Rate the Vuelta Route

[Red Rick]

.

 

[GuyIncognito]

'Lower than 1' implies I could be voting zero. I want an option that makes it clear I'm voting in the negatives
Essentially what I'm saying is Guillén should be fired

 

[KyoGrey]

It is a disgrace, an absolute disgrace to the country. There are some individually good stages obviously, but the ludicrous accumulation of murito finishes is just toxic.

¿Why not turn 3-4 of those 9 MTF into descent finishes? I'm not asking a super route like the 2015 Giro, just that for a start.

We Spanish cycling fans do not deserve this, our great champions of the past are crying in their houses and tombs and it is a very sad way to possibly say goodbay to Contador, Valverde, Purito or Samu.

 

[Valv.Piti]

It is a disgrace, an absolute disgrace to the country. There are some individually good stages obviously, but the ludicrous accumulation of murito finishes is just toxic.

¿Why not turn 3-4 of those 9 MTF into descent finishes? I'm not asking a super route like the 2015 Giro, just that for a start.

We Spanish cycling fans do not deserve this, our great champions of the past are crying in their houses and tombs and it is a very sad way to possibly say goodbay to Contador, Valverde, Purito or Samu.

Well, Valverde wont retire in the end of 2016, I couldnt imagine Purito to do that either. I dont necessarily think that the old champions will be crying in the house or whatever, this obsession with 2015-Giro esque routes primarily seems to be something going on on CN's forums (not that is it bad).

4.

 

[Escarabajo]

I dislike the Vuelta's routes usually because is just sprints up the hills. But this route has to be one of the worst routes in history that the organization has created.

Awful, just awful.

 

[TheGreenMonkey]

1 point because they managed to actually get a route together, no extra points for any skill in the design of the route.

 

[jens_attacks]

3
Just because the ttt is not under 15 kms

 

[Dazed and Confused]

Gave it 6. Same recipe with large number of 2-3km sprints, up or flat to the line.
But there are a few promising stages as well. Praying for narrow, twisty roads in some of the finals at this point.

 

[18-Valve. (pithy)]

3/10, but it doesn't affect me as it's only the Vuelta. I'll probably watch the last few kms of the GC relevant uphill and mountain finish stages like I always do.

 

[yaco]

The riders make the race not the route making the race.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Re:

The riders make the race not the route making the race.

And where, pray tell, do the riders make the race if not on the race route?

 

[Ferminal]

Nowhere I guess since Stuey mate retired

 

[yaco]

Re: Re:

The riders make the race not the route making the race.

And where, pray tell, do the riders make the race if not on the race route?

Success of a route is determined how the riders attack the course - A route may look ordinary, but riders can light up the stages/route - A route may look tasty, but riders barely get out of a jog.

Look at the 2015 Giro - Route looked very solid but the riders attitude made it an exciting race.

 

[hrotha]

Sure, the riders can turn almost any route into a very interesting race, but it's a lot easier if the route is good to begin with. It's an important variable, and the only one the organizers can control.

this obsession with 2015-Giro esque routes primarily seems to be something going on on CN's forums

It's not about Giro-esque routes, it's about balanced routes. Unfortunately, the 2015 Giro was one of the few recent GTs that came close to balance.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Re: Re:

The riders make the race not the route making the race.

And where, pray tell, do the riders make the race if not on the race route?

Success of a route is determined how the riders attack the course - A route may look ordinary, but riders can light up the stages/route - A route may look tasty, but riders barely get out of a jog.

Look at the 2015 Giro - Route looked very solid but the riders attitude made it an exciting race.

The problem is, there's got to be the obstacles that give them the opportunity to make it. Take the Pozzato stage from the 2010 Giro - flat on paper, a couple of little bumps near the end. It wasn't expected to create any entertainment but at least there was a platform that could be used. Fuente Dé was unexpected, sure, but Hoz and Ozalba gave at least something that riders could use as a possibility of some racing from afar. Here, we have the La Camperona and Peña Cabarga stages where it really isn't going to matter how much the riders want to race. There are possible options on the Monte Naranco stage, but the riders will know La Manzaneda like the back of their hand by now, and there are literally dozens of possible stages in that area possible to give greater opportunity of racing from distance, so even if it's possible it's still a huge disappointment. Bizarrely, one of the best opportunities riders will have for long range attacks is the one I least expect them to - apart from Marie-Blanque, the hardest lead-in climb in the race is probably Mirador del Fito, but the mythical nature of Lagos de Covadonga is such that I can't imagine anybody realistically bidding for home before it.

 

[Bavarianrider]

Oh so yet another route with a zillion uphill finishes but hardly any real and proper mountain satges at the same time. The usual *** up TTT on day one and a lonely and sad 39km in tzhe last week.
What a freaking joke GTs have become.

 

[Gigs_98]

I gave it a 3, mainly because stages 12 to 15 are okay or even good. However I have to say that even these stages wouldnt be mentioned as highlights in any other gt of the last decade

Stage 1:
30 kilometers of TTT. Thats already the first lowlight. I don't like TTT's in general, because riders with strong teams get a bigger advantage than they have anyway, but 30 km's are just too much and make this advantage even bigger. Why not a good old prologue?

Stage 2:
There is a little bump near the end, maybe that will make the stage interesting, maybe

Stage 3:
This stage is okay. If there wouldnt be so many more uphill finishes like that I wouldnt even complain. The climbs before look good on the profile, but they wont affect the race because nobody will do an long range attack that early in the vuelta

Stage 4:
The next mtf without anything interesting before. Moreover there is a short descent in the climb which IMO is very bad because nobody will attack before it.

Stage 5:
The last kilometers are a bit uphill, maybe that will at least make the sprint interesting

Stage 6:
Okay, that stage is good. It will probably go to the break because I don't see any reason why a team should be working here.

Stage 7:
Another one for the break I guess. Maybe a rider like Sagan or Degenkolb targets the stage but I don't think it so its basically like stage 6 just not as good

Stage 8:
bs

Stage 9:
I think this stage looks quite good too, the problem with it is that there are many way better climbs the organizers could have put before the mtf (at least libertine wrote so, and that usually means its true)

Stage 10:
One of the two 1st category passes inside spain, applause applause. Besides that, I think we shouldnt expect anything more than the classic Lagos de Covadonga stage with nothing more than a bit action on the last few kilometers

Stage 11:
bs

Stage 12:
Could be nice to watch but that doesnt change the fact that 4 climbs (of which one is the second 1st category pass inside Spain, applause applause) on more than 190 km's are still pretty bad for a medium mountain stage

Stage 13:
The only stage in the whole races which deserves the description "really good". A pity that there still wont happen anything because the next two stages are by far harder and very important for the gc

Stage 14:
Decent stage. Only decent because there are always flat sections between the passes, which makes long range attacks unlikely. Moreover the hardest climb is the last one. For me it doesnt really matter that its almost completely in France, but I have to admit that I find it kind of appropriate to this mess of a route that the only REAL mountain stage of the whole race doesnt take place in Spain.

Stage 15:
The next mtf and the next stage with no meaningful climbs before the final climb...how great

Stage 16:
Boring flat stage

Stage 17:
The next mtf and the next stage with no meaningful climbs before the final climb...how great

Stage 18:
Another boring flat stage at this point of the race? Seriously?

Stage 19:
39 ITT kilometers aren't enough and stage 19 is too late

Stage 20:
Well, at least there are climbs before the mtf. However these climbs aren't very hard while the final one is, so I don't expect anything before the final 10 k's

Stage 21:
I'm okay with a flat parade although I find it pretty stupid to make 3 of the last 6 stages sprints, but thats not the problem of this stage but of stage 16 and 18.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

In stage 9 they arrive in Asturias via Puerto de Tarna, then do the cat.3 climbs of San Emiliano and La Manzaneda before the MTF.

Instead of La Manzaneda they could use the tougher Picullanza (I don't expect that the brutal La Grandota would pass logistics without a new lick of asphalt, but would be a much tougher alternative to La Manzaneda) with no other real changes to the stage; they could have done La Colladiella instead of San Emiliano, or even done La Colladiella and descended through La Mozqueta to climb San Emiliano giving us an additional cat.1 climb. You could also add Faya de los Lobos before either La Colladiella or San Emiliano.

If instead of Tarna they descended into Asturias through the easy side of San Isidro (potentially via Señales if they go the Tarna road), they could end up near Pola de Lena, enabling them to arrive in Oviedo via the legit cat.1 Cuchu Puercu or the more commonly-used (and overcategorized cat.1) Alto del Cordal before the harder side of Viapará which would then let them do the same run-in as their stage, including the easier side of El Padrún (not categorized) and La Manzaneda or the alternatives I mentioned above.

The other alternative would be to loop around Oviedo and climb Naranco via the side used in the Subida al Naranco after it was subsumed into the Vuelta a Asturias, cutting the climb of Naranco down but adding the short and steep El Violeo before, which looked like this. The best way to get to this side is either to go the way they do and loop around, potentially adding the very nasty La Degollada first - this approach also climbing El Violeo was used in the 2015 Vuelta a Asturias which looked like this.

If they want to end up on that side of the city though, instead of Cuchu Puercu and Cordal, they would then need to do the cat.1/ESP borderline Lena side of Cobertoria and then they can either climb the difficult Tenebredo to head into Manzaneda/Picullanza/Grandota, or its big brother Campo Dosango. The alternative would be to climb the traceur favourite Cruz de Linares which is a definite cat.1, and would lead directly to the cat.3 Escamplero before Violeo and Naranco.

 

[PremierAndrew]

It's not hard to see that a GT route should be balanced, at least most of the time. Why do the Vuelta organisers not get it?

 

[Escarabajo]

I think they want Purito to finally win it?

 

[Põhja Konn]

There doesn't appear to be any wider plan behind the layout of this Vuelta route other than to concentrate the possible action on each stage to the very end of them. Basically the Vuelta consists of a TTT, an ITT and 19 sprint stages (sprints on flat, sprints up the last hill and sprints up the last mountain).

Just replacing the opening TTT with an ITT of same length alone would alter the racing and the way teams and riders approach to the entire Vuelta. It would erase unjustice done to GC riders with weak(er) TTT teams and give more balance to the whole route.

The 4 points I gave already looks overtly generous. Though at least expectations are very low, so there is unlikely to be unpleasant surprises when it comes to actual racing.

 

[Hugo Koblet]

Just had my first look at this Tour of Northern Spain route and it indeed looks awful.

 

[DFA123]

There doesn't appear to be any wider plan behind the layout of this Vuelta route other than to concentrate the possible action on each stage to the very end of them. Basically the Vuelta consists of a TTT, an ITT and 19 sprint stages (sprints on flat, sprints up the last hill and sprints up the last mountain).

Just replacing the opening TTT with an ITT of same length alone would alter the racing and the way teams and riders approach to the entire Vuelta. It would erase unjustice done to GC riders with weak(er) TTT teams and give more balance to the whole route.

The 4 points I gave already looks overtly generous. Though at least expectations are very low, so there is unlikely to be unpleasant surprises when it comes to actual racing.

I think the plan is to make the GC as open as possible. Most GC's nowadays are massively loaded in favour of pure climbers - with numerous opportunities to take several minutes on multiple mountain stages and little chance to get time back on TT's or on shorter uphill finishes.

This Vuelta could be won by a climbing specialist, a time trial specialist, or a murito specialist - as long as they can make the most of their specialism and limit their losses in the other parts. Adding another ITT may make it even more open, but because there is limited scope to gain big time in the mountains - just one ITT can still be a significant factor.

 

[Nirvana]

The Vuelta never disappoints the expectations of those who love mountain/uphill finishes, the only remark that i can make is about last four stages, there are three sprint stages, two of them (stage 18 and 1q9) could be switched with two summit finishes of first week, the vote is 9 out of 10 for this reason.

A route like this it's what i also expect from the Giro, it's ridiculous put 9 sprint stages with a terrain like italian one...

Ironically in the last years the Tour is harder than the Giro although France is mostly flatter (even if France lowlands are slightly rolling).

 

[Gigs_98]

There doesn't appear to be any wider plan behind the layout of this Vuelta route other than to concentrate the possible action on each stage to the very end of them. Basically the Vuelta consists of a TTT, an ITT and 19 sprint stages (sprints on flat, sprints up the last hill and sprints up the last mountain).

Just replacing the opening TTT with an ITT of same length alone would alter the racing and the way teams and riders approach to the entire Vuelta. It would erase unjustice done to GC riders with weak(er) TTT teams and give more balance to the whole route.

The 4 points I gave already looks overtly generous. Though at least expectations are very low, so there is unlikely to be unpleasant surprises when it comes to actual racing.

I think the plan is to make the GC as open as possible. Most GC's nowadays are massively loaded in favour of pure climbers - with numerous opportunities to take several minutes on multiple mountain stages and little chance to get time back on TT's or on shorter uphill finishes.

This Vuelta could be won by a climbing specialist, a time trial specialist, or a murito specialist - as long as they can make the most of their specialism and limit their losses in the other parts. Adding another ITT may make it even more open, but because there is limited scope to gain big time in the mountains - just one ITT can still be a significant factor.

You might be right but even if you are it would still be a very bad idea. There aren't enough ITT kilometers to give TT specialists a good chance, and try to give murito specialists a good chance to win a gt is simply stupid. Thats like saying you give huge time bonuses for bunch sprints so a pure sprinter can also win a gt. That would make the tour more balance because it gives more riders the chance to win. However it would also make the race extremely boring because instead of hourlong fights for the leaders jersey we would have a ten seconds long sprint.