Tour de France Tour de France 2022 route rumors thread.

Page 20 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Probably an unpopular opinion: Tbh, I don’t really see the big fuss about SPBDF.
  • as a first climb it’s pretty okay in my opinion
  • it will give some differences between the GC guys, and it will punish those not ready for the climbing
  • the final ramp is also quite exciting because we as spectators don’t really know what to expect, like Alaphilippes attack and then him dying 50 meters from the line in 2019 was good TV.
I understand that it’s not creative to use the same climb again and again, but the climb itself doesn’t deserve the hate it gets.
 
30 is plenty. Just need to pack them into less mountain stages, which are LONGER in distance.
Including cat. 2s in the metric definitely contributes to diluting routes, as they usually have little impact on the difficulty. If they need a cap, setting it at 20, or preferably 25, cat. 1/HC climbs would be better. This route will have 16-19 depending on what Croix, Mégève and Anzican will be, unless there's another in the Mende, Mégève or PBF stage we don't know of, so 20 is on the low side anyway.
 
Probably an unpopular opinion: Tbh, I don’t really see the big fuss about SPBDF.
  • as a first climb it’s pretty okay in my opinion
  • it will give some differences between the GC guys, and it will punish those not ready for the climbing
  • the final ramp is also quite exciting because we as spectators don’t really know what to expect, like Alaphilippes attack and then him dying 50 meters from the line in 2019 was good TV.
I understand that it’s not creative to use the same climb again and again, but the climb itself doesn’t deserve the hate it gets.
The problem is that the gravel ramp is so steep that it discourages attacks further down the climb, unlike the 2012-14-17 finish which only ended in a sprint up the final ramp once, and even then it was a much more reduced sprint than in 2019. Regular PBF serves its purpose, although there are enough similar climbs the Tour can realistically use that it really shouldn't feature so often. Don't mind that finish in and of itself at all though, unlike Super-PBF.
 
Use of the mountains and have to use them is unavoidable, but the ITT on Stage 20 and SPBDF!Completely avoidable.
Both those. And having both that Alpe d'Huez stage and that Peyragudes stage in the same version. Especially the latter. There is absolutely none mountain stages designed for action before on the last climb. And most stages only for action on the very last few kms on the last climb.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
Okay, but so how does it work? I mean the places / cities won't really pay for passing through them, they will pay for being finish, right? And there will be a limited number of places willing to pay enormous sums just for that, anyway. Also, the shorter the stages are, the less roads you have to close...
 
Reactions: Sandisfan and noob
But in all seriousness, I suppose much of the routes is not about people not having any imagination but about road closures, logistics, contracts, money.
Nah, I think there is a compromise between fixing and paving Col de Parpaillon and using PDBD, Alpe and Peyragudes yet again! I doubt it would ruin ASO if they changed one or two stage finishes and changed the route for one or two more using the same stage start and finish.
 
But in all seriousness, I suppose much of the routes is not about people not having any imagination but about road closures, logistics, contracts, money.
It doesn't explain:
  • Why ASO have lowered the threshold for HC/cat. 1 climbs without increasing the amount they put in a race
  • Why the average mountain stage length decreases every year
  • Why we barely have stages with a difficult start anymore. Aigle, Morzine and Albertville are all surrounded by good climbs so they can't blame it on the stage host locations
  • Why the race has to have a HC MTF or a TT on Stage 20 (the only exception in the past 20 years is 2016)
  • Why the order of mountain stages is wrong every single year
  • Why good options are deliberately skipped, e.g. not finishing on the PBF gravel ramp, not having a flat stage into Liège, not having any climbs before weak MTFs like Orcières or Mégève when there's plenty of options
And quite a few other things, but this post is long enough...
 
the alps are interesting. The Alpe stage has the classic run up which is what made it the icon it is, so it’s a difficult. Galibier-Granon is a dream combo.

The rest of it looks boring. OK, Arenburg stage will be fun, but SPDBF and Peyregudes in the same Tour... Planche de Belle Filles is a nice climb, but it ain’t exactly Los Machucos type of difficult.

To be honest, I haven’t examined the route other than the alps so far but this sounds like a course Jean Marie LeBlanc came out of retirement just to give his approval for.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS