No, Landa just has no filter and always speaks his mind.I don’t have that impression of him, but he is not a rider I follow that closely.
The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to
In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.
Thanks!
No, Landa just has no filter and always speaks his mind.I don’t have that impression of him, but he is not a rider I follow that closely.
Great post. Also another example of a great stage was when Froome won with the attack on the Finestre. Even if Froome hadn't done a miracle ride; it already put many riders in huge difficulty (including the race leader) with still 90km to go.When we think queen stage, we dont think about a stage where everybody and their mother knows that the important riders will only move with 3-4 kms left. Loze is obviously a great climb and should hopefully be visited a lot in the coming years, but the nature of the climb is such that we wont ever get a big spectacle from such a stage apart from the last 15 minutes or so. And thats basically true for a Loze MTF no matter the racing scenario, simply because the last part is so steep it discourages people to move from further out.
I dont have a problem with a MTF as a queen stage, but generally you'd want a stage where you see more action. Take the Giro stage over Stelvio as a perfect example of how an optimal queen stage should be designed (thats obviously extremely subjective), you basically ensure an entire hour of great racing with big gaps.
And in terms of the pacing, as I think LS has noted, you'd generally want such a hard MTF (which ensures gaps no matter what stages are in the horizon to potentially scare the riders) and follow it up with stages with greater potential to make a move from a bit more far out.
So if you're Pogačar, do you wear the Polka Dot Jersey or the White Jersey tomorrow? Are there rules around this? I'd probably wear the Polka Dot given the choice, but are they given the choice?
Honestly, that would be the only Pantani celebration that I wouldn't mind seeing in the coming years (besides Carpegna, of course).For future usage, I'd like it to be the first mountain stage of a trifecta. It's the kind of climb where the difficulty of the final climb will scare people anyway, but the final part is steep enough that it will create gaps regardless. You can then go over Madeleine or something working your way southwards for a multi-col stage the following day - Madeleine-Glandon/CdF-Alpe d'Huez or Madeleine-Galibier-L2A would be great examples, or maybe over toward Le Grand Bornand or Morzine. My only concern with L2A would be that we have more than enough Pantani beatification in the Giro most years.
That would be criminal. But adding Agnello before Madeleine and then Loze and making it close to 200 km, then you will have riders crawling to the finish. And all sprinters will have to be pushed otherwise they will not be able to finish. I think they were already pushed today.Just add two more HC-climbs before the Madeleine/La Loze.
Weak field in this Tour. Where are the last three winners of the race?
Or, alternatively, restday between stage 16 and 17 and leave everything else the way it is.The harder penultimate climb, followed by easier finishing climb is very popular on this forum. Mortirolo-Aprica, Finestre-Sestriere, Palhares-AX3 etc.
And with mountain stage chains, yesterday's stage 16 would be much better as stage 18. So HC MTF, multi high mountain stage, 'ambush' medium-high mountain stage.
Yes, Fineste, Agnello, Mortirolo, Stelvio, San Carlo.. other posters on this forum go probably make this list 20-30 climbs long. Unfortunately, the hardest climbs TdF possibly can use in France are Galibier, Portet, Tourmalet, Loze, Madeleine, Croix-de-Fer, but with a good design such stages can also cause carnage from far out even though they are not the Italian monsters we all love.Great post. Also another example of a great stage was when Froome won with the attack on the Finestre. Even if Froome hadn't done a miracle ride; it already put many riders in huge difficulty (including the race leader) with still 90km to go.
Putting a brutally hard and selective climb in the middle of a stage should be mandatory for a queen stage in the last week of the race. If nothing else, it at least gives riders the possibility of going long and winning the race from minutes back and keeps the race open. There is the chance of it being a stage for the ages. On the route today it was simply impossible to go long.
For future usage, I'd like it to be the first mountain stage of a trifecta. It's the kind of climb where the difficulty of the final climb will scare people anyway, but the final part is steep enough that it will create gaps regardless. You can then go over Madeleine or something working your way southwards for a multi-col stage the following day - Madeleine-Glandon/CdF-Alpe d'Huez or Madeleine-Galibier-L2A would be great examples, or maybe over toward Le Grand Bornand or Morzine. My only concern with L2A would be that we have more than enough Pantani beatification in the Giro most years.
They all have the heart, the question is if they have the legs. I don't think it will happen.Porte, Yates, Uran and Landa all have to launch long range attacks tomorrow, if they want a hope of making the podium.
I hope at least one of them has the heart to go for it, because then the stage becomes a blinder
Glandon would have been slightly overkill imo, even so, adding an easier climb before Madeleine, like Barioz or Grand Cucheron, would have improved the route.Could you keep same start and finish as today but add Glandon before Madeleine? Glandon would be soft pedalled most likely but it would hurt legs more than the flat did today
Or, alternatively, restday between stage 16 and 17 and leave everything else the way it is.
Thanks, it's a long, fast-moving thread, haven't seen it all.Explained above; dots rank higher than white.
Too bad his legs can't speak. He is a bit of an enigma like today's stage winner..............No, Landa just has no filter and always speaks his mind.
The thing about a really long, super difficult MTF is that it tends to negate any racing earlier in the stage unless sheer desperation necessitates it. The good news with regards to the Col de la Loze is that this is clearly a mountain which is hard enough that it will create gaps wherever they put it because the difficulty of those final few kilometres on top of already climbing for half an hour before you get there mean that it becomes impossible for it not to weed riders out who are suffering or struggling. However, the problem is that because that final climb is so difficult, there would be almost no chance of anybody making a move on an earlier climb - and here we had the Col de la Madeleine, one of France's greatest and toughest passes, from one of its toughest sides, too.Exposing my own ignorance here. I've seen a lot of comments about the design of this stage and others. Why should this not be a queen stage? And why do people now not like MTFs? It seems like when there are few, people clamor for more. When we get them, people say they create boring racing. Recognizing that these might be different folks. But honest questions, who has a moment to succinctly articulate basic stage design principles?
Glandon would have been slightly overkill imo, even so, adding an easier climb before Madeleine, like Barioz or Grand Cucheron, would have improved the route.
Believe it or not, right in the very, very early days of the Race Design Thread I did a stage which did something similar, a 205km from Guillestre to Méribel-Mottaret going over Galibier South, Madeleine and then finishing at Mottaret, which is also above the regular Méribel finish but in a different direction from where they went today and a markedly easier finale.Could you keep same start and finish as today but add Glandon before Madeleine? Glandon would be soft pedalled most likely but it would hurt legs more than the flat did today
Chaussy?Glandon would have been slightly overkill imo, even so, adding an easier climb before Madeleine, like Barioz or Grand Cucheron, would have improved the route.
In the simplest way possible, it's to do with minutes of action. climbing finishes can be queen stages, but not when they have just about 20-30 minutes of entertainment, and the rest a prelude. A Queen stage must find that balance between difficulty and attrition and trying to force action from afar - so usually two big climbs and a smaller one, or three big climbs, and about 170-200km of length.Exposing my own ignorance here. I've seen a lot of comments about the design of this stage and others. Why should this not be a queen stage? And why do people now not like MTFs? It seems like when there are few, people clamor for more. When we get them, people say they create boring racing. Recognizing that these might be different folks. But honest questions, who has a moment to succinctly articulate basic stage design principles?
The drooling for Quintana was because in Colombia we all truly believed that He would deliver the first Tour de France victory. That happened at the hands of some one else. He keeps trying to deliver on his promise but after 2016 it has been downhill for him. He should desist on the promise and dedicate himself to having more fun climbing mountains and going for stages. He might have 2 more good years for that. But for going for the Tour victory he shut that door this year. IMHO.Pretty good take on things. My two cents is that Miguel Angel Lopez is a great climber, but he isn't a TTer. A hill at the end of the ITT isn't going to make a difference.
And, what's with so many people drooling over Quintana? Sadly, he seems to be past his prime (since last year?) Lots of hype around some of these riders, finally one of them (MAL) delivers!!
Do you know how viable Loze is as a pass and how it connects to potential lesser MTFs?Believe it or not, right in the very, very early days of the Race Design Thread I did a stage which did something similar, a 205km from Guillestre to Méribel-Mottaret going over Galibier South, Madeleine and then finishing at Mottaret, which is also above the regular Méribel finish but in a different direction from where they went today and a markedly easier finale.
I can't see how that looked now because it was uploaded on tinypic so the images are gone, and I was using tracks4bikers at the time which is dead. There are a lot of fanciful things in that early Tour route though, and several things I would do differently now.