luckyboy said:The Mont du Chat near Chambery is an underused hard climb in France - doesn't go under 10% for the last 7km.
Yes. You get all amped up for the Tour, it comes, and then there's this big letdown because you've got to wait a week for a decent stage. The 2008 1st week was so much better, with those two Valverde-finishes.hrotha said:Maybe they should get rid of the whole flat week + mountains + hilly/flat transition + mountains formula.
I'm all for this. Of course they always cite logistics as the barrier.personal said:Smaller teams and more of them.
Agree with this one as well.Ferminal said:Time bonuses mean working harder to catch the break on the MTFs. If you feel you're the strongest climber that day you want to be able to try and secure the extra 20s. Also if Contador is riding to a summit finish with Valverde, he's more likely to attack, further out from the line to prevent the seconds going to Valverde.
So, in my entirely subjective view, I prefer them as they seem to add something to mountain days.
Also you get crazy things happening like Evans marking Vino on a slightly uphill sprint finish.
I've long since said that the only way to make the flat stages interesting is eitherrzombie1988 said:I see no reason for no time bonuses. It doesn't make sense not to do it. I challenge anyone to give me a good reason for no time bonuses. I've watched alot of the TdF's over the years and I can tell you that every TdF with time bonuses was better than the ones without them. It makes people actually try their best, it prevents giving race wins away out of charity and it gives more people shots at winning. It also makes boring flat stages more competitive.
I'm all for more teams too. The more the better chance there is of a better race.
I'd also like to see smaller length flat stages. They don't seriously race until the last km anyway, so smaller stages would cut all the bs.