Tour 2012: Route Rumours / Our wishes

[Luke Schmid]

Stages 8, 10, 14, 16 possible Nibali territory, or Samu Sanchez.

 

[l.Harm]

Doesn't seem too bad to me. It's not like this year we have to wait more than two weeks for some action. I like stage 8 and stage 11 is a serious mountain stage. Stage 16 queen stage?

 

[Dekker_Tifosi]

I wonder if this route will influence team selections.

I mean some climbers must think there is no chance for them to win now and go for the Giro or the Vuelta?

 

[theyoungest]

Doesn't seem too bad to me. It's not like this year we have to wait more than two weeks for some action. I like stage 8 and stage 11 is a serious mountain stage. Stage 16 queen stage?

Personally I thought the first week wasn't that boring this year. Maybe not for the reasons it should be though. But after that the excitement only really started in the final weekend, that's true.

I wonder if this route will influence team selections.

I mean some climbers must think there is no chance for them to win now and go for the Giro or the Vuelta?

You really think that? Maybe for an Italian or Spaniard it's different, but for the boys from the Low Countries I'm afraid it will be the Tour and nothing but the Tour again. Even for VDB, the worst time trialist of them all.

 

[Magnus]

The easier climbs in the Giro would be fully classed HC's in the Tour.

Etna was something like 6.5% for 21km.

The part Bertie attacked on and spent the first few km stretching his lead on was over 8%

He also owned on Grossglockner though people forget that one because he gave the stage to Rujano, and that if included in the Tour would be the hardest climb they ever done.

Etna was classified 1 in the GdI. Just like your beloved Crostis and Zoncolan.

Btw, Etna was 19.4 km and 6.2% (the second time, the first time was 18 km, 6.1 %).
In comparison Cormet de Roselend is 20.3 km, 6% and is categorized 1, not HC.

The climb of grossglockner was 15 km at 6.4 %. Even with some steep parts I disagree it is harder than any climb ever done in the tour.

 

[Luke Schmid]

Doesn't seem too bad to me. It's not like this year we have to wait more than two weeks for some action. I like stage 8 and stage 11 is a serious mountain stage. Stage 16 queen stage?

Possibly stage 16, maybe 11, both have two hard climbs followed by 2 easier climbs. It is possible being MTFs that stages 17 and even 7 will have bigger gaps than stage 16.

 

[Magnus]

Any1 got profiles for them? on ASO's homepage I can only see profiles of the stages in tghe Alps

http://www.letour.fr/2012/TDF/COURSE/us/les_sommets_du_tour.html

 

[l.Harm]

Personally I thought the first week wasn't that boring this year. Maybe not for the reasons it should be though. But after that the excitement only really started in the final weekend, that's true.


You really think that? Maybe for an Italian or Spaniard it's different, but for the boys from the Low Countries I'm afraid it will be the Tour and nothing but the Tour again. Even for VDB, the worst time trialist of them all.

Imo this years Tour was pretty boring the first weeks.

Mollema said this one doesn't fit him. Would be nice if he'll do Giro-Vuelta But he'll probably do the Tour I think.

 

[Cimber]

I wonder if this route will influence team selections.

I mean some climbers must think there is no chance for them to win now and go for the Giro or the Vuelta?

Ideally thje Schlecklets would ain for the Giro and maybe then Andy can actually win a stage race. Would be good for him. But, alas, I am sure they will go all in on the Tourand get nothing to show from it apart from a stagewin maybe and a top 5.

 

[roundabout]

http://www.letour.fr/2012/TDF/COURSE/us/les_sommets_du_tour.html

The muppets at letour still have 2011 stages linked

The only Pyrenees stage missing is the one to Peyragudes as the stage to Luchon is a rerun

 

[Magnus]

The muppets at letour still have 2011 stages linked

Here then:
http://www.letour.fr/2012/TDF/COURSE/fr/les_sommets_du_tour.html

Nice that it is only updated in the french version.

 

[Bavarianrider]

 

[The Hitch]

Etna was classified 1 in the GdI. Just like your beloved Crostis and Zoncolan.

Btw, Etna was 19.4 km and 6.2% (the second time, the first time was 18 km, 6.1 %).
In comparison Cormet de Roselend is 20.3 km, 6% and is categorized 1, not HC.

The climb of grossglockner was 15 km at 6.4 %. Even with some steep parts I disagree it is harder than any climb ever done in the tour.

Well I got Etna wrong, though I should point out that Galibier was HC in last years Tour and that was 23km at 5.1%.

And I guess I overestimated Grossglockner too, though I should point out that if you take away the descent sections, the gradient is steeper.

Still, you are right, it would not be the hardest climb in the history of the Tour. Not even close. For some reason I thought it was much harder.

 

[richardp]

From the BBC website:

Race director Christophe Prudhomme said: "There are new climbs featuring very steep parts with very high gradients.

"It should make for a thrilling race. Those who want to attack a long way from the finish will be able to do so."

One of the new climbs, to the top of the Planche des Belles Filles on stage seven, is a 5.9km climb at an average gradient of 8.5%.

However, Prudhomme added: "Once the roads are completely finished, we will add a final 270m with some 60m at 20.2%."

Another new climb will be the Mur de Peguere, with gradients reaching 18%, a rarity in Tour de France history.

 

[Magnus]

Well I got Etna wrong, though I should point out that Galibier was HC in last years Tour and that was 23km at 5.1%.

And I guess I overestimated Grossglockner too, though I should point out that if you take away the descent sections, the gradient is steeper.

Still, you are right, it would not be the hardest climb in the history of the Tour. Not even close. For some reason I thought it was much harder.

I took away the descent section, when i calculated the gradient (in vertical gain, not in horizontal direction).
If you climbed to the top (2571 m) it would be harder. GdI stopped at 2100 plus something m.

Edit:
The categorizations seem somewhat arbitrary. Galibier is HC because it's Galibier I guess... Even when they do it from the easy side. Of course max gradient, altitude, history and placing in stage also plays a role in the categorization.
For instance the last 23.7 km of Pt St Bernard is 5.1 % and this was categorized 1 in 2009

 

[The Hitch]

Ideally thje Schlecklets would ain for the Giro and maybe then Andy can actually win a stage race. Would be good for him. But, alas, I am sure they will go all in on the Tourand get nothing to show from it apart from a stagewin maybe and a top 5.

Andy and Frank will attack like mad on Galibier, Contador and the others will try to go with them, and might end up doing like 16 2009 with those 3 finishing together.

Add Andy going all out on 1 of the small mtfs and he might get a podium.

 

[Kwibus]

What I've seen so far is really despressing.

Nice TT miles, but where is the long hard mountain stage to equal that?

Pure climbers should all go to the Giro. Nothing to get in the TdF, unless they ride for stage wins.

 

[The Hitch]

I took away the descent section, when i calculated the gradient (in vertical gain, not in horizontal direction).
If you climbed to the top (2571 m) it would be harder. GdI stopped at 2100 plus something m.

You sure it was 15k at 6.4%?

Looking at this profile, I would expect the 10% and 9% km to more than cancel out the short 5% section and move the overall grade up from the 6.4% section at the end.

Dont know though, more guessing.

 

[just some guy]

From the BBC website:

Race director Christophe Prudhomme said: "There are new climbs featuring very steep parts with very high gradients.

"It should make for a thrilling race. Those who want to attack a long way from the finish will be able to do so."

One of the new climbs, to the top of the Planche des Belles Filles on stage seven, is a 5.9km climb at an average gradient of 8.5%.

However, Prudhomme added: "Once the roads are completely finished, we will add a final 270m with some 60m at 20.2%."

Another new climb will be the Mur de Peguere, with gradients reaching 18%, a rarity in Tour de France history.

A wall at the end of that -

Could be a nice stage -

the route seems not as bad as I 1st thought but some of the finishes are way too long from the last descent

 

[Ferminal]

It's basically Pena Cabarga, bring on the Froome wagon.

 

[Forunculo]

It's basically Pena Cabarga, bring on the Froome wagon.

Since ASO is behind the Vuelta we can claim that Pena Cabarga finnish liked to much Tour organizers

 

[jonjungel]

I gave the Giro 7 out of 10, losing 3 points on too few TT kilometers. So to stay relatively consistent, I give equal points to the Tour, because it lacks a long and hard mountain stage.

Still 7 out of 10 is not too bad.

 

[roundabout]

You know things are bad when the "wall" which is 270 meters long and the whopping 60 meters at 20% get a mention.

 

[masking_agent]

does prudhomme actually know the speeds and power professional cyclists are capable of nowadays ?

 

[Magnus]

You sure it was 15k at 6.4%?

Looking at this profile, I would expect the 10% and 9% km to more than cancel out the short 5% section and move the overall grade up from the 6.4% section at the end.

Dont know though, more guessing.

Well calculating with start in Pockhorn the average gradient is (2137-1174+49)/15750=0.064
Where the 2137 is finish altitude, 1174 is altitude at Pockhorn and the 49 is the altitude loss in the descent.