Tour de France Tour de France 2022 route rumors thread.

[Froome]

I think using the term petite climber all the time is very dismissive, and also Bernal is certainly not without explosivity, he at least has more of that than Evenepoel who if I remember correctly you respect.

Bernal is a petite great rider. The slovenians are better than him in everything, but that doesn't mean that bernal is not a great rider. He's very reasonable on itts, very good in the mountains, i saw him doing great on echelons, punchy climbs,sterrato, cobbles, and typically the colombian gc riders aren't that great on that things except the mountains. The problem is that the slovenians can even be better than him.
And yeah, Bernal is very explosive and he's never afraid of attack from far.
Evenepoel almost has no explosivity, but it's difficult to compare him to bernal, because Evenepoel still has a lot to prove, and we don't know what the type of rider he will be, maybe even he will never be a gc rider like bernal, and will be a rider of one day races like mvdp or van aert.

 

[Mayomaniac]

Looks like those collaborateurs no longer know how to put a climb at the start of more than one mountain stage.

 

[Big Doopie]

Do you prefer GC riders like Wiggins and Dumoulin before Bernal, Aru, Quintana, etc?

not Wiggins -- kind of an aberration the other way around...

Dumo, I am partial towards as he is one of my favorite riders, sooo...

However, I would say Dumo is more in the vein of what I think a GT winner should look like. Remember that in his best days, he has won on the top of MTFs (Oropa? Catching and dropping Quintana) and short steep climbs (Vuelta 2015? when he was passed and then fought back and beat Froome) as well as dominating at ITT (the race of truth after all).

Bernal, Aru, Quintana will never win an ITT (unless it is a total MTT). Though I do think Bernal is more deserving of GT consideration than the other two. I would have so much preferred Dumo to win that Vuelta that Aru ended up winning.

I have asked this question before: would you accept a strong TT rider who rarely, if ever, cracks the top 30 in any mountain stage win a GT? then why do you accept it of a climber who does the same for any TT?

 

[OlavEH]

I have asked this question before: would you accept a strong TT rider who rarely, if ever, cracks the top 30 in any mountain stage win a GT? then why do you accept it of a climber who does the same for any TT?

No to the first. Yes to the second. Because I value climbers more than time trialers. And I think mountain stages in general are much, much, much more entertaining than time trialing.

 

[Big Doopie]

I think using the term petite climber all the time is very dismissive, and also Bernal is certainly not without explosivity, he at least has more of that than Evenepoel who if I remember correctly you respect.

I agree, he does.

However, remco compensates by constantly attacking from really far out, soloing often, etc... He is exciting for that reason. He is also fairly spectacular at ITT... So, I would say that remco is much less a one-trick pony...

anyway, i suggest that we leave remco out of this debate as he really does not have his place in it yet.

as mentioned wiggins was an error going the other way.

and why the hell did they put us through five of the most boring TDFs in a row by giving Indurain 120+kms of TT each year...!?

 

[Mayomaniac]

Yeah but lets also ignore the big elephant in the room that the Tour has abandoned tappones for years, mountain stages are getting shorter, and that stronger teams make it far easier for worse TTers to limit the damage.

Controversial opinion: The Giro della Valle d'Aosta and the u23 Giro often have harder mountain stages than the Tour.

 

[Big Doopie]

No to the first. Yes to the second. Because I value climbers more than time trialers. And I think mountain stages in general are much, much, much more entertaining than time trialing.

and i would argue that this is the real issue.

and that recent routes have solidified certain riders in fans minds and hearts at the expense of others.

the fact that aru is and has been in the conversation is case in point.

as I posted elsewhere, i actually think the mountain stage racing would be way more exciting if you put back ITT kms. climbers would be forced to attack sooner from further out, it would lead to far more attacking, exciting and desperate riding...

the other thing is I want the best rider to win. I am not looking to favor a rider i like. for example i love Esteban Chaves but he should never be a GT winner... :-(

and i understand why but find it disappointing that there is not more appreciation for ITTs from the fans these days. Traditionally, it was always one of the most exciting days, specifically because it could have such a dramatic effect on GC. I actually find successive MTFs where riders wait until their watts/kg make the difference in the last hundred meters mind-numbing. and i am not alone. lots of fans here complain constantly about "nothing happening" even when the GC has ten riders within a minute.

 

[Carrick-On-Seine]

What is the echelon probability? I don't really care about mountains, ITTs and sprints.

 

[OlavEH]

and i would argue that this is the real issue.

and that recent routes have solidified certain riders in fans minds and hearts at the expense of others.

the fact that aru is and has been in the conversation is case in point.

as I posted elsewhere, i actually think the mountain stage racing would be way more exciting if you put back ITT kms. climbers would be forced to attack sooner from further out, it would lead to far more attacking, exciting and desperate riding...

the other thing is I want the best rider to win. I am not looking to favor a rider i like. and i understand why but find it disappointing that there is not more appreciation for ITTs from the fans. I actually find successive MTFs where riders wait until their watts/kg make the differece in the last hundred meters. and i am not alone. lots of fans here complain constantly about "nothing happening" even when the GC has ten riders within a minute.

Well, there haven't really been to many of the Wiggins/Dumoulin types in cycling the last 10-15 years. They just aren't there. We have the few riders that can do it all (Contador, Froome, Roglic, Pogacar), the few that are great in TT and good climbers and fairly many who are very good or even great in the mountains, but at best medicore in time trials.

But I don't think the lack of the type that are great in time trials are due to the design of the Grand Tours. I can't even think of more potential these type of riders that could have challenged for the GC given the GTs were designed more to their fitting (more ITT kms) and that they chose to pursue that type of races. Maybe it's just to demanding to lose weight and keep that low enough. Wiggins had only a couple of good seasons. Dumoulin hade some recent trouble and seem to have abanoned his GC ambitions. Rohan Dennis have seemingly tried, but had some eating disorder. It seems really difficult.

As you might have seen in the discussion about the Tour route, I'm neither a big fan of multiple stages ending in action the last 2-3-4-5 kms. But adding more ITT doesn't solve that much. In most versions the last 5-10 years you would just have ended up with Froome or Pogacar or Contador winning with even bigger margins. In other version with few or none good time trialists, it wouldn't make much of a difference. And if you had pitted a Dumoulin in top shape against a Bernal in top shape, I would say that a good route should give them fairly equal chance to win. And if you then added 80 or even 100 km of ITT, you would need a shitload of mountains to balance that. I just don't think we'll see that kind of design in Grand Tours anymore.

 

[Red Rick]

Controversial opinion: The Giro della Valle d'Aosta and the u23 Giro often have harder mountain stages than the Tour.

I don't really follow those races every year, but I doubt they beat the Alpe and Granon stage tbh. They're objectively hard, they just don't do what they're supposed to do by any stretch I think.

 

[houtdffan]

Well, there haven't really been to many of the Wiggins/Dumoulin types in cycling the last 10-15 years. They just aren't there. We have the few riders that can do it all (Contador, Froome, Roglic, Pogacar), the few that are great in TT and good climbers and fairly many who are very good or even great in the mountains, but at best medicore in time trials.

But I don't think the lack of the type that are great in time trials are due to the design of the Grand Tours. I can't even think of more potential these type of riders that could have challenged for the GC given the GTs were designed more to their fitting (more ITT kms) and that they chose to pursue that type of races. Maybe it's just to demanding to lose weight and keep that low enough. Wiggins had only a couple of good seasons. Dumoulin hade some recent trouble and seem to have abanoned his GC ambitions. Rohan Dennis have seemingly tried, but had some eating disorder. It seems really difficult.

As you might have seen in the discussion about the Tour route, I'm neither a big fan of multiple stages ending in action the last 2-3-4-5 kms. But adding more ITT doesn't solve that much. In most versions the last 5-10 years you would just have ended up with Froome or Pogacar or Contador winning with even bigger margins. In other version with few or none good time trialists, it wouldn't make much of a difference. And if you had pitted a Dumoulin in top shape against a Bernal in top shape, I would say that a good route should give them fairly equal chance to win. And if you then added 80 or even 100 km of ITT, you would need a shitload of mountains to balance that. I just don't think we'll see that kind of design in Grand Tours anymore.

The 2007 tour had more than 110 flat ITT km. It was a tour for the pure climbers. The Pahaileres/PDB stage was considered the Pyrenean warm up stage. We had real mountains that made it a climbers' tour, despite a large amount of ITTkm. Go back to a tour like that

 

[Big Doopie]

...and he’s a capable ITT rider when necessary (ie, not when riding a final-stage TT with a 3 minute gc cushion)...

and therein lies the rub.

...he didn't even have to "try" in the only ITT of the entire route.

i would suggest something is therefore wrong with the route design.

also, please note that I have several times qualified bernal for being more than the likes of aru, yateses, carapaz and even quintana. he is like a wiggins winner from the other side. can compete for the win when the route favors them greatly and the top competition is not really there for whatever reason... he is almost comparable to Van Impe, though Van Impe often finished top ten in ITTs, even finished third of the 1975 prologue in Charleroi.

 

[johnymax]

I think Bernal at his best can win against Rogla and Pogi. He just needs them to have a so so day during the three weeks while he needs to be on top of his game all the time. Easier said than done, I know.

In general I agree with @Big Doopie about GT winners being allrounders but he didn't use the right examples. The riders he mentioned are all multi dimensional. Quintana is also a great sprinter thus "Quintana in green" become a thing. And Aru is a fantastic TT rider, that's why he got the nickname CancellAru. Both deserved their GT wins.

 

[Big Doopie]

Maybe it's just to demanding to lose weight and keep that low enough. Wiggins had only a couple of good seasons. Dumoulin hade some recent trouble and seem to have abanoned his GC ambitions. Rohan Dennis have seemingly tried, but had some eating disorder. It seems really difficult.

i think you are very much onto something.

i have often wondered if the emphasis on incredible thinness and weight loss (leading to eating disorders) in order to compete for GC is not more than a little a direct result of the over-emphasis on climbing in the recent routes.

that and also the constant search for steeper and steeper gradients because riders have access now to smaller and smaller gears.

steeper is not necessarily more exciting -- racers often wait until they have reached or overcome the steepest section leading to boring racing.

also, often, much more damage and differences can be made on long, successive 7-10% gradients. yes, this puts the ball back in the court of riders that might be a fraction heavier but still powerful at those gradients -- but that is precisely the realm of Merckx, Hinault, Lemond, Fignon, Thevenet, Ocana, Roche, etc. -- riders who won TTs and given the wear of a GT could rival if not at times destroy the pure climbers in the mountains.

 

[Big Doopie]

In general I agree with @Big Doopie about GT winners being allrounders but he didn't use the right examples. The riders he mentioned are all multi dimensional. Quintana is also a great sprinter thus "Quintana in green" become a thing. And Aru is a fantastic TT rider, that's why he got the nickname CancellAru. Both deserved their GT wins.

...can i assume this is tongue firmly in cheek?

the only green quintana would ever see is the green points jersey at the Vuelta because there are 14 MTFs over 21 stages...

the only TT Aru did well in that I know of is when he was eventually penalized for riding behind a car/motorcycle...

 

[johnymax]

...can i assume this is tongue firmly in cheek?

the only green quintana would ever see is the green points jersey at the Vuelta because there are 14 MTFs over 21 stages...

the only TT Aru did well in that I know of is when he was eventually penalized for riding behind a car/motorcycle...

Reddit - Dive into anything

www.reddit.com

Tour de France 2016 Stage 18 (ITT) results

Tour de France 2016 Stage 18 (ITT) from Sallanches to Megève was won by Chris Froome before Tom Dumoulin and Fabio Aru. Chris Froome was leading the general classification.

www.procyclingstats.com

Giro d'Italia 2018 Stage 16 (ITT) results

Giro d'Italia 2018 Stage 16 (ITT) from Trento to Rovereto was won by Rohan Dennis before Tony Martin and Tom Dumoulin. Simon Yates was leading the general classification.

www.procyclingstats.com

Tour Colombia 2.1 2020 Stage 1 (TTT) results

Tour Colombia 2.1 2020 Stage 1 (TTT) from Tunja to Tunja was won by Sergio Higuita before and Daniel Felipe Martínez. Jonathan Klever Caicedo was leading the general classification.

www.procyclingstats.com

 

[Devil's Elbow]

Quick redesign, with thanks to the people at LaFlammeRouge for their attempt at tracing the route based on the animations:
Stage 1-4: no change

Stage 5: add 30-50 flat kilometres at the start, haven't bothered to draw a new profile

Stage 6:

The route crosses the border five times, four of which in the final 55 kilometres of the race. The first 170 kilometres and the final two climbs have been retained, but a few steep climbs have been added in between to make for a real Ardennes stage.

Stage 7:

Added Chevrères, removed the gravel ramp.

Stage 8: no change

Stage 9:

Uphill start, something really missing in the actual route, to the Col des Mosses from the opposite (hard) side, then looping through German-speaking territory to climb the Col du Pillon before temporarily rejoining the actual route over Col de la Croix. The Montée des Giettes, with its steep first half, adds some spice to the pointy end of the stage; the finale has been retained in full. (the finish could be 5k closer to Pas de Morgins but I like this finale, it has Pescocostanzo vibes).

Stage 10:

A much tougher first part of the stage, with two borderline cat.1/2 climbs, then relatively easy in the middle before the final combination of the classic Côte de Domancy and the irregular Montée de Vauvray, using older roads to Combloux and then Megève. It's possible to continue to the altiport; I preferred the finish this way earlier tonight but now I'm not sure.

Rest day here instead of a day earlier, makes more sense, also given that it's the second rest day and not the first

Stage 11:

Added the duo of Champ-Laurent and Grand Cucheron. Madeleine isn't that realistic in this day and age; this is still a worthy queen stage, imo.

Stage 12:

Glandon instead of Croix de Fer, we rarely see it in combination with Alpe d'Huez and it's a better climb anyway. Would prefer to climb Huez via Villard-Reculas but that will never happen for financial reasons. I have slightly shortened the flat through the Oisans valley by taking the D44A and D44 from the dam.

Stage 13-15: no change. The first is a sprint, which is fine at this point, it's difficult to change the run-in to Mende, and Stage 15 is nicely balanced (if the LFR reconstruction is correct) so that the break is favoured but stronger sprinters can win in a 2020-esque edition, somewhat akin to the Lyon stage of that year.

Stage 16:

Flipped the order of the Pyrenees finishes, this takes a long stage to Peyragudes to work. As it's mostly a leg-softener this way, I've chosen to retain the altiport finish.

Stage 17:

The original route of stage 18. The short length fits well after a long stage 16 and the final combination can't be improved anyway.

Stage 18:

A much more attackable final mountain stage, with little flat between the climbs and a descent finish in an actually-appropriate slot.

Stage 19-21: no change

 

[Leinster]

and therein lies the rub.

...he didn't even have to "try" in the only ITT of the entire route.

i would suggest something is therefore wrong with the route design.

also, please note that I have several times qualified bernal for being more than the likes of aru, yateses, carapaz and even quintana. he is like a wiggins winner from the other side. can compete for the win when the route favors them greatly and the top competition is not really there for whatever reason... he is almost comparable to Van Impe, though Van Impe often finished top ten in ITTs, even finished third of the 1975 prologue in Charleroi.

1. it was the 2nd ITT of the race.
2. It would suggest to me that he built up such a big lead over the course of the previous 19 stages that he could afford to ride safely in the final stage. And he still finished in the top 25, less than 2 minutes slower than Ganna.

 

[Jungle Cycle]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1448756829664710657

View: https://twitter.com/cronoescalada/status/1448756829664710657

 

[Big Doopie]

1. it was the 2nd ITT of the race.
2. It would suggest to me that he built up such a big lead over the course of the previous 19 stages that he could afford to ride safely in the final stage. And he still finished in the top 25, less than 2 minutes slower than Ganna.

u call the prologue a TT. it was super short. there was like 38 TOTAL kms of TT.

and again you prove the point i am making. had there been a 35 KM time trial in the middle of the race, the Giro would have been much more exciting.

and the fact that the winner could relax and hardly try in one of the main disciplines that a GT is supposed to test the only real time he was required to do it shows how riders can get away without being strong in that discipline.

and enough of the "he finished 28th in this ITT and actually 22nd in this one. first of all, those are outliers. and secondly, how many riders are actually going full gas in an GT ITT... the GC men and the specialists, that is it so when Bernal finishes 35th or 40th, it means he is virtually last of the people who are trying...

again, if a GT winner won all the TT(s) but could "relax" and not try hard and finish no better than 28th or whatever in all the mountain stages, would you think this rider was a legitimate winner? i wouldn't.

it's really that simple.

 

[OlavEH]

i think you are very much onto something.

i have often wondered if the emphasis on incredible thinness and weight loss (leading to eating disorders) in order to compete for GC is not more than a little a direct result of the over-emphasis on climbing in the recent routes.

that and also the constant search for steeper and steeper gradients because riders have access now to smaller and smaller gears.

steeper is not necessarily more exciting -- racers often wait until they have reached or overcome the steepest section leading to boring racing.

also, often, much more damage and differences can be made on long, successive 7-10% gradients. yes, this puts the ball back in the court of riders that might be a fraction heavier but still powerful at those gradients -- but that is precisely the realm of Merckx, Hinault, Lemond, Fignon, Thevenet, Ocana, Roche, etc. -- riders who won TTs and given the wear of a GT could rival if not at times destroy the pure climbers in the mountains.

The Vuelta has changed much in terms of types of climbs, but not the Giro (except Zoncolan, Mortirolo has been around since the 90s) and certainly not the Tour. Less TT, more uphill finishes, but not a shitload of those ultrasteep ramps like in the Vuelta. The main difference is shorter stages and less time trial kms. And I can't say that I disagree on the latter. Maybe 30 km of ITT is to little, but I don't think you need 80 or even 100 or 120 km of ITT to create "worthy" Grand Tour. For me Quintana, Aru and Bernal, to name the best pure climbers who have won GTs the latest decade, is equally as worthy winner as Dumoulin, Thomas and Wiggins. And I really don't see many more candidates either. Maybe by doing it your way Dumoulin could have continued as a GC contender and Dennis could have managed the transistion, but other? I don't see any obvious names.

And for me it would make some kind of "nightmarish" vision if for example Ganna decided to go all-in for GTs, and RCS as a result tailor-made the route for him. 100+ km of ITT and no Finestre, Mortirolo or even Fedaia or Giau. Finish at Pratonevoso, Oropa, Monte Bondone and a loop around Sella Ronda. As I stated in the last post, if you had one of these type riders against a top climber like Bernal, the good route design would give them both fairly equally chance to win. You could do that with 60-70 km of ITT, but not 100+ km unless you have more mountains than ever used in a Grand Tour.

 

[OlavEH]

Quick redesign, with thanks to the people at LaFlammeRouge for their attempt at tracing the route based on the animations:
Stage 1-4: no change

Stage 5: add 30-50 flat kilometres at the start, haven't bothered to draw a new profile

Stage 6:

The route crosses the border five times, four of which in the final 55 kilometres of the race. The first 170 kilometres and the final two climbs have been retained, but a few steep climbs have been added in between to make for a real Ardennes stage.

Stage 7:

Added Chevrères, removed the gravel ramp.

Stage 8: no change

Stage 9:

Uphill start, something really missing in the actual route, to the Col des Mosses from the opposite (hard) side, then looping through German-speaking territory to climb the Col du Pillon before temporarily rejoining the actual route over Col de la Croix. The Montée des Giettes, with its steep first half, adds some spice to the pointy end of the stage; the finale has been retained in full. (the finish could be 5k closer to Pas de Morgins but I like this finale, it has Pescocostanzo vibes).

Stage 10:

A much tougher first part of the stage, with two borderline cat.1/2 climbs, then relatively easy in the middle before the final combination of the classic Côte de Domancy and the irregular Montée de Vauvray, using older roads to Combloux and then Megève. It's possible to continue to the altiport; I preferred the finish this way earlier tonight but now I'm not sure.

Rest day here instead of a day earlier, makes more sense, also given that it's the second rest day and not the first

Stage 11:

Added the duo of Champ-Laurent and Grand Cucheron. Madeleine isn't that realistic in this day and age; this is still a worthy queen stage, imo.

Stage 12:

Glandon instead of Croix de Fer, we rarely see it in combination with Alpe d'Huez and it's a better climb anyway. Would prefer to climb Huez via Villard-Reculas but that will never happen for financial reasons. I have slightly shortened the flat through the Oisans valley by taking the D44A and D44 from the dam.

Stage 13-15: no change. The first is a sprint, which is fine at this point, it's difficult to change the run-in to Mende, and Stage 15 is nicely balanced (if the LFR reconstruction is correct) so that the break is favoured but stronger sprinters can win in a 2020-esque edition, somewhat akin to the Lyon stage of that year.

Stage 16:

Flipped the order of the Pyrenees finishes, this takes a long stage to Peyragudes to work. As it's mostly a leg-softener this way, I've chosen to retain the altiport finish.

Stage 17:

The original route of stage 18. The short length fits well after a long stage 16 and the final combination can't be improved anyway.

Stage 18:

A much more attackable final mountain stage, with little flat between the climbs and a descent finish in an actually-appropriate slot.

Stage 19-21: no change

This would certainly have been much better. From a 5 to a 7 or 8 in my rating.

 

[Eddy Evenepoel]

again, if a GT winner won all the TT(s) but could "relax" and not try hard and finish no better than 28th or whatever in all the mountain stages, would you think this rider was a legitimate winner? i wouldn't.

But you are fine with GT winners that doesn't try hard and finish no better than 20ish in any flat stages which sometimes is almost half the stages in a GT?

 

[Big Doopie]

But you are fine with GT winners that doesn't try hard and finish no better than 20ish in any flat stages which sometimes is almost half the stages in a GT?

I am focused on the traditional balance between climbing and ITT where most (tho not all) GT time differences occur. It is the balance in skills in those two areas that traditionally have determined the best “all -round” rider. There is reason why certain stages are called GC days and others are not. ;-)

 

[Samu Cuenca]

But you are fine with GT winners that doesn't try hard and finish no better than 20ish in any flat stages which sometimes is almost half the stages in a GT?

Yeah, let's go back to the good old rules with 10 minute time bonusses on flat stages, so we'll see more GC action on those and/or give the sprinters a chance to win the race.