Re:

Maybe this favours some more aggressive riding. But we'll see. I'm fine with this route as it reminds a bit of the good old 90's & 00's.

The hell are you smoking bro? :lol:

This parcous has absolutey nothing in common with the 80es/90es besides a rather reasonable amount of pure sprint stages.

Well, here are the things that remind me of them:
- The start with a short ITT
- Not too many MTF's
- An intermediate stage and an ITT before Paris

I love mountain finishes, I love time trials, but I also see the Tour's struggling to have interesting racing with that. Hats off that they try something different, but with less ITT because of the decreased time gaps in the mountain stages.

 

[Red Rick]

Hats off for not trying anything different and replacing half-arsed or ok-ish mountain stages by flat stages.

Except for the Chambery stage. That one I approve of

 

[Kwibus]

How can I rate this TdF without profiles? Or am I missing something?
Well I know I won't rate it high with this low TT kms.

 

[BigMac]

Re:

How can I rate this TdF without profiles? Or am I missing something?
Well I know I won't rate it high with this low TT kms.

From the map video you can more or less make up the profiles in your mind. For instance, it's easy to tell most mountain stages are designed like steady, failing heartbeats with too much flat inbetween climbs.

At least two stages look good, though. Might tune in for those couple of days,

 

[Valv.Piti]

Re: Re:

How can I rate this TdF without profiles? Or am I missing something?
Well I know I won't rate it high with this low TT kms.

From the map video you can more or less make up the profiles in your mind. For instance, it's easy to tell most mountain stages are designed like steady, failing heartbeats with too much flat inbetween climbs.

At least two stages look good, though. Might tune in for those couple of days,

Stage 9 and 17 look good, yes. The sorry amount of real mountain stages will hopefully produce some good racing on these stages.

 

[Red Rick]

Re: Re:

How can I rate this TdF without profiles? Or am I missing something?
Well I know I won't rate it high with this low TT kms.

From the map video you can more or less make up the profiles in your mind. For instance, it's easy to tell most mountain stages are designed like steady, failing heartbeats with too much flat inbetween climbs.

At least two stages look good, though. Might tune in for those couple of days,

Most are actually designed like the heartbeat of man that's been dead for years

 

[BigMac]

Re: Re:

How can I rate this TdF without profiles? Or am I missing something?
Well I know I won't rate it high with this low TT kms.

From the map video you can more or less make up the profiles in your mind. For instance, it's easy to tell most mountain stages are designed like steady, failing heartbeats with too much flat inbetween climbs.

At least two stages look good, though. Might tune in for those couple of days,

Most are actually designed like the heartbeat of man that's been dead for years

Touché.

 

[rghysens]

Off course we don't know all profiles in detail, but based on the maps we have:

*) An opening itt. I can live with that, I actually like it.
*) Two flattish (as far as we know) stages through the Ardennes. OK, the second one finishes on an easy hill.
*) Another flat stage
*) A rolling stage with a MTF. I can live with La Planche des belles Filles, it's a very good early climb. I can live less with no other decent climb before it.
*) Another flat stage
*) A stage where ASO seems to take every measure to make the final as flat as possible. There are barely any hills southeast of Nuits-Saint-Georges, while there are plenty of hills (up to 250m elevation gain) west of it. This stage basically makes a detour to make it easier.
*) A decent medium mountain stage, similar to the stage to Lac de Payolle this year. Possibly there can be some fireworks on the last climb, but it will probably be neutralized because of
*) A stage where two great climbs are used in a way they won't have the impact they could have. If you use the fantastic combo of Col de la Biche and the hardest side of the Grand Colombier, don't let it be followed by 35km of flat and another hard climb. Finally using the Mont du Chat earns some points.
*) Another flat stage after the rest day
*) A flat stage
*) A good mountain stage
*) A good medium mountain stage, if they hadn't forgot the first half of it.
*) A rolling stage with an easy hilltop finish. In an intermediate weekend.
*) A breakaway stage
*) Probably the 7th mass sprint stage
*) A very good high mountain stage, probably partially neutralized because of the next stage
*) The "let's finish on a mythical pass" gimmick we've seen too much the last few years.
*) A flat/rolling stage. Maybe there's a Poggio-like climb on a Poggio-like distance from the finish, but I wouldn't count on it.
*) A short tt. Which is, strangely enough ok, but only due to the anemic mountain stages .
*) The usual Paris parade.

So... 4/10?

 

[Breh]

Oh the tears... Quite enjoyable

 

[rghysens]

Re:

How can I rate this TdF without profiles? Or am I missing something?
Well I know I won't rate it high with this low TT kms.

Profiles of the main difficulties: http://www.velowire.com/article/994/nl/het-parcours-van-de-tour-de-france-2017-gepresenteerd--de-alpen-zien-dubbel--eer-aan-het-middelgebergte-.html#comments

more info: http://web-aso.engage.augure.com/www/images/12373/TDF17_DP_FR_UK_Total_BD.pdf

 

[LeoMontero]

Re: Re:

How can I rate this TdF without profiles? Or am I missing something?
Well I know I won't rate it high with this low TT kms.

Profiles of the main difficulties: http://www.velowire.com/article/994/nl/het-parcours-van-de-tour-de-france-2017-gepresenteerd--de-alpen-zien-dubbel--eer-aan-het-middelgebergte-.html#comments

more info: http://web-aso.engage.augure.com/www/images/12373/TDF17_DP_FR_UK_Total_BD.pdf

Thx for the second link. Really nice

 

[Tonton]

Well, well, well. For some reason, I always end up giving a 8 to GT designs (unless they're my designs )...riders make the race after all. This TdF is no exception: 8 it is.

I don't understand the outcry expressed by some. Ratings below 5, are, in my estimation, pure nonsense. I also agree that the final ITT should be longer. The 40K suggestion is spot on. I also wish that half of France was not ignored. On the other hand, among the half of France that, for once, was not ignored, I'm glad to see a true Jura stage, beginning in the old capital of Franche-Comte, Dole, and featuring an interesting finish. Before that, the PDBF coming from the west as it seems is probably a missed opportunity. I don't think that Chevreres will precede it (narrow), so I'm afraid of a _____/.

One thing that warrants at least a decent rating is the Biche-GC (by Virieu, muhahahaha )-MDC, the dream of so many forum participants. I don't know what will happen on that day, but all I know is that I'll take the day off.

For the second year in a row, ASO is trying to shake the tree with different designs. Last year, the GC battle was great, so why not try again? The nostalgia about the '90s, 100K of ITT, is something that I can't understand. I lived through the BigMig years and it was no fun. I also don't understand the comment about a Colombian lobby influencing the design. The poster should realize that Bardet was 2nd last year: nice course for him in'17, isn't it? Which means great TV ratings, hype, sponsorship, et caetera. Add to the mix the route passing in front of Tibopino's house, and he forgets about the Giro (see his reaction - I'm in!). Alaphilippe: if he really is a younger version of Valverde, he should do well. A few sprints for Demare, Coquard, and Nacer, and here you go. I can understand some of the considerations. It's a business.

The Peyragudes stage is great, Izoard MTF is going to be very tough, I wish we had all the profiles, a precise itinerary to know everything that we need to know.

I give ASO a pass and some props.

 

[Netserk]

Tonton, I'd like to see what kind of route would get a 4 from you.

 

[Tonton]

Re:

Tonton, I'd like to see what kind of route would get a 4 from you.

One featuring three weeks like the usual first week of a "traditional" TdF .

 

[Netserk]

So no route ever would get below 5 from you? Doesn't it lose meaning then to have a scale go from 1-10, if you don't use the first half of it?

Or let me put it in another way, if you were to list the three worst routes of the last ten years, which would it be? Wouldn't it be normal that if they were the worst, that they would get a low grade?

I'd probably have '12, '17 & '09, though there's some real competition for crappiest route.

 

[Tonton]

Re:

So no route ever would get below 5 from you? Doesn't it lose meaning then to have a scale go from 1-10, if you don't use the first half of it?

No, because (as I wrote), the riders make the race. A bad looking design may produce a great race. And therefore it was a great design, if not by design .

I think that there are enough bones in there to make interesting things happen, if the riders are willing to take chances. The Mont du Chat stage, for example: if Froome's opponents are bold, the Grand Colombier will be a kill zone, Froome will have no help in the final climb. And that one is no picnic. Much tougher than AdH IMO. We live in the era of the earpiece. Sad. Riders need to make the race. Until they do, there's no perfect design. I think you'll agree.

 

[Tonton]

'12 definitely the worst. You say '17, we'll see what happens. We could get a race for the ages. What do we know? The '17 edition will require being strong for three whole weeks, after that we can only hope that the contenders don't race for second or fifth. That's what makes some TdF editions so bad. In '16, only one guy forced the issue, too little, too late: Romain Bardet.

 

[ferryman]

Re: Re:

So no route ever would get below 5 from you? Doesn't it lose meaning then to have a scale go from 1-10, if you don't use the first half of it?

No, because (as I wrote), the riders make the race. A bad looking design may produce a great race. And therefore it was a great design, if not by design .

I think that there are enough bones in there to make interesting things happen, if the riders are willing to take chances. The Mont du Chat stage, for example: if Froome's opponents are bold, the Grand Colombier will be a kill zone, Froome will have no help in the final climb. And that one is no picnic. Much tougher than AdH IMO. We live in the era of the earpiece. Sad. Riders need to make the race. Until they do, there's no perfect design. I think you'll agree.

I think Chat is just about the only stage everyone has agreed on so far. For me, it is screaming Bardet already

And I'm ever an optimist when it comes to the Tour, so won't write this route off until the fine details are announced (when is that usually late May?).

 

[hrotha]

"The riders make the race" is an utterly absurd platitude in a discussion about the route and nothing but the route.