Tonton said:
I'm sick and tired to read about "balanced" GTs. There are as many definitions of "balanced" as there are observers. The only thing that matters IMO is to feature the country for what it is, stay true to what defines the said country. TdS should be climber-friendly, et caetera. And do the utmost to cover the host country's map, not just half of it, or less. I agree with the comments about the stage in France: I'm consistent with my beliefs expressed in other threads.
So in a nutshell, this Vuelta design is crap. I haven't voted yet, but it's going to be 1 or 2. Maybe 3, because a few stages are cool.
My $0.02 FWIW...
Of course, different races have their different characteristics; a pure balance that will suit all races is not a possibility, but you will find certain patterns emerge. Two good length ITTs, for example, are usually needed to produce a wide enough range of potential victors to create worthwhile racing on the mountain stages - however the nature of those stages vary.
Spain does not have many climbs of the same altitude and length as those seen in the Alps in the Tour or Giro; it does, however, have a very broad range of mid-length and steep climbs. Another factor is that Spain does not have the same number of ski resorts to pay for stages, and the federal nature of the country means that we often see a region take on a large amount of the race (seven Andalucían stages last year, six Galician this year). The Giro has traditionally been more of a climber's race than the Tour, primarily as the country of Italy is, with the exception of the Po floodplain, a very mountainous country, whereas large parts of France do not have that; France also has far fewer climbs of the steepness often seen in the Giro or Vuelta, but can compensate with some extremely long ascents and also the simple fact that, being the Tour de France, the importance of the race means that typically the field is strongest and the pace of the péloton in general is faster. There are small hills and low mountains over large swathes of Spain so a lot of intermediate stages is fine, it's the number of finishes on hilltops and mountaintops with no TT mileage to counter that hurts first, and secondly the number of stages where they finish on hilltops and mountaintops
after avoiding many obstacles on the way there that could have created a stage that allows people to race from further out.
What are the best stages in the race? Most people seem happiest at the Basque stages - stage 13 to Urdax in particular. Why? Because they go through an area of the country it would almost be harder to NOT have a range of low but steep, hard to control hills. It can be seen in smaller races; the Tour de Suisse should
always be mountainous - just look at a relief map of Switzerland and note that 2009 was a dreadful joke still mocked to this day. The Vuelta al País Vasco is all about steep mid-length climbs and offers next to nothing to the sprinter - as finding flat enough terrain there to present a sprinter-biased race would take some serious effort. And so on. Races should always be true to the territory they occupy... but the Vuelta seems to be forming an identity around the MISUSE of that.