Tour De France Contenders - who has a shot?

[Kvinto]

Aspin matches badly for an early raid. Evans would fight off all attacks as a piece of cake. Tourmalet is 100km from the finish. That's why it's going to happen at La Toussuire stage or never, I think.

We don't need an early raid, we need the early selection

edit: and as it was mentioned earlier in this thread - if it won't happen on the Luchon stage it will happen next day on Peyragudes

 

[guncha]

i really expect the Tour to be the most interesting GT of 2012.

I couldn't agree less. Of course, I agree that small hill finishes or medium mountains nice. But they are just additional bonus to high mountain GC stages. It is impossible to make good route with lack of sufficient amount of high mountain stages for GC. I see only 3 high mountain stages for GC (Toussuire, Luchon, Peyragudes). Other 2 high mountain stages are waste:
• Grand Colombier (stage 10 to Bellegarde) – this stage could be compared to the stage to Lourdes 11 when climb of similar difficulty (Abisque) was 40km from finish and the stage ended with nothing. 3rd cat. Richemont will not change anything.
• Mur de Peregue (stage 14 to Foix) – this stage could be compared to the stage to Pau 06 which also ended with nothing. In this stage Marie Blanque (final 3,4km has 10,6% ) was located 42km before finish. In comparison – final 3,5km of Mur de Peregue is just slightly steeper (11,8%); both climbs have the same difficulty (9,4km @7,7% vs 9,3km@7,9%).

Lack of high mountain stages for GC is also disappointing when we take into account that nowadays time gaps between main contenders in the mountains are decreasing. In order to make racing exciting it is not necessary to make sadistic Giro 10 or Giro 11 type route. But TDF organizers should put at least 3 – 4 high mountain stages with MTFs and 1 – 2 high mountain stages for GC with decent.

P.S. IMHO, TDF 11 and TDF 10 routes were better than Giro 11 and Giro 10 routes and due its better balance TDF routes in general are better than Giro routes. However, TDF 09 or TDF 12 routes failed.

 

[Kvinto]

Just one question then: what's the point of making a 'mountainous' Tour de France route like in 2011 if among those GC 'opportunities' only one is really taken (Galibier)?
Tour de France is always less mountainous than Giro and the purpose of its 2012 edition is to force climbers to take existing chances instead of waiting for a perfect stage which is obviously whenever but today. Two out of 3 stages you mentioned have the biggest altitude gain in several Tour editions and if we'll get to see some sort of GC showdown only on these 3 stages it will be more than whole the previous Tour.

 

[the3verB]

Tour de France is always less mountainous than Giro

False. 2003,2004,2007,2008 just in the recent editions.

 

[Kvinto]

False. 2003,2004,2007,2008 just in the recent editions.

ok, lets say in recent years then

 

[the3verB]

ok, lets say in recent years then

right. For example : 2009,2010,2011.

 

[18-Valve. (pithy)]

False. 2003,2004,2007,2008 just in the recent editions.

False.

http://plataformarecorridosciclistas.org/2009/02/04/comparando-giro-tour-y-vuelta-08/


After having compared both routes the 2007 Giro also seems more mountainous than the 2007 Tour. So it seems it's been that way for a while. Not just in the last 3 years.

 

[roundabout]

The Giro didn't climb the Splügenpass in 2008. Wonder what the comparison would be without it?

I also see that there's no Agnello for the Tour.

 

[El Pistolero]

Hang on a sec. Your 20 years old yet youve done a 3 year course + 1 year erasmus?

3 year Bachelor with a half year Erasmus(which counts towards your bachelor, so it's not 3.5 years) and in October I'll start my one year Master.

 

[18-Valve. (pithy)]

The Giro didn't climb the Splügenpass in 2008. Wonder what the comparison would be without it?

The Giro would still come out on top. When you also include the Agnello it depends on the next hardest climb in the Giro (after the Pordoi) but it would be a virtual tie, I guess.

Due to unforeseen circumstances, though, not because of the initial route designs.

I also see that there's no Agnello for the Tour.

Why would it be included? They weren't supposed to climb it. They had to because the 2nd category Maddalena either needed work, or wasn't safe due to avalanches that winter. You can hardly credit ASO for that.

But YAY for avalanches, I suppose...

 

[roundabout]

I am not crediting ASO. I would simply like the actual ridden routes to be compared. That is all.

 

[18-Valve. (pithy)]

I am not crediting ASO. I would simply like the actual ridden routes to be compared. That is all.

I see. Well, on second glance the Giro would still come out on top with the Agnello and without the Splugenpass going by the climbing coefficients listed on that website. The Agnello from that side isn't harder than the Croix de Fer. The 12th hardest climb of that Giro would only have to have a coefficient of about 50 or so, which is of course unlikely.

But you could say the actual routes were comparable in difficulty going by that website's methodology. The Giro climbs being shorter and steeper on average, of course. It was still way more of a climber's course in my opinion, but......

 

[greenedge]

Kloden, Nibali, Gesink, Kruisjwijk, Horner, Brajkovic, Peraud, CVV, Danielson, Cunego/ Scarponi and Froome in my view must be considered as well as the ones on the first post.

I also think that Rolland and Kern should be given a chance. Kern was the French ITT champion but did not end up finishing the TDF because of tendonitis. Next year if he can still ITT well and maybe even improve, whilst having that aggressive attitude shown at the Dauphinie he could go very well. Rolland was the white jersey winner last year so deserves a mention. Hopefully this year he can improve on his ITT, have a leadership role and not lose time in the first week.

I think Talansky could challenge for the white jersey as well.

 

[greenedge]

Could Riblon have a chance of top 5? If he has the form of last year and Voekler is not top 10 by the first mountains then he may be team leader and stand a chance.

If you are referring to Rolland, apparently he has leadership status whilst Voeckler has more of a free role.

 

[Jan the Man]

***** Contador

**** Evans

*** A. Schleck

** A. Klöden, L. Leipheimer, B. Wiggins, S. Sanchez

* A. Valverde, J. Van den Broeck, R. Gesink, F. Schleck

 

[Woody22]

If Contador is cleared and avoids the inevitable crashes he will win the Tour. Still seems wierd watching him get dropped on climbs when I rewatch last years race.

Although the route suits Evans better this year he will find it much harder. Team Schleck will be attacking non stop and it is hard to see things falling into place for Cadel like they did last year.

 

[guncha]

Just one question then: what's the point of making a 'mountainous' Tour de France route like in 2011 if among those GC 'opportunities' only one is really taken (Galibier)?

Route design is about opportunities. It has to give enough chances to climbers and ITT specialists. It is true that sometimes when course is "mountainous" riders don't attack too much (due to tactics or other reasons). But it doesn't mean route is bad. For instace, in TDF 03 top 3 guys had gaps on each other in 5 mountain stages. Had there been just three high mountain stages for GC in TDF 03 we might have never seen drama in stage Gap, attacks on Loudenvielle etc.

Moreover, when mountains are not difficult enough there are questions if strongest guy won. For instance, Vuelta 07 was won by Menchov - it had 72km of ITT but the hardest MTF was Covadonga (12.6km @ 7.3%) in stage 4. Other MTFs were 12-15 km long with modest 5.5-5.7% steepness. Also majority of MTF stages had just one (final) climb. In some stages Menchov struggled but final climbs were too easy to drop him. Had they put Angliru or something similar in the route...

Due to well designed first week it was easy to make great TDF route:
they could make Grand Colombier as MTF or climb it from Artemare (15.8km@7.9%) with 20km decent to Culoz
they could make Mur De Peregue as MTF or could stick without 13km loop around Foix finishing after 26km decent.
they could make a stage Samatan - MTF in Pau area.
All in all, instead of making meaningful GC stages TDF organizers went for money from towns in valleys.

 

[movingtarget]

If Contador is cleared and avoids the inevitable crashes he will win the Tour. Still seems wierd watching him get dropped on climbs when I rewatch last years race.

Although the route suits Evans better this year he will find it much harder. Team Schleck will be attacking non stop and it is hard to see things falling into place for Cadel like they did last year.

I disagree. Two TTs is preferable for Evans as is a lot of medium hilly stages. If things fell into place for him last year it was only because of the way Evans reacted when he was under pressure. As for the falls, that can happen in any race and Evans was overdue for a change of luck. History tells us Contador is still the rider to beat but I don't expect him to dominate like in last year's Giro. I agree about R/Shack. That can be their only approach to the race.

 

[airstream]

We don't need an early raid, we need the early selection

edit: and as it was mentioned earlier in this thread - if it won't happen on the Luchon stage it will happen next day on Peyragudes

Selection is not enough. If Bruyneel dreams of winning le Tour, they will have to fire early and it will happen before the Peyragudes stage, I think. Very dangerous to wait up to the final stage, surely if they will have any chance to win by that moment.

 

[Kvinto]

Route design is about opportunities. It has to give enough chances to climbers and ITT specialists. It is true that sometimes when course is "mountainous" riders don't attack too much (due to tactics or other reasons). But it doesn't mean route is bad. For instace, in TDF 03 top 3 guys had gaps on each other in 5 mountain stages. Had there been just three high mountain stages for GC in TDF 03 we might have never seen drama in stage Gap, attacks on Loudenvielle etc.

Moreover, when mountains are not difficult enough there are questions if strongest guy won. For instance, Vuelta 07 was won by Menchov - it had 72km of ITT but the hardest MTF was Covadonga (12.6km @ 7.3%) in stage 4. Other MTFs were 12-15 km long with modest 5.5-5.7% steepness. Also majority of MTF stages had just one (final) climb. In some stages Menchov struggled but final climbs were too easy to drop him. Had they put Angliru or something similar in the route...

Due to well designed first week it was easy to make great TDF route:
they could make Grand Colombier as MTF or climb it from Artemare (15.8km@7.9%) with 20km decent to Culoz
they could make Mur De Peregue as MTF or could stick without 13km loop around Foix finishing after 26km decent.
they could make a stage Samatan - MTF in Pau area.
All in all, instead of making meaningful GC stages TDF organizers went for money from towns in valleys.

Of course it is about opportunities but for the recent Tour de France editions it turns out - the less itt kms organizers put in the race, the less GC opportunities are taken in mountains no matter how many mountainous stages are in the race. IMO it happens (to some extent) because of the only tt on the penultimate stage. Some riders (not being great tters) seem to exaggerate the benefits of good recuperation at the end of third week and probably expect to do a better tt that they are really capable of, I dunno but it looks like either of the guys who can time trial and those who actually can’t both these groups for some reason count on it (tt).
It’s great that in 2003 we got to see many mountain stages, many time trials and gaps almost everywhere but if you mention the GC guys’ gaps in 5 mountain stages only Alp d’Huez and Luz Ardiden were really decisive, which is what does matter in the case of GC battle. (I don’t know if the Beloki Gap drama has something to do with great Tour designing). But that is not quite what I’m talking about, the issue is that I don’t think if you give 2012 Tour the same (2003) route you’ll have an awesome Tour again. All I can imagine is the whining about 170km of tts (itt+ttt), it would be the first thing some of today’s riders care about.
IMO if we have two main contenders in the Tour then no matter how many mountain stages the route actually offer in the end it boils down to 1-2 or max. 3 stages where this 2 guys would really ride head-to-head. In 2012 they just won’t have the right to choose this stages (the route does it itself). But that should not make the Tour uninteresting (remind you that you argued with my statement that the Tour should be the most interesting GT of 2012 in my view). The only difference is that you see the interest in numerous mountain stages (the right to choose for GC riders) while I think it can be enough (i've never said it is surely enough) for GC climbers and puncheurs' stages can animate the race no less than mountains for breakaways. In 2011 Evans won the Tour that didn't suit him, so why wouldn't Schleck try to do the same (if he finally got balls of course)?

Selection is not enough. If Bruyneel dreams of winning le Tour, they will have to fire early and it will happen before the Peyragudes stage, I think. Very dangerous to wait up to the final stage, surely if they will have any chance to win by that moment.

I’ve never said Schleck should wait for Peyragudes. I think Luchon stage can be interesting if due to the selection on previous climbs we’ll have a small group at the bottom of Peyresourde and someone, let’s say Samu would attack there. I don’t think Andy will take a risk before the descent to Luchon but he has 3 chances he absolutely should take if he wants to win - Belles Filles (#7), La Toussuire (#11) and Peyragudes (#17)

 

[mr. tibbs]

I'm cheering for Rolland this year. Hopefully, we'll see him into a top 5, or maybe even a podium. Probably not the latter, though. With Contador focusing on the Tour and Evans possessed of a new confidence after winning it, I think the forum's general consensus will hold true:

Contador
Evans
Menchov

Andy is the wildcard, but he'll have to take control of the race pretty early on. I think.

 

[cycladianpirate]

Time and time again I hear people on this forum bewailing the fact that the 'outside world' cares nothing for cycling save for the Tour and yet, if there's one sure thing on cyclingnews.com, it's that a thread about the Tour (no matter what time of year it's instigated) will get a massive response.

Honestly........

 

[cineteq]

In 2011 Evans won the Tour that didn't suit him, so why wouldn't Schleck try to do the same (if he finally got balls of course)?

In 2011 A. Schleck lost the Tour that did suit him, so why should he bother trying in a Tour (2012) that does not suit him?

 

[Angliru]

Time and time again I hear people on this forum bewailing the fact that the 'outside world' cares nothing for cycling save for the Tour and yet, if there's one sure thing on cyclingnews.com, it's that a thread about the Tour (no matter what time of year it's instigated) will get a massive response.

Honestly........

Well, it was never said that the cycling news forum community didn't care about the Tour at all. Some may moan about the hype but still it is quite important.

 

[Kvinto]

In 2011 A. Schleck lost the Tour that did suit him, so why should he bother trying in a Tour (2012) that does not suit him?

Why? I have no idea and to be honest don’t care that much. I’m just trying to breathe some colors in the dark painting of 2012 Tour de France expectations