Tour de France Femmes 2025 (July 26th- August 3rd)

[Alien Performance]

if people could reorder the stage in any order of their choosing what order would you go for?
For the best racing I think something like 1,2,8,4,5,6,9,7

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Not sure what's optimal, I like something like 1 - 3 - 5 - 7 - 4 - 8 - 6 - 2 - 9; open with the punchy stage, then get a flat stage out of the way. Then have the one with a slightly tougher climb near the end that causes a little more of a gap, then today's stage as the first real climbing stage, but with a flat stage following it so the GC riders aren't dissuaded from giving it a go because they can recuperate a little with an easier on-paper day the next day. Then the main MTF, before a stage with a lot of cumulative climbing but no key-note ascents, so that the tired legs of the day before come into it, and you possibly have some serious stagehunters who soft-pedalled the Madeleine up the road, giving potential for ambushes but at least a battle between strong riders no longer in the GC mix for the stage win. After this, we have the up-and-down-all-day stage 2, one where time gaps aren't necessarily going to be that big but with some very weary legs from the previous two days, the fact that there's almost no flat in the last 50km means that it's a real banana skin of a stage where even if the GC riders want a day off they'll struggle because there's going to be so many riders who've lost some time still hunting something to take out of the race and the many small hills will encourage potential small time gains and losses that demand attention from the leaders, and then finally the final stage where there's a major climb but it's 60km from home; I don't think this stage sees too much GC action if it isn't the last GC-relevant stage in line, and if it goes before other major climbing stages you probably don't see too much action in earnest kick off before Corbier, but as the last chance, riders could be throwing haymakers from the Joux-Plane.

The danger of putting the Madeleine too early is that if you get somebody do an Annemiek and just obliterate the competition, it will take out the possibility for a battle among riders not expected to be front-line GC contestants to battle over the jersey. Definitely it is better to move the MTF forward, but I do think stage 3 runs the risk of being too early when it's the only major mountain positioned to be decisive in the stage it is in. Ideally I'd have it around stage 5 or 6 with some intermediate stages beforehand that put the jersey in the vicinity of the favourites but still allows others to battle for a chance to wear it, a bit like we're seeing with Le Court at the moment.

 

[Red Rick]

Not sure what's optimal, I like something like 1 - 3 - 5 - 7 - 4 - 8 - 6 - 2 - 9; open with the punchy stage, then get a flat stage out of the way. Then have the one with a slightly tougher climb near the end that causes a little more of a gap, then today's stage as the first real climbing stage, but with a flat stage following it so the GC riders aren't dissuaded from giving it a go because they can recuperate a little with an easier on-paper day the next day. Then the main MTF, before a stage with a lot of cumulative climbing but no key-note ascents, so that the tired legs of the day before come into it, and you possibly have some serious stagehunters who soft-pedalled the Madeleine up the road, giving potential for ambushes but at least a battle between strong riders no longer in the GC mix for the stage win. After this, we have the up-and-down-all-day stage 2, one where time gaps aren't necessarily going to be that big but with some very weary legs from the previous two days, the fact that there's almost no flat in the last 50km means that it's a real banana skin of a stage where even if the GC riders want a day off they'll struggle because there's going to be so many riders who've lost some time still hunting something to take out of the race and the many small hills will encourage potential small time gains and losses that demand attention from the leaders, and then finally the final stage where there's a major climb but it's 60km from home; I don't think this stage sees too much GC action if it isn't the last GC-relevant stage in line, and if it goes before other major climbing stages you probably don't see too much action in earnest kick off before Corbier, but as the last chance, riders could be throwing haymakers from the Joux-Plane.

The danger of putting the Madeleine too early is that if you get somebody do an Annemiek and just obliterate the competition, it will take out the possibility for a battle among riders not expected to be front-line GC contestants to battle over the jersey. Definitely it is better to move the MTF forward, but I do think stage 3 runs the risk of being too early when it's the only major mountain positioned to be decisive in the stage it is in. Ideally I'd have it around stage 5 or 6 with some intermediate stages beforehand that put the jersey in the vicinity of the favourites but still allows others to battle for a chance to wear it, a bit like we're seeing with Le Court at the moment.

The field should be more even now than in the Van Vleuten year. But still I don't think the TdFF should put in the MTFs on hard HC climbs that take the men 45 minutes +. If anything use them mid stage or in the 2nd half of the stage, but without the HC finish. It's as simple as the Mortirolo/Finestre format that is so popular among fans in the men's races but for the women it shouldn't require climbs that legendary necessarily to achieve the same effects.

 

[Oldman]

Squiban does...and did. Another colossal descending skills clinic. Chapeau!!!!

 

[Libertine Seguros]

The field should be more even now than in the Van Vleuten year. But still I don't think the TdFF should put in the MTFs on hard HC climbs that take the men 45 minutes +. If anything use them mid stage or in the 2nd half of the stage, but without the HC finish. It's as simple as the Mortirolo/Finestre format that is so popular among fans in the men's races but for the women it shouldn't require climbs that legendary necessarily to achieve the same effects.

I understand, and to an extent agree, I feel introducing a legendary climb each year is a good way of building the women's race up as part of the legacy of the Tour, however, as well as buying goodwill and buy-in from fans (a legendary climb does not have to be a monster HC climb nor does it have to be an MTF, it could just as easily be, say, Peyresourde, Aspin or Colombière). A better approach in years where that climb is an HC monster that they're using as an MTF (let's remember the women have done things like the Zoncolan in the Giro, and have even done Mont Ventoux in the Tour de l'Ardêche which doesn't even draw a full WWT type field) would be a Unipuerto followed by a stage which uses multiple cat.1/2 type climbs so that the types of climbing stage are varied and they don't neuter earlier stages.

There's only one problem.

Last year's Glandon and Alpe d'Huez stage. That had two such HC monsters, it was a colossally backloaded route, they'd staked the race on that stage delivering, and most importantly, it was awesome. They got lightning in a bottle, sure, and replicating that type of stage in the hope of getting the same kind of drama is a fool's errand. But there should be no denying that objectively that stage provided great drama and entertainment.

 

[Oldman]

There's only one problem.

Last year's Glandon and Alpe d'Huez stage. That had two such HC monsters, it was a colossally backloaded route, they'd staked the race on that stage delivering, and most importantly, it was awesome. They got lightning in a bottle, sure, and replicating that type of stage in the hope of getting the same kind of drama is a fool's errand. But there should be no denying that objectively that stage provided great drama and entertainment.

I agree from what little I've watched last year. The final stage was sensational and has appeared to affect how the much closer racing progresses this year. The fear of the coming climbs has tied the top five so closely together that almost any aggression among them gets and automatic neutralization; rather than a relay and serious break effort. The last two stages have shown the fear of the bigger cols has them all sitting on each other and only contesting bonus and final sprints for seconds.
I'm not sure if it's the pending hills or the FOMO syndrome. I confess I don't know enough about all the rider histories that could explains the tepid follow-throughs but the next two days will likely reveal this year's hidden/surprise heroine.

 

[Didinho]

Pieterse crashed on the downhill trying to get back to the Le Court group. Was thinking the whole time when she would get there, no camera behind the front groups.

 

[Tonton]

Bravo Maeva! She belongs to the top, she's here to stay. The revelation. French road cycling is not dead, and now, there's Pauline.

PFP is in that galaxy of special champions, she gave herself three years to win Le Tour and complete her comeback: how about year one? tomorrow's stage is HUGE!

Allez Pauline!

 

[dobrien]

Bravo Maeva! She belongs to the top, she's here to stay. The revelation. French road cycling is not dead, and now, there's Pauline.

Pretty exciting!!

 

[TourOfSardinia]

Pieterse crashed on the downhill trying to get back to the Le Court group. Was thinking the whole time when she would get there, no camera behind the front groups.

She crashed downhill in the MTB last week too.

 

[Jan the Man]

I don’t really follow it closely throughout the season but have been watching the Tour- who realistically is favourite? Vollering? PFP?

Realistically Can Gigante emulage Giro Donne form and what was competition like there in comparison?