The most interesting tour for years

[Mellow Velo]

The stage I am awaiting with most anticipation is........................Mende.
Doesn't that say it all?

 

[Dekker_Tifosi]

Every year the prestige of the Grand Tours is in the order
1. Tour
2. Giro
3. Vuelta.

Every year the quality of the racing in the Grand Tours is in the order
1. Giro
2. Vuelta
3. Tour

Remember the Monte Grappa stage of the Giro? Where the GC candidates were pushing it hard despite there being over 40k to go? Where they crested the climb with only 3 men remaining, then you had Nibali attacking on the descent and soloing in?

If the Col de la Madeleine stage, which is near identical, involves that much action, I'll eat a bug. That kind of profile in the Tour is a recipe for conservative racing (don't want to risk blowing up another day), and either the break will be allowed to go or the vast majority of GC contenders will come in together, like the Jausiers finish in the 2008 Tour.

Indeed, I'll go to a gay bar in a leather suit if anything like the Monte Grappa happens on the Madeleine stage

 

[Kwibus]

Indeed, I'll go to a gay bar in a leather suit if anything like the Monte Grappa happens on the Madeleine stage

I doubt it indeed, but I sure hope so.
For the stages that end uphill the pure climbers like the Schlecks and Gesink should attack on the mountain before the last mountain to gain really lots of time.
Stage 8 they should attack on Col de la Ramaz, but I'm sure they won't as it's too early in the TdF so they are still afraid of blowing up and Gesink won't be allowed by Rabo for sure.
Stage 14. Attack on the Port de Pailharres....
Stage 17. Attacking on Col de Soulor with a lot of ' flat ' till the Tourmalet might seem suicide, but since it's the last mountain stage in which things could happen I hope it will happen, but again I doubt it.

Let's hope for the best.

 

[Dekker_Tifosi]

I remember the Port de Pailheres from 2007.. it was the penultimate climb there too wasn't it?
T.Dekker reducing the group to some 15 men... obviously on the juice when we look back at it, but still.

 

[theyoungest]

Indeed, I'll go to a gay bar in a leather suit if anything like the Monte Grappa happens on the Madeleine stage

Well, if some of the major contenders have lost 12 minutes in an earlier stage, like they did in the Giro, maybe the action will be similar. The gay bar joke is a bit cheap, though. And not very funny.

 

[Dekker_Tifosi]

It's no joke, it's dead serious.

 

[movingtarget]

I am less enthused. A dull route compared to the Giro. One flat, long time trial and the mountain stages are nothing special. Everyone knows who will win. I think the fight for the Green jersey could be one of the more interesting aspects. Let's face it, the Tour needs a makeover and do we need to see any more flat, Dutch, traffic furniture, crash ridden stages. Even some of the finishes to stages in the Giro's first week were very dangerous and on narrow roads. The first few days of the Giro almost ruined the chances of some of the best riders in the race. If they are going to start the race in another country it may be worth thinking about the rider's safety.

 

[Race Radio]

I think it will be a good tour. Stages 7, 8, 9, 14, 15, should be very interesting. The cobbles will make it like NASCAR. The course is perfect for old man Armstrong current condition and he will hang on to making the podium.

 

[Anonymous]

The only way this TdF gets compelling is if AC shows weakness early. If the Schlecks sense form (AC's) not quite where it was last year, or if AC is isolated repeatedly... or if AC loses significant time on stage 3... But, if AC shows he's as good as last year then the race becomes a fight for the podium. It will be like watching P-R this year... once Cancellara went the race was over and boring as hell.

 

[Dedelou]

Something is not adding up here unless people's have not yet noticed but as a rule the TDF is always longer than the others, the total climbing surpasses both Giro or Vuelta. The competition generally includes all the best riders in the cycling world and you say it is not exciting? You can always play reruns of the Tour of California.
Take a trip to discover the two alpes stages than let me know the boring parts of it. as far as the middle stages in the center of France they are leg breakers by any standard. Not to mention the Pyrenees in the last week. I think it is how you look at it.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Something is not adding up here unless people's have not yet noticed but as a rule the TDF is always longer than the others, the total climbing surpasses both Giro or Vuelta.

The 2009 Tour was a massive, leg-crushing 2 km longer than the 2009 Giro.
The Tour also actually tends to include less time going uphill, but the Vuelta and Giro don't have 4th-category climbs so those aren't counted in the totals for those races.

The competition generally includes all the best riders in the cycling world and you say it is not exciting? You can always play reruns of the Tour of California.

Interesting that you use the Tour of California as the counterpoint there, since many people said that California would be a great race because of having an excellent field. Just because the best riders are there doesn't automatically mean the race will be good - remember the World Cup final four years ago was 0-0!

Take a trip to discover the two alpes stages than let me know the boring parts of it.

All of it apart from the final climb, usually. And even these don't tend to be as dramatic as the climbs of the Vuelta and Giro since there's more to lose, so people race more conservatively.

as far as the middle stages in the center of France they are leg breakers by any standard. Not to mention the Pyrenees in the last week. I think it is how you look at it.

And if you look at it from the perspective of somebody who's watched a lot of cycling all year round, the Tour is always underwhelming and more often than not features a better cast than the other two Grand Tours, but less excitement because the riders all cancel each other out and aren't as willing to take risks because the price of failure is higher.

 

[therhodeo]

Something is not adding up here unless people's have not yet noticed but as a rule the TDF is always longer than the others, the total climbing surpasses both Giro or Vuelta. The competition generally includes all the best riders in the cycling world and you say it is not exciting? You can always play reruns of the Tour of California.
Take a trip to discover the two alpes stages than let me know the boring parts of it. as far as the middle stages in the center of France they are leg breakers by any standard. Not to mention the Pyrenees in the last week. I think it is how you look at it.

Big Bear in the TOC should be a good lesson in elevation gain not equaling an exciting mountain stage. The tour is what 70 miles longer than the Giro total? Thats 3 miles per stage over 21 stages. I don't think any of the riders are going to be noticing that.

And the competition including the best riders is part of what makes it so boring. 30 riders who really don't want to lose is infinitely more boring than 10 guys who really want to win. And that sums up the difference between the Giro and the Tour for me.

 

[Eyeballs Out]

I think this year's Tour parcours is the best for years. Tedious TTs down to a minimum, another possible crosswinds stage, the cobbles stage and some of the steeper climbs being used. Shame that the Ardennes stage looks a bit tame but overall the roads are there for an exciting race so it's up to the teams

Personally I think that while Contador is obviously a strong favourite he's not unbeatable and there are enough flaws that can be exposed especially in the first week. What the GC really needs is Liquigas and Rabobank to be strong but we'll see

 

[ilillillli]

30 who really don't want to lose is infinitely more boring than 10 guys who really want to win. And that sums up the difference between the Giro and the Tour for me.

there have been a lot of good, completely accurate quotables in this thread. this is most certainly one of them.

 

[Anonymous]

Something is not adding up here unless people's have not yet noticed but as a rule the TDF is always longer than the others, the total climbing surpasses both Giro or Vuelta. The competition generally includes all the best riders in the cycling world and you say it is not exciting? You can always play reruns of the Tour of California.
Take a trip to discover the two alpes stages than let me know the boring parts of it. as far as the middle stages in the center of France they are leg breakers by any standard. Not to mention the Pyrenees in the last week. I think it is how you look at it.

Did you actually WATCH last year's TdF? It was more boring than watching two flies f*ck. "Hey, lets put the Tourmalet in the middle of the freaking stage, thereby neutralizing it and then we can have a sprint finish at the end...doesn't that sound GREAT???!!!"

 

[Magnus]

I don't understand why all the haters complain all the time. You're free not to watch. I like the tour because it's the main goal for so many riders that nothing happens at random(barring 2006 but clearly 2006 was an anmoaly). The winner of the tour is the best gt rider in the world. The winner of the giro/vuelta is someone who's usually not strong enough to compete for the gc in the tour.

 

[flicker]

I don't understand why all the haters complain all the time. You're free not to watch. I like the tour because it's the main goal for so many riders that nothing happens at random(barring 2006 but clearly 2006 was an anmoaly). The winner of the tour is the best gt rider in the world. The winner of the giro/vuelta is someone who's usually not strong enough to compete for the gc in the tour.

Exactly. Strongest rider wins the tour. Fields in the Vuelta/Giro do not usually have the top quality fields of the tour. Also the top riders are peaking in the tour. It takes a good eye to see the excitement in the tour. It is there though. I imagine the complainers want to see top tier riders blow up and die? Like Simpson, or Merckx having to be revived and hopitalized after a stage. Or riders having to be hospitalized after efforts? Probably the most exciting riders are banned now from the Gts, Landis,Shumaker ,Ricco,Hamilton, Rasmussen,Mayo etc. Oh well at least Vino is back. tee hee

 

[Anonymous]

I don't understand why all the haters complain all the time. You're free not to watch. I like the tour because it's the main goal for so many riders that nothing happens at random(barring 2006 but clearly 2006 was an anmoaly). The winner of the tour is the best gt rider in the world. The winner of the giro/vuelta is someone who's usually not strong enough to compete for the gc in the tour.

I have this one fellas.

Because it is the main goal for many riders, we would like to see a race that challenges them a bit more. The problem is not with the riders, it is with the stage on which they perform. When the race is decided on boring stages, then the race is boring regardless of the protagonists. Like I said, watch a replay of stage 9 of last year's tour (not the only boring, ill planned stage mind you, but certainly the worst) and tell me what if anything was exciting about it. Then in part 2 of your essay, explain how a stage with the Tourmalet should be done if one wants to watch an exciting stage.

I will also freely admit that the idea of the Tour being the only race fanboys really care about is also a bit annoying. There is fantastic racing for most of the year, but it seems that a large number of people seem only to show up and post/care about cycling from the end of June till the beginning of August. The rest of the year, those of us who actually watch cycling, and not just one rider get to converse regarding things involving cycling in the other 11 months. Call me a hater, but fact is that this pattern has been repeated for many MANY years.

 

[flicker]

I have this one fellas.

Because it is the main goal for many riders, we would like to see a race that challenges them a bit more. The problem is not with the riders, it is with the stage on which they perform. When the race is decided on boring stages, then the race is boring regardless of the protagonists. Like I said, watch a replay of stage 9 of last year's tour (not the only boring, ill planned stage mind you, but certainly the worst) and tell me what if anything was exciting about it. Then in part 2 of your essay, explain how a stage with the Tourmalet should be done if one wants to watch an exciting stage.

I will also freely admit that the idea of the Tour being the only race fanboys really care about is also a bit annoying. There is fantastic racing for most of the year, but it seems that a large number of people seem only to show up and post/care about cycling from the end of June till the beginning of August. The rest of the year, those of us who actually watch cycling, and not just one rider get to converse regarding things involving cycling in the other 11 months. Call me a hater, but fact is that this pattern has been repeated for many MANY years.

It is the only race in the US that has coverage. Even the ToC has little coverage in the US. Lance and LeMond capitlized on that market. Blame those two for the fanboys.

 

[Mellow Velo]

For the Tour to be the most interesting, what must happen?

Well, stage 1 needs the echelon carnage of the Giro's Middleburg stage.
Stage 3 on the cobbles to have the grit and determination of the Giro's Montalcino strada bianchi mud wrestling epic.
Morzine Avoriaz needs to surpass the Monte Terminillo stage.
The St Jean/Madeleine stage must have a GC sort out like the Monte Grappa grapple.
Rousses, Mende and Luchon to surpass Pejo Terme, The Gavia/Tonale and L'Aquila's great escape??????
Plateau de Bonascre and the Tourmalet must go toe-to-toe with the Mighty Zoncolan and Mortirolo.
Paulliac to grand cru over Plan de Corones?

All in all, I'd say you'd get better odds on a French winner. That would give those who whine about field quality over parcours something to get their teeth into!

 

[alberto.legstrong]

It is the only race in the US that has coverage. Even the ToC has little coverage in the US. Lance and LeMond capitlized on that market. Blame those two for the fanboys.

whhaaaaaaattttttt........ ??????

I don't understand what that sentence means. Versus is the only TV outlet that covers cycling and they cover cycling just about year round. They do it poorly, but they do it.

maybe you meant something else?

 

[manolo]

I have this one fellas... We would like to see a race that challenges them [a lot more!]. The problem is... with the stage on which they perform...

Nice post!

Stage 1 needs the echelon carnage of the Giro's Middleburg stage.

Stage 3... to have the grit and determination of the Giro's Montalcino strada bianchi [stage].

Morzine Avoriaz needs to surpass the Monte Terminillo stage.

The St Jean/Madeleine stage must have a GC sort out like the Monte Grappa...

Rousses, Mende and Luchon to surpass Pejo Terme, The Gavia/Tonale and L'Aquila's great escape?

Plateau de Bonascre and the Tourmalet must go toe-to-toe with the Mighty Zoncolan and Mortirolo.

Right with you! Good post!

 

[Rocksteady]

whhaaaaaaattttttt........ ??????

I don't understand what that sentence means. Versus is the only TV outlet that covers cycling and they cover cycling just about year round. They do it poorly, but they do it.

maybe you meant something else?

I'll try to help explain. True that Versus (and Universal Sports in parts of the country) have Cycling coverage, but I would say MAYBE 50% of races are covered by these stations (usually highlights too, not live). The problem is that these stations are cable/satelite channels and not everyone gets them and nothing about cycling is mentioned on any of the more popular sports/news channels (ESPN as an example) Except TDF. So unless you are an adamant cycling fan, you hear nothing about professional cycling except the TDF.

 

[Deagol]

I echo those sentiments regarding the Giro as superior to the Tour, but for slightly different reasons. For me, it’s about the landscape: the mountains of northern Italy versus the mountains of France. To me, the Italian mountains are more aesthetic, the roads more interesting, steeper, the routes through and over them more alluring. If I could travel to Europe and actually ride some of the stages, I would by far prefer something in the Dolomites to the French Alps. The Stelvio looks more interesting to me than, say, Alp D’Huez. Mount Ventoux might be a cool stage, but it’s not exactly a beautiful mountain on top (not with that huge ugly antenna and all..). From what I have seen, routes in the Giro take smaller, windier, narrower, and steeper roads than the tour. There does not seem to be much of Italy that looks like an easy ride, as some of the stages in northern France where the peloton rolls through like a bullet-train. So, although I far prefer the color yellow to pink, I far prefer the Giro to the Tour.

 

[kurtinsc]

The Giro was exceptional this year.

But I don't remember it being all that great last year in comparison to the Tour. I'd say last year the Giro and Tour were probably on even footing in terms of interesting racing, while the Vuelta had the most action.