Vuelta 2011

[Kwibus]

So the third grand tour (Vuelta)route is now posted,and im starting to believe to be able to win a GT you must only be a climber who can TT ok.Are the days of Time Triallers winning a GT over?Can only sub 65kg riders win from now on?What does this mean for the future of our sport?

The vuelta looks to have quite a few TT km. Allthough this course isn't very reliable so I'm gonna wait till January.
And relax... this is a phase. There will be more TT friendly GT's in the future.
Imo they should keep having atleast 6-7 mountain stages and add 3 TT's. The other stages can be flat or slightly hilly. That would make GT's interesting

 

[Matthijs]

The vuelta looks to have quite a few TT km. Allthough this course isn't very reliable so I'm gonna wait till January.
And relax... this is a phase. There will be more TT friendly GT's in the future.
Imo they should keep having atleast 6-7 mountain stages and add 3 TT's. The other stages can be flat or slightly hilly. That would make GT's interesting

Imo that's a good base for a interesting GT. An experiment once in a while (Giro with more moutains/less TT, Giro stage 7, Roubaix stage Tour) can be interesting too I think.
But all the 3 GT's without long TT? Normally the Vuelta is the last GT where I expect a long GT, let's hope they change that this year because I need it!

 

[Libertine Seguros]

So the third grand tour (Vuelta)route is now posted,and im starting to believe to be able to win a GT you must only be a climber who can TT ok.Are the days of Time Triallers winning a GT over?Can only sub 65kg riders win from now on?What does this mean for the future of our sport?

A pure time trialler like a Cancellara, Rogers or Grabsch shouldn't be winning a GT. The pure climbers can often win a Giro or Vuelta, but less often the Tour.

I think it's a bit of a reactive move after the 2009 Tour was such a festival of merde.

That was a GT that enormously favoured the time triallist.

 

[The Hitch]

save the panicking for next January

TDU is in January.

I want to panick now

 

[Descender]

I think it's a bit of a reactive move after the 2009 Tour was such a festival of merde.

That was a GT that enormously favoured the time triallist.

Care to explain why?

 

[Skip Madness]

That was a GT that enormously favoured the time triallist.

I don't think that's accurate. In 2009 there were only 56km of ITT and 39km of TTT (OK, that's a lot of TTT by modern standards). I know what you're getting at (the mountains were crap - and you're right, they were), but there were still squandered good mountains - the stages of the St Bernards and the Ventoux were worse for the lack of time trials, not their presence.

The problem with that Tour was they basically took all the difficulty of Paris-Nice or the Dauphiné and stretched it out over three weeks. It was a farcically bad route, but to say it enormously favoured the time triallist is off-target.

Funny thing - much as that Tour is rightly loathed, I'd kill for something like that Romme-Colombière stage in next year's Alps.

Regarding next year's Vuelta I read someone say somewhere recently (can't remember who or where, sorry) that something which might come of the Giro pumping its mountains with increasing amounts of steroids is that Vuelta mountain stages are going to start to look really bad by comparison unless they up their game, so we might be able to hope realistically for more Vuelta stages with tougher yet evenly-paced difficulty. I'm going to keep that filed under pipe dreams for now, though.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Care to explain why?

Because the "prologue" was more than twice the length of the usual prologue, the mountain stages were neutered embarrassingly, with only 3 MTFs - one being on an otherwise totally flat stage (Ventoux), one on a climb as short as - and less severe than - most Vuelta MTFs (Verbier), and one on Arcalis, about as easy an MTF for the less elite climber to hold on on as any. The Pyrenees were almost totally neutralised, and the huge TTT and decent length (but not excessive) Annecy TT were about the most important of all stages in deciding the race.

The Romme-Colombière stage was about the only really challenging mountain stage, even though as Skip says above there were some very good climbs wasted in that race. And in that stage, the time trial types like Wiggins were dropped and lost minutes.

If the Montpélier TTT had been an ITT, there'd been an MTF in the Pyrenées (other than Arcalis), and Ventoux have come on the back of another couple of climbs (maybe climb to Chalet-Reynard and go back around again on a circuit to give some half decent climbs before the Col des Tempêtes), that race would have been infinitely better.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

I don't think that's accurate. In 2009 there were only 56km of ITT and 39km of TTT (OK, that's a lot of TTT by modern standards). I know what you're getting at (the mountains were crap - and you're right, they were), but there were still squandered good mountains - the stages of the St Bernards and the Ventoux were worse for the lack of time trials, not their presence.

The problem with that Tour was they basically took all the difficulty of Paris-Nice or the Dauphiné and stretched it out over three weeks. It was a farcically bad route, but to say it enormously favoured the time triallist is off-target.

Funny thing - much as that Tour is rightly loathed, I'd kill for something like that Romme-Colombière stage in next year's Alps.

Regarding next year's Vuelta I read someone say somewhere recently (can't remember who or where, sorry) that something which might come of the Giro pumping its mountains with increasing amounts of steroids is that Vuelta mountain stages are going to start to look really bad by comparison unless they up their game, so we might be able to hope realistically for more Vuelta stages with tougher yet evenly-paced difficulty. I'm going to keep that filed under pipe dreams for now, though.

OK, the combination of that farcically bad route and the TTT dominance and strength of Astana meaning nobody even tried to challenge them or put them under any sort of pressure whatsoever in the mountains meant that the race favoured the time triallist.

 

[Descender]

OK, the combination of that farcically bad route and the TTT dominance and strength of Astana meaning nobody even tried to challenge them or put them under any sort of pressure whatsoever in the mountains meant that the race favoured the time triallist.

The race, but not the route. Two completely different things.

 

[Skip Madness]

In case anyone thinks I'm being obsessively negative about the Vuelta, here are the great times when they've got mountain stages right recently:

That last one is so awesome. It's a real shame the Rañadoiro has gone.

 

[auscyclefan94]

OK, the combination of that farcically bad route and the TTT dominance and strength of Astana meaning nobody even tried to challenge them or put them under any sort of pressure whatsoever in the mountains meant that the race favoured the time triallist.

It favoured a very strong team but when you have a hill in the opening tt and a 41km tt that has a decent climb in it then it hardly favours a strong tt rider.

 

[Descender]

In case anyone thinks I'm being obsessively negative about the Vuelta, here are the great times when they've got mountain stages right recently:

That last one is so awesome. It's a real shame the Rañadoiro has gone.

You picked the three best mountain stages of the Vuelta in the last years, true. Maybe of all time.

Still, all three had a significant flat stretch before the final climb, which conditioned a lot the whole stage, as riders thought about it twice before attacking before the final climb... in the last stage for instance, there are a million better climbs to match with San Lorenzo than Cobertoria. Valle del Lago, Somiedo, Maravio...

 

[Skip Madness]

You picked the three best mountain stages of the Vuelta in the last years, true. Maybe of all time.

Still, all three had a significant flat stretch before the final climb, which conditioned a lot the whole stage, as riders thought about it twice before attacking before the final climb... in the last stage for instance, there are a million better climbs to match with San Lorenzo than Cobertoria. Valle del Lago, Somiedo, Maravio...

Going from the direction that stage went from, I think Ventana would have been the best finish (space permitting). I love the summit of that climb, although I suppose it's more impressive approached from the León side.

I'd like to see San Lorenzo tackled from the other side like with a couple of the climbs you've suggested. My dream Vuelta stage is Oviedo - Villablino via Viapará, Cordal, Cobertoria, Trobaniello-Ventana, San Lorenzo and Somiedo. If that ever happens I promise I will never criticise the Vuelta again.

 

[Descender]

Going from the direction that stage went from, I think Ventana would have been the best finish (space permitting). I love the summit of that climb, although I suppose it's more impressive approached from the León side.

I'd like to see San Lorenzo tackled from the other side like with a couple of the climbs you've suggested. My dream Vuelta stage is Oviedo - Villablino via Viapará, Cordal, Cobertoria, Trobaniello-Ventana, San Lorenzo and Somiedo. If that ever happens I promise I will never criticise the Vuelta again.

You're right, from that side Ventana would have been the best option. And overall, Somiedo is the most fitting finish after San Lorenzo.

That stage you propose would be awesome indeed, but has a big problem you're surely aware of: Trobaniello has some 9 km of sterrato, including two in slight descent. Can't see the Vuelta organisers going that way.

 

[Kvinto]

3 tts, I like it . The perfect ASO-organized grand tour's tt is the long tt in the end of first week. It can compel climbers to attack earlier on the high mountain stages but not at last 3km. I don't understand the reason of tt at 20th or 21th stage (after all mountain stages), because before it all (most of) climbing specialist ride their race like waiting for a dream that guys like Menchov or Nibali would surely ruin their tt.

 

[Skip Madness]

That stage you propose would be awesome indeed, but has a big problem you're surely aware of: Trobaniello has some 9 km of sterrato, including two in slight descent. Can't see the Vuelta organisers going that way.

The sterrato is a problem?! It's why I want that stage!

You're right, though, Unipublic would never go for it.

 

[icefire]

The sterrato is a problem?! It's why I want that stage!

You're right, though, Unipublic would never go for it.

The sterrato is a problem if it spans along both sides of the summit.

 

[The Devil]

The sterrato is a problem if it spans along both sides of the summit.

gEE tHATS A gREAT PIECE OF ANALYSIS WELL ACTUALLY IT AINT

 

[Descender]

The sterrato is a problem?! It's why I want that stage!

You're right, though, Unipublic would never go for it.

Like Icefire said, it starts to be a problem when it's on a descent. Besides there's your second sentence.

 

[Skip Madness]

It's not very steep, though is it? Isn't it more like a short section on a false flat?

 

[Descender]

It's not very steep, though is it? Isn't it more like a short section on a false flat?

2km on a descending false flat. Still, riders would be riding fast and the dirt there is not the best in the world... hard to imagine. Unipublic is ready to put the riders through dangerous roads, but under the condition that there is someone who pays well. That wouldn't be the case in that stage me thinks.

 

[Descender]

More than probable stage with finish up Peña Cabarga right before the Basque stages, that is, as the last uphill finish of the Vuelta and the last chance for GT riders to have a go at the GC.

 

[icefire]

Petrer is confirmed as a starting town for one of the first stages:

http://www.petreraldia.com/noticias...011-tendra-en-petrer-una-salida-de-etapa.html

Petrer is just 15 kms west of Xorret de Catí, but I can't see how that climb can be in the race if they place stage finishes at the seashore. If it's included it would be further than 70 kms to the anounced finish in Orihuela-Costa. That'd be a stage worthy of the Tour.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Xorret del Catí may not be the last mountain. Remember the Mortirolo was the first of several climbs in the 2004 Giro.

Besides, XDC has been in the last two Vueltas as a finish, they don't need it every year I guess.

For a grand finish in the Basque country I'd do a San Sebastián-San Sebastián TT. 50km or so, with long, hard power highway sections, but a climb of Jaizkibel to allow the lightweight climbers to limit their losses. That way you can use the Asturian climbs up to the late stages, then finish with a stage similar to the 2009 nationals in Cantabria, one that runs into Bilbão (probably sprinty but reducing the bunch over a number of short hills), and people will need to hunt out gaps and small gains, but both the climbers and the power TT guys will need to do something ahead of the San Sebastián TT.

 

[Skip Madness]

I'm in two minds about Peña Cabarga. On the one hand you know that no matter how the stage is planned there's only likely to be six kilometres of serious riding. On the other hand, it is steep enough to produce significant differences and if it's close at the end of the Vuelta then it should kick off as soon as they get to the bottom. Still, personally I'd prefer something offering more opportunity for a spectacle as the final big mountain stage.

EDIT: And regardless, it shouldn't be in two consecutive years.

I was under the impression that Xorret was only likely to be coming a long way from the finish line next year. It's most important to see what comes after it on the stage.