The Unipublic way

[Libertine Seguros]

You have to wonder if they aired every stage from 13-14 pm, like ASO and France Télévisions do in July, the general enthusiasm about this race would be this high. Remembering a stage that starts live on tv with 30 km to go with1-2 mountains as 'amazing' would seem a bit easier than remembering it as 'amazing' when we had to watch the first 170 km of nothing before the fun - like Tour De France.

This is worth remembering. If we'd watched another hour of nothing happening every day first, we might not be so high on this Vuelta.

 

[No_Balls]

How was that epic? The Stelvio stage was more interesting and the main contenders didn't even do anything. As soon as I heard the first time split I switched off the TV because I knew what was coming. At least at the Stelvio stage there was still the fight for the rossa, and the ending position for De Gendt to have suspense about. The problem is the normally small time gaps combined with the fact that chance for really dropping someone is small, So whenever it happens, you pretty much know the winner immediately.

It was epic due to contrary reasons actually. The Fuente De stage was less intresting on paper, because of the parcours, but the main contenders shred it to pieces in their fight for the red. Probably made possible because of the small time gaps coming in for the 17th stage.

 

[rantanplan]

AS dubbed it to "the best Vuelta in History"

No way, the best has been, and still is Vuelta 1983

 

[DominicDecoco]

This is something I have touched on in the past.

Going on about the Tour, I just find it ridiculous that France Télévisions release the pictures at around 13.00 for a flat stage with about 120km to go. During the 90s I remember stages like that coming on about an hour later at 14.00 or 14.30 on Eurosport. It just adds to the boring factor when they come on so early.

Disagree. The more time on tv the better. Flat stage or not. The thing is with this 'spectator friendly' route is that your example could very well be the way of doing it in the future. A route that is remembered as fantastic and as an example of how every GT should be drawn, when, in fact, it was more down to a given number of riders to get the best out of a very avarage route - which is also pretty much why this thread was made to begin with, partly.

 

[Peccio89]

This is something I have touched on in the past.

Going on about the Tour, I just find it ridiculous that France Télévisions release the pictures at around 13.00 for a flat stage with about 120km to go. During the 90s I remember stages like that coming on about an hour later at 14.00 or 14.30 on Eurosport. It just adds to the boring factor when they come on so early.

I actually enjoy when they show the battle to get in a breakaway during early broadcast.

But i guess the main reason is more hour of broadcast means more time for commercial breaks, so more money the various tv are willing to pay for tv rights.

 

[roundabout]

Speaking of the Unipublic way, I see the Milano-Torino revival is ending at the Basilica di Superga. Sure, it's a double pass and usually Superga is the decisive point, but still.

 

[The Hitch]

82% of AS readers say this was the best Vuelta ever.

http://www.as.com/encuestas/encuesta/Ciclismo-17506

 

[Asturiano]

82% of AS readers say this was the best Vuelta ever.

http://www.as.com/encuestas/encuesta/Ciclismo-17506

At least, one of the best GT of the decade.

 

[Taxus4a]

My opinion about Fuente Dé stage and Unipublic way:
(Press select lenguage before)

http://patrimoniociclista.blogspot.com.es/

 

[cineteq]

My opinion about Fuente Dé stage and Unipublic way:
(Press select lenguage before)

http://patrimoniociclista.blogspot.com.es/

Excellent analysis of Fuente Dé stage, 100% agree with what you said may have happened. Cheers!

 

[Forunculo]

My opinion about Fuente Dé stage and Unipublic way:
(Press select lenguage before)

http://patrimoniociclista.blogspot.com.es/

Brilliant, I agree with you, above all about parcours

 

[Libertine Seguros]

At least, one of the best GT of the decade.

Careful now. There's only been 9 this decade, and the 2010 Giro still has this safely for the time being.

As for 82% of AS readers polled, well, you have to remember that it's fresh in the memory, fans are still high on the wave of enjoyment. It's how it's seen years down the line that may change things.

At least, the best GT of 2012 for sure.

 

[Taxus4a]

Brilliant, I agree with you, above all about parcours

Thanks

Anyway later I will compare this with Andy in Izoard. Andy is not a very profesional rider, not very apreciated in Spain at least, surely he deserves in part, and some people said Fuente Dé was more than Galibier. But not, I will say why is not so impressive.

 

[icefire]

Careful now. There's only been 9 this decade, and the 2010 Giro still has this safely for the time being.

As for 82% of AS readers polled, well, you have to remember that it's fresh in the memory, fans are still high on the wave of enjoyment. It's how it's seen years down the line that may change things.

At least, the best GT of 2012 for sure.

Wrong to the bold. There was no year 0. 2010 belongs to the past decade

Agree with your second paragraph

 

[Eshnar]

At least, one of the best GT of the decade.

you mean, the decade that began in 2011? Definitely one of the best
If you meant the last 10 years... well... no.

 

[Descender]

Wrong to the bold. There was no year 0. 2010 belongs to the past decade

Agree with your second paragraph

Hmm it depends how you see it. The decade of the sixties spans from 1960 to 1969.

If you say "the 195st decade of the common era" then that's 1961 to 1970.

So the "tens" of however they end up being known began on January 1st 2010.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Was 1990 part of the 80s? Most of the time, in fact more or less invariably, we say no, it belonged to the 1990s. Therefore 2010 belongs to the current decade.

 

[icefire]

Hmm it depends how you see it. The decade of the sixties spans from 1960 to 1969.

If you say "the 195st decade of the common era" then that's 1961 to 1970.

So the "tens" of however they end up being known began on January 1st 2010.

I explained why that accounting is wrong. There is no year 0 in the common era. The first decade goes from 1 (1st of January) to 10 (31st of December), and so on. And the 21st century began on 1st of January 2001:

http://aa.usno.navy.mil/faq/docs/millennium.php

As the saying goes, there are three types of people in this world:
-those who can count
-those who can't

You choose, but Giro 2010 is the past decade

 

[icefire]

Was 1990 part of the 80s? Most of the time, in fact more or less invariably, we say no, it belonged to the 1990s. Therefore 2010 belongs to the current decade.

That's just what common people think. To me it's simply innacurate time accounting because that logic fails with century boundaries:

http://aa.usno.navy.mil/faq/docs/millennium.php

But hey, we had an excuse for celebrating two turn of the century parties one year apart of each other

 

[Descender]

Vuelta director Javier Guillén gave an interview to AS.

http://www.as.com/ciclismo/articulo/vamos-insistir-finales-alto-funcionan/20120911dasdaicic_3/Tes

I'll just quote this bit:

Q: More than ten MTFs next year?
Guillén: I don't think we'll have more than ten. But you can't rule it out. These finishes work with the crowd and the fans. We'll keep at it.

 

[veji11]

That was a fun thread (was linked to from the rate the Vuelta thread) and I must say I agree with the general purpose. Give is more Porrentruy 2012 type stages on the Vuelta ! it is so possible ! give us 3/4 good descent finishes and limit yourself to 5/6 MTFS. please ?§

 

[Netserk]

Was 1990 part of the 80s? Most of the time, in fact more or less invariably, we say no, it belonged to the 1990s. Therefore 2010 belongs to the current decade.

Therefore 2010 belongs to the '10s.

In Danish we use both of "1900-tallet" and "20. århundrede". I'd argue that the first goes from 1900 to 1999 and that the second goes from 1901 to 2000 (just as the very first century goes from 1 to 100). When the discussion is about the current decade I think it's the 202nd decade (2011-2020) not the 2010s (2010-2019).

Just found out that wiki agrees with me: "Det 20. århundrede består af årene 1901 til 2000, det er ofte forvekslet med 1900-tallet som består af årene 1900 til 1999."

 

[Jagartrott]

80s, 90s etc are called that because they end with '8x' and '9x'.
When you take about decades, centuries and millennia as such though, you're right. The third millennium started in 2001, not in 2000.

Edit: I now see you basically said all of that.

Anyway: Boo Vuelta design, boo!