• The Cycling News forum is still looking to add volunteer moderators with. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Tour De France Dream Stage Structure

I'm already getting tour withdrawal symptoms, so I decided to compile somewhat of a schedule for next years event.

I'd like to hear some opinions on the twenty stages of The Tour (plus prologue). What can the organisers do better?

The major gripe that I have is the absence of bonus time. I can't understand why they took this away as they do make the race more exciting. To have the twenty, twelve and eight second bonuses for the first three finishers also gives many riders a real chance to pull on the coveted yellow jersey early in the race (and in my 2011 version I give the non GC riders five days of opportunities). The ten second advantages that Schleck and Contador gained on each other in various stages this year would have been extended to a more deserving thirty. And does anyone remember 2003? Lance and Jan were actually sprinting for the sprint points (because there was a small time bonus there too)!

Time bonuses could even be extended to thirty, twenty and ten seconds.

I also want to see more individual time trialling. To have just one gives far too great an advantage to the climbers (I find the high mountains more exciting, but the organisers should mix it up more). I've seen the other grand tours have a few. Why not The Tour? Most years I think that two is enough. And that the first of these should involve climbing. In some years it could be solely a high mountain event. We haven't seen one of these since 2004.

There should be enough individual kms for a time trialler to potentially make up five minutes on a climber......if they are super enough against the clock and the climber is not so great. It has to be remembered that on many stages a decent rider can still lose two minutes, even when performing quite well in the mountains (look at the guys behind Andy and Alberto on the Tourmalet). The winner of the Tour De France should still have to be amongst the best ten climbers in the tour, but he shouldn't necessarily have to be the absolute best if his real strength is the time trial, and his advantage over the best climber is greater in this area than his disadvantage is in the mountains.

At least two hours should be provided for time trialling, not the hour or so that has been on offer the last couple of tours. It is interesting to note that though a better pure climber, in 2004 Basso lost out to Kloden on the time-trial climb to Alp Du'ez despite having better climbing form in the Pyrenees. This demonstrates the climbing ability that the German possessed, but also the different racing style between the two. Those who have the great ability to accelerate violently up hill are able to break riders and split packs in a race situation, then settle into their comfortable pace while being supported by whoever was able to go with them. Fierce accelerations don't matter in a mountain time-trial. It simply showcases a climbers ability to ride at a strong, steady tempo (how interesting would a mountain time trial be between Alberto and Andy!). Hence, a mountain time-trial suited Ullrich and Kloden over Basso, whereas in a race situation Ivan would likely surge away, then continue to edge away, with the help of say a Lance Armstrong.

I like that they have scrapped the team time trial as it can have too big an influence on the overall standings with many riders being disadvantaged, simply for being a part of a weak (or weaker) team.

I know that there can be issues with logistics, but sometimes the organisers have ignored major climbs for too long. And in some cases they return to others too often. I like the idea of only going over most mountains every five years or so. Even a mythical one like the Alp du'ez was used far too much in the '90's. Let's make it even more mythical and prestigious to the winner by having it every five years or so, not every couple. Bring it back in 2013.

Logistics may take this matter out of the organisers hands in some instances. They seem to go over the Tourmalet every second year or so. Maybe this is a major link to the other Pyrenean climbs. So my question is, why was this year the first time in over thirty years that they finished on it? It is such a terrific climb. Wouldn't fans and riders want to see this occur more often?

If you're going to have a so called Queen stage (and I like the idea) then really make it a Queen stage (2009 and 2004 finished on descents). Definitely have it as a mountain top finish. Recently the organisers like to have three huge climbs in its makeup (like stage 17 this year). Nothing particularly wrong with that, but I like the really monster climbing stage as in 2005 (stage 15 to Pla-d'Adet) when they went over a whopping six cols! Four of these were all beasts that came in the second half of racing. Now that's a stage! This makes for even more fascinating racing as usually the penultimate climb (perhaps even the third last climb) will totally blow up the peleton.

I would bring back this particular stage in 2012.

They do not have too many HORS climbs in the race (nor should they) so do not waste them. Organisers should do there upmost to not include one of these at the start of the day, particularly if there is not a lot else on during the stage. The climb has to have an impact, either as a mountain top finish, a final climb with a short descent, a penultimate climb, or an early climb that weakens the legs for smaller climbs to come afterwards. I have a similar opinion with category 1 climbs.

This year the biggest climbing stage was stage 16 and it was big (2 HORS and 2 category 1's), but the climbs were all wasted since they were all way too far from the finish.

The cobblestones were an interesting addition this year, but I don't think that they should be included annually. And perhaps the organisers put too many in (maybe three sections next time instead of seven!).

The biggest dilemma for the tour organisers I think is always how do they make the first week exciting without high mountains?

Below is a basic guide to the sort of tour I'd like to see in 2011.


Prologue: 6 kms. Flat. Meant to advantage the track specialists.

Stage 1: Basically flat with early category 3 and 4 climbs to give us a King Of The Mountains leader.

Stage 2: Flat. No climbs.

Stage 3: Not for the sprinters, but not really for the General Classification either. Perhaps a couple of category 3 and category 4 climbs. One comes at the end. I like the idea of an uphill 2km finish at about 6% gradient that can give the victory to many different riders.

Stage 4: Basically flat with a couple of category 4 climbs.

Stage 5: Short ITT. 20-25 kms with a category 4 climb.

Stage 6: Flat. No climbs.

Stage 7: Medium mountains. Maybe a category 1 climb. Perhaps finishing atop a Category 2.

Stage 8: Flat. One category 4 climb.

Rest day.

Stage 9: Rolling stage. Couple of category 3 and 4 climbs. Another possible victory for the sprinters.

Stage 10: High mountains. To Hautacam, so a HORS category finish. They could take exactly the same route as the 2000 race which saw Armstrong win so emphatically. Why has this epic route not been used since? The riders scale the category 1 Marie-Blanque and the HORS category Aubisque (taken from the much tougher side unlike in this years event) before they reach Hautacam. And all the climbs take place in the second half of the stage.

Stage 11: Medium mountains ITT. Still in the Pyrenees, but only for a second day. Short course sees about 10 kms of flat road followed by about 6 kms of difficult ascent (category 2 climb) to the finish. A good day for the GC riders to be split by gaps of up to ninety seconds.

Stage 12: Rolling stage.

Stage 13: Generally a rolling stage, but with perhaps a short, sharp climb near the finish.

Stage 14: Generally flat stage for the sprinters.

Stage 15: High Mountains. First day of three in the Alps and the Queen stage of the tour. I'd like to flashback to stage 16 of 2006 and the finish at La Toussuire. There are two HORS beasts to destroy the legs (Galibier and la Croix-de-Fer) before a handy category two climb (Mollard). All this before the 18.4 km final ascent at 6% gradient, which as we saw in 2006 (after all that climbing) was more than steep enough to make a big impact. But because this is the Queen stage I wouldn't mind yet another climb being thrown in!

Rest day.

Stage 16: High Mountains. Smallest of the Alps stages, but still significant. Not a mountain top finish. I like the idea of creating a time trial contest in this situation, but the distance from the top of the final climb to the finish cannot be long otherwise the riders will not attack and we will not see splits. This sort of a stage can highlight strength in climbing, descending and time trialling. I think that stage 7 to Morzine from 2003 can be the perfect route next year. Then it didn't have much effect on the GC riders, but coming this late in the race I think I we would see splits and great racing. This stage tackles the category 1 Ramaz. From the top there is just 25.5 kms to the finish, and this includes another category 3 climb.

Stage 17: High mountains. Back to a mountain top finish. Perhaps stage 15 of the 2002 race could be used here. This included a bunch of small climbs before finishing with the category 1 Les-Deux-Alpes. 11.5 kms at 6.1% is tough enough to have an impact.

Stage 18: Rolling stage. This is usually a very boring stage, but we can still design it for a bunch sprint, but have earlier interest in the KOM classification. It's unlikely to still be undecided by now, but if not then some category 3 and 4 climbs early in this stage will make it an interesting end to this battle. The finish to stage 17 is unlikely to see the KOM combatants at the front anyway.

Stage 19: Long ITT. 50 kms. Flat.

Stage 20: Champs-Elysées. Flat. Pop the champagne.
 
Jul 20, 2010
51
0
0
Visit site
Theres another thread like this floating around somewhere but I cant seem to find it. I suggested on there that it might be fun to try the last ITT being a MTF, with most of the guys going off at 3 minute intervals like usual, but then the top 10 GC contenders being sent off in pursuit style- i.e. this year, contador would have gone 1st, then schleck released 8s after him, then another 1.30 to SS etc etc, and essentially first to the top wins. Obviously issues excist with people finishing in dead heats, you dont really want the TDF decided by a photo finish at the top of an alp, but it would be interesting to see this done once as a test run, does anyone know any cycling races that do this? The only event i can think of that does is the modern pentathlon where the last event is a cross country where they are all released like this...
 
Jan 27, 2010
168
0
0
Visit site
* ITTs are fundamentally a bit boring though - that's the problem. if you are going to have them, i think a potential improvement is to have them relatively early in the race so that climbers can go on the attack to make up for lost time (potentially making the climbing more interesting)

* team time trials are a good spectacle but ruin the race. i don't support the idea unless it is really short. team prologue anyone?

* interesting point about the different mountains used - the main point is that resorts that are prepared to pay big bucks get the tour regularly (morzine for example), so we get a lot of repetition. hautacam is an epic climb - although dead end roads are much more difficult to organise

* fans prefer the MTF but you can't do that all the time, especially as it only suits one type of rider. there is a legitimate (different) challenge in having the cols earlier in the stage and descent at the end - this doesn't make the stage "easy" by any means.

* i thought the cobbles were awesome although obviously it can cause crashes. i would include at least one "one-day classic" type stage in the first week every year - mixing it up between cobbles, hilly classic, strade bianchi type races each year.
 
Jul 26, 2010
23
0
0
Visit site
timmarshall said:
Theres another thread like this floating around somewhere but I cant seem to find it. I suggested on there that it might be fun to try the last ITT being a MTF, with most of the guys going off at 3 minute intervals like usual, but then the top 10 GC contenders being sent off in pursuit style- i.e. this year, contador would have gone 1st, then schleck released 8s after him, then another 1.30 to SS etc etc, and essentially first to the top wins. Obviously issues excist with people finishing in dead heats, you dont really want the TDF decided by a photo finish at the top of an alp, but it would be interesting to see this done once as a test run, does anyone know any cycling races that do this? The only event i can think of that does is the modern pentathlon where the last event is a cross country where they are all released like this...

If you had something like this, wouldn't schleck have been able to power his way to contador's wheel at the start, then sat there?
 
Jul 2, 2009
36
0
0
Visit site
gregrowlerson said:
Prologue: 6 kms. Flat. Meant to advantage the track specialists.

Stage 1: Basically flat with early category 3 and 4 climbs to give us a King Of The Mountains leader.

Stage 2: Flat. No climbs.

Stage 3: Not for the sprinters, but not really for the General Classification either. Perhaps a couple of category 3 and category 4 climbs. One comes at the end. I like the idea of an uphill 2km finish at about 6% gradient that can give the victory to many different riders.

Stage 4: Basically flat with a couple of category 4 climbs.

Stage 5: Short ITT. 20-25 kms with a category 4 climb.

Stage 6: Flat. No climbs.

Stage 7: Medium mountains. Maybe a category 1 climb. Perhaps finishing atop a Category 2.

Stage 8: Flat. One category 4 climb.

Rest day.

Stage 9: Rolling stage. Couple of category 3 and 4 climbs. Another possible victory for the sprinters.

Stage 10: High mountains. To Hautacam, so a HORS category finish. They could take exactly the same route as the 2000 race which saw Armstrong win so emphatically. Why has this epic route not been used since? The riders scale the category 1 Marie-Blanque and the HORS category Aubisque (taken from the much tougher side unlike in this years event) before they reach Hautacam. And all the climbs take place in the second half of the stage.

Stage 11: Medium mountains ITT. Still in the Pyrenees, but only for a second day. Short course sees about 10 kms of flat road followed by about 6 kms of difficult ascent (category 2 climb) to the finish. A good day for the GC riders to be split by gaps of up to ninety seconds.

Stage 12: Rolling stage.

Stage 13: Generally a rolling stage, but with perhaps a short, sharp climb near the finish.

Stage 14: Generally flat stage for the sprinters.

Stage 15: High Mountains. First day of three in the Alps and the Queen stage of the tour. I'd like to flashback to stage 16 of 2006 and the finish at La Toussuire. There are two HORS beasts to destroy the legs (Galibier and la Croix-de-Fer) before a handy category two climb (Mollard). All this before the 18.4 km final ascent at 6% gradient, which as we saw in 2006 (after all that climbing) was more than steep enough to make a big impact. But because this is the Queen stage I wouldn't mind yet another climb being thrown in!

Rest day.

Stage 16: High Mountains. Smallest of the Alps stages, but still significant. Not a mountain top finish. I like the idea of creating a time trial contest in this situation, but the distance from the top of the final climb to the finish cannot be long otherwise the riders will not attack and we will not see splits. This sort of a stage can highlight strength in climbing, descending and time trialling. I think that stage 7 to Morzine from 2003 can be the perfect route next year. Then it didn't have much effect on the GC riders, but coming this late in the race I think I we would see splits and great racing. This stage tackles the category 1 Ramaz. From the top there is just 25.5 kms to the finish, and this includes another category 3 climb.

Stage 17: High mountains. Back to a mountain top finish. Perhaps stage 15 of the 2002 race could be used here. This included a bunch of small climbs before finishing with the category 1 Les-Deux-Alpes. 11.5 kms at 6.1% is tough enough to have an impact.

Stage 18: Rolling stage. This is usually a very boring stage, but we can still design it for a bunch sprint, but have earlier interest in the KOM classification. It's unlikely to still be undecided by now, but if not then some category 3 and 4 climbs early in this stage will make it an interesting end to this battle. The finish to stage 17 is unlikely to see the KOM combatants at the front anyway.

Stage 19: Long ITT. 50 kms. Flat.

Stage 20: Champs-Elysées. Flat. Pop the champagne.

Firstly - good post.

However stages 1-9 as outlined above have borefest written all over them.
Maybe we need two TdF's. One as per stages 1-9 for the sprinters to knock themselves out in. Maybe run it in December so nobody feels compelled to watch it. Then have the main TdF run as per stages 10-20. Thor can enter the 2nd one and have the green jersey to himself without any of that pesky train business going on.
 
Feb 18, 2010
882
0
0
Visit site
boardhanger said:
Cut the prologe.

I suggest a 1k straight road, completely flat flying start prologue - so 1,5k but only the last kilometre counts for time. Then we have the "who's fastest" bit over and done with and can go straight to the hills and mountains.
 
ca. 10 stages for the sprinters? Sounds like a HORRIBLE race. I'd prefer them to do something really drastic, like moving the race forward two months, and holding almost the whole race outside France. Probably in Italy, with a couple of excursions into France in the Alps. Lots of mountain stages - the Tour has never really taken advantage of the Dolomites, has it? I'd prefer them to invite a bunch of Italian teams since they'd be starting and finishing in Italy. I'd perhaps even change that yellow jersey; yes it's iconic, but it's a bit tired and stale isn't it? I think we should go for a vibrant, new pink jersey.
 
Jul 30, 2009
1,621
0
0
Visit site
Libertine Seguros said:
No fully flat stages unless they involve cobbles or wind. Flat stages are garbage and should be eradicated.

I used to think the same. Until Cav came along that was! Now I can't get enough of them;)
 
Jul 20, 2010
38
0
0
Visit site
gregrowlerson said:
I'm already getting tour withdrawal symptoms, so I decided to compile somewhat of a schedule for next years event.

I'd like to hear some opinions on the twenty stages of The Tour (plus prologue). What can the organisers do better?

Congrats on a well thought out piece.

Have you applied for a job with the TdF route planning team yet?

My simple view would be to keep the cobbles in as a regular part of the Le Tour as it really sorts the men out from the boys. As far as mountains go, I think there should be good variation on peaks and geography. Some more sprint finished uphill and possibly more opportunity near the end of the 3 weeks rather than deciding everything on a time trial.
 
I don't mind sprinters, but they should always be made to work for the sprint. Eradicate the stages where it's clear before they even begin that it will be a sprint. Put lumps into the race, or cobbled sections, or put it along the coast where wind will batter the riders. If the sprinters make it across and can then sprint for the win, they deserve it. But stages with no climbs, or a single cat.4, or even those rolling ones with 3s and 4s but nothing strenuous and about 50km between any climb and the finish, need to disappear.
 
Mar 11, 2009
3,274
1
0
Visit site
If you remove all the sprint stages they'll just slow peddle every hilly stage. Sprinters need to get chances. It's part of the TDF. Just make those stage 120km or even less with a couple of monster stages (250-275km) to get to 3500km total or something.

It also needs a short stage with a steep MTF. Like the Giro does every so often.

If I had a say in it:
1.5 - 2km prologue on a hill. Not necessarily a Mur de Huy, but something challenging. Stage 1 dead flat. Bonus seconds are back (8, 3, 1 should be enough). The next stages should be coastal, Bretagne is always good. Sprinters stages but only if they really work for it, profiles that make you think 'Voeckler!'.

Stage 9 or something a double stage like in the old days (but a little easier). 10km TTT in the morning, 100km flat stage in the afternoon.

After that a couple of flat stages again, one ending on a max 6km not so steep climb.

By 13 were in the mountains.
First one should be hard, about 220km, 5 1st- or Hors category climbs, finish is 25-30km from the last mountaintop.
Next day will be avoiding the big climbs until the end, finish on legendary mountain (Tourmalet, Aubisque, Luz-Ardiden).
3rd day in the Pyrenees will be a long Climbing ITT.

In the Alpes, there should be only 1 MTF. Prolly Alpe d'Huez. Sestriere is also nice.
Last mountain stage is long again >230km with at least 5 big climbs. Finish max 25km from the last mountaintop.

Last ITT could be saved for last day to spare us the champagne BS, but I kinda like the Champs elysees sprint. Final ITT should be max 30km.


Maybe a little light on the ITT kilometers, but I think that would make things less predictable.

Other things outside the route:
-8 man teams
-Boni seconds back, but not that much
-On 4th cat climbs the first on top gets only 1 KOM point, on 3rd cat the points are 5-2-1, on 2nd cat it's 10-3-1, on 1st 15-8-5-3-1 and on HC 40-30-20-15-10-5-1.
-The last in the daily GC is out of the race.
 
Jul 18, 2009
202
0
0
Visit site
The flat stages are not just for the benefit of the sprinters, surely they're to let everyone else have a bit of a breather too, if you can call 200-odd km relaxing? :eek: Plus geographically there HAS to be flat stages at some points.

If every stage was a nightmare most of the riders wouldn't see Paris. There has to be a bit of variety. Can't imagine 21 stages of AS and AC marking each other to a standstill next year would be that interesting either.

I always like Sean Kelly's idea of a downhill time trial which would be a bit different but would probably be seen as a bit dangerous?
 
Apr 26, 2010
325
0
0
Visit site
Moose McKnuckles said:
I vote they release a pack of rabid dogs on every climb to discourage soft-pedaling.

And fans who come to close ofcourse :p that would be fun to watch, hundreds of fans suddenly also sprinting up the mountain as those rabid dogs eat up Kenny van Hummel :D
 
Libertine Seguros said:
I don't mind sprinters, but they should always be made to work for the sprint. Eradicate the stages where it's clear before they even begin that it will be a sprint. Put lumps into the race, or cobbled sections, or put it along the coast where wind will batter the riders. If the sprinters make it across and can then sprint for the win, they deserve it. But stages with no climbs, or a single cat.4, or even those rolling ones with 3s and 4s but nothing strenuous and about 50km between any climb and the finish, need to disappear.

I realize that the riders need some flat stages as they have to recover throughout the race. However, I get frustrated with the predictable decision to start off the first few stages with nothing, but flat roads. The racers even voice their complaints that this makes the stages more dangerous as everyone is fresh and the finishes get more chaotic. If they at least had a few lumpy stages early in, this could help take the kick out of some riders' legs early on and also sort out the GC a bit in the first week and then lessen the problems with the sprinters. Plus, it would make the race a lot more interesting if we already didn't know that the sprinters would take the first 5 stages.
 
Jul 14, 2009
744
0
0
Visit site
1. Bring back the col du Joux Plane, that climb is awesome
2. Mountain TT on Alpe d'Huez
3. Time Bonuses
4. A cobbled stage, and a stage that's a tribute to the hilly classics.
5. I'm ok with descending finishes, just no flat after the descent.
6. No pan flat stages, always rollers with small cat 3 and 4 climbs along the way-make the sprinters work for their wins.
7. Have more climbs throughout the day, like 4 cat 1 climbs instead of 150km of flat and then a big summit finish.
 
Jul 28, 2010
2,274
0
0
Visit site
My tour

And since I have time, I'm even using Google Earth to find cities.
Locations in Bold

Stage 1. Start at the Normandy Beaches. Flat with climb at finish to open up for attackers. Cabourg-Rennes.
Stage 2. 20 km ITT. Rennes
Stage 3. Flat stage. Le Mans-Longjumeau
Stage 4. 15 km TTT. PARIS.
Stage 5-6. Flat Stages. Longjumeau-Tours. Tours-Bourges.
Stage 7. Mountain Stage. Levet - MTF at Puy de Dome (site of Poulidor vs. Anquetil. One section's at 13%!!)
Stage 8. Hilly Stage. Clermont-Ferrand - Tulle.
Stage 9. Flat stage. Brive-la-Gaillarde - Bordeaux
Rest Day in Bordeaux
Stage 10. Bordeaux-Pau (250 km flat)
Stage 11. HUGE Pyrenees stage (Pau-Hautacam-Luz Ardiden-End on Tourmalet)
Stage 12. Pyrenees foothills at beginning, flat finish. Tarbes-Toulouse
Stage 13. Flat from Albi to Montpellier (Transfer after to Mont Ventoux)
Stage 14. Ventoux ITT (Looking like 2013 will have this :))
Stage 15. Short, hilly stage. Brantes-Gap (not a sprint stage)
Stage 16. Gap-Alpe d'Huez (via Col du Galibier, 180-ish kms)
Rest Day in Le Bourg-d'Oisans
Stage 17. Le Bourg-d'Oisans - Briancon. (Col Agnel, Col d'Izoard, descent finish)
Stage 18. Briancon to MTF at Courchevel(Climb Lex Deux Alpes also)
Stage 19. Bourg-Saint-Maurice to Lyon (via Lake Annecy, it was too stunning not to go again) Stage is flat for sprinters
Stage 20. Lyon ITT. 50 km. (Transfer to Paris)
Stage 21. 50 km traditional run-in to PARIS. Then the Champs-Elysses!

Wow, I have way too much time on my hands.
I think this is balanced enough, I really enjoy sprint stages (see profile pic) so I count about 6 or 7 stages. Probably too many, but who cares.
 
Jan 6, 2010
194
0
0
Visit site
Get rid of a TTT - or have it up a cat2/1 mounain, like the Giro occassionally do; rather than a pancake flat 1 beingboring and deciding the entire race. Then if you want ITTs, sure, but lets *not* make them pancake flat and long like this years - last years Annecy route was pretty ok actually, enlough climbing for it to be a work out, but not too much so that the l****s of Martin/Cancellara aren't near the front.
Or have a proper insane HC ITT - like Kronplatz was. Just putting in ITTs to help the TTers is boring, TTers should stick to the track or minor 1 stage races like Oman or Cali.

Above all, have a very mimimum of 4 MTDFs in a tour, with at least 2 being HC, and 2 stages ending either *during* or at the very end of the descent of other mountains. Get rid of 2/3 pancake flat (or even vrolling cat 4 days) which would still leave 5 flat stages designed entirely for sprints (about what there used to be), but have these with lots of nice funiture and along the coast, somewhere like the Passage de Gois, to break the peloton up. Maybe end it on the Alpe d'Hiuez once in a while - the Paris stuff is another broing day?