Vuelta a España 2017 Rumours

Page 9 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Re: Re:

TromleTromle said:
DFA123 said:
There surely can't be a harder 50km stretch in grand tour history than the Cobertoria, Cordal and Angliru. Isn't that enough to make it a queen stage?
It's quite solid at least - not harder than Sella Ronda - but the gradiants are LOCO.

Overall this a 8-9 in a Vuelta world. and perhaps a lucky 7-ish overall.
+: ITT
+: Stage 3
+: Last week
+: Downhill kings be alert
+: Lots of small annoying mountains everyday

-: Sierra Nevada ???
-: B/C-class sprinters incoming
-: Transfer heavy
-: Last year had ALL NEW MTF's - this year we reuse too many classics, sets up a weird 2018, unless the Canaries........
- I don't care about B/C-class sprinters. The reason they will attend and the best won't is because there are a huge amount of medium mountains/WC-esque stages which is a huge plus. You noted it yourself as a plus and this is the result of it. Anyways, they can't possibly be worse than 2016.

- The riders will probably complain, but honestly, I don't care about transfers.

- Again, something I don't care about.

The Sierra Nevada stage is meh, but honestly, thats about it. It could turn out great anyways, it has the potential. If the Giro is a 7, the Vuelta is definitely a 7. I'd say at least 7,5-8,0 and for Vuelta standards 9,0.
 
Jun 30, 2014
7,060
1
0
Re: Re:

DFA123 said:
TromleTromle said:
DFA123 said:
There surely can't be a harder 50km stretch in grand tour history than the Cobertoria, Cordal and Angliru. Isn't that enough to make it a queen stage?
It's quite solid at least - not harder than Sella Ronda - but the gradiants are LOCO.
It's way, way harder than Sella Ronda. Its 15km shorter and has about 800m more of climbing. Angliru alone is harder than the entire Sella Ronda.
Overall it's probably harder, but the Angliru alone? No way, maybe with late 70ies/early 80ies gearing, but not today.
 
Stage 3 and a flat ITT stand out as positives, but apart from that, it's just the usual crap. Many MTF/HTF's and all of those stages are designed to totally discourage any racing before the final kilometers.
 
stage 1: A TTT...meh, but at least "only" 13.8 kilometers long
stage 2: Could be a very nice crosswind stage, maybe with a similar impact as stage 2 of the tour 2015. The loop at the end is shitty though since there won't be crosswind in the last kilometers.
stage 3: Won't have a big impact on the gc since it's very early and Rabassa is quite far away from the finish, but still a cool mountain stage for stage 3. Let's hope for at least a few time gaps and an entertaining fight for the stage win and the red jersey.
stage 4: First boring sprint stage but stage 4 is actually already pretty late for that.
stage 5: Typical first hill top finish for the vuelta. Won't be the stage of the year but the last kilometers will be entertaining.
stage 6: Probably a stage for the break. If we are lucky a gc contenders has a bad day and gets into troubles on the Puerto del Garbi, then this stage could be epic (but ofc thats very unlikely)
stage 7: Another fat stage but the last climb could make things interesting. Maybe the break, maybe a late attacker but probably a sprinter.
stage 8: Nothing will happen before Xorret de Cati, but the last 6 kilometer will be great. I don't know why, but this is somehow my favorite short but super steep 1st category climb.
stage 9: The first big disappointment for me. This stage would be okay as stage 8, but after Xorret de Cati I don't immediately want another finish with exactly the same characteristics. Still this was probably the best mtf of the year 2015, so the stage might still be good.

stage 10: A bit like stage 3. I like that there is a climb, it probably won't cause action between gc contenders, but maybe someone will have a bad day, and for sure the fight for the stage will be worth watching.
stage 11: Probably the first really gc relevant stage, with two late 1st cat. climbs. Unfortunately I fear that the riders will be afraid of the flat section near the finish, that could spoil the stage. But now I'm optimistic and hope for a good stage. And ofc in the worst case we still have pictures of the Alto de Velefique.
stage 12: This stage is harder than it looks. The puerto del torcal has some pretty steep ramps, about 600 meters of altitude gain and is only 17 (mostly downhill) km away from the finish. I don't expect big attacks, but I wouldn't completely rule them out, especially after a hard stage 11.
stage 13: Only the 2nd completely uninteresting stage of the whole Vuelta :eek:
stage 14: Pretty hard mtf (though no idea why this is a Esp climb) which will probably be entertaining to watch. I hope for a good gc battle, but don't expect a superb stage.
stage 15: Very short but very hard stage. Incredible how small Hazallanas looks on such a profile. Yeah, the stage isn't a monster stage, but if stage 14 was hard and if the pace is high enough Sierra Nevada will cause absolute carnage. And I think even in the worst case this stage should be pretty good.

stage 16: A flat ITT. It could be longer, but we've seen way worse.
stage 17: Very interesting stage IMO. It's not super hard so riders won't hold too much back in the 2nd week because they know that week 3 isn't full of super hard mtf's. Then again, it's hard enough to make a big attack and you even have the chance to make a long range attack on the Puerto de Alisas. Moreover it's actually the last good chance for a long range attack, since there is flat before the last climb on stage 18 and a long range attack before the Angliru is suicide.
Edit: Okay, I just saw how steep the last climb is, maybe not such a good stage for long range attacks after all. :(
stage 18: Unfortunately it's absolutely impossible that a stage with climbs like Ozalba or Hoz earlier on and a relatively easy uphill finish will have any impact on the gc. Especially if there is still a super steep Esp mtf to come on stage 20.
stage 19: I guess another one for a break
stage 20: Short stage but absolutely brutal. There won't be any attacks before the Angliru, but maybe the two other 1st category climbs will make the race harder and the Angliru even more brutal. And then let's hope for an epic finale on this monster of a climb. I have to say though that I really don't think the Angliru is a good climb for stage 20 since you can still gain a lot of time there and you can't really make a long range attack.
stage 21: The last stage of the Vuelta and only the 3rd completely boring stage, wow.
 
A nice route.
My only concern is related to stages 14 and 15. They should've tried to separate them with the rest day. The itt would've been more interesting in that setup, as well, I believe.
Should be great for watching.
 
Aug 31, 2012
349
0
0
Re: Re:

Red Rick said:
DFA123 said:
There surely can't be a harder 50km stretch in grand tour history than the Cobertoria, Cordal and Angliru. Isn't that enough to make it a queen stage?
A cat 1, a cat 2, and an HC climb (not using Unipublic measures) in a stage under 120km? Hell **** no.

Also, Sierra Nevada stage of 120km? ****

Somebody tell Contador to please go full genius in a 220km+ stage the next time he does it
For me, Cordal is a cat 1.
http://www.altimetrias.net/Asturias/Cordal1.gif
 
Oct 6, 2009
5,270
2
0
Good route, except for the tired opening TTT. Angliru stage looks a beast. A little much with all those transfers. Did I see that they've sprung for an extra helicopter this year, so we might be able to see more of the race on TV? Good development.
 
Re: Re:

Red Rick said:
DFA123 said:
There surely can't be a harder 50km stretch in grand tour history than the Cobertoria, Cordal and Angliru. Isn't that enough to make it a queen stage?
A cat 1, a cat 2, and an HC climb (not using Unipublic measures) in a stage under 120km? Hell **** no.

Also, Sierra Nevada stage of 120km? ****

Somebody tell Contador to please go full genius in a 220km+ stage the next time he does it
Fair enough, but those categorisations don't really do it justice. Angliru is twice as hard as a lot of Tour de France HC climbs. I make it around 3800m of climbing in 120km. With about half of that above 9% gradient. That's a pretty tough day in the saddle whether or not it is 'queen stage'.
 
Re:

Flamin said:
Stage 3 and a flat ITT stand out as positives, but apart from that, it's just the usual crap. Many MTF/HTF's and all of those stages are designed to totally discourage any racing before the final kilometers.
At least they guarantee racing in the final kilometres of most days if nothing else. Sticking in loads of gentle climbs instead would make the Vuelta as controllable and dull as the Tour.
 
Re:

Beech Mtn said:
Good route, except for the tired opening TTT. Angliru stage looks a beast. A little much with all those transfers. Did I see that they've sprung for an extra helicopter this year, so we might be able to see more of the race on TV? Good development.
The extra helicopter wil be used to show more of the landscape, landmarks and monuments along the route. That's what they said, literally. :p
 
Re: Re:

DFA123 said:
Red Rick said:
DFA123 said:
There surely can't be a harder 50km stretch in grand tour history than the Cobertoria, Cordal and Angliru. Isn't that enough to make it a queen stage?
A cat 1, a cat 2, and an HC climb (not using Unipublic measures) in a stage under 120km? Hell **** no.

Also, Sierra Nevada stage of 120km? ****

Somebody tell Contador to please go full genius in a 220km+ stage the next time he does it
Fair enough, but those categorisations don't really do it justice. Angliru is twice as hard as a lot of Tour de France HC climbs. I make it around 3800m of climbing in 120km. With about half of that above 9% gradient. That's a pretty tough day in the saddle whether or not it is 'queen stage'.
It's not that hard a climb, I think you are slightly overestimating it. It's hard alright, and steep but not as hard as Stelvio (because of the altitude more than anything else) and is on par with some others (finestre, mortirolo, zoncolan, galibier including telegraphe etc.) and it is certainly not twice that of 'a lot' of HC climbs.

It's also a very difficult 50km stretch indeed. That nobody can deny.

Edit: i mention these long high climbs mainly because of the altitude which changes the dynamic of the climb quite a bit
 
Oct 6, 2009
5,270
2
0
Re: Re:

ice&fire said:
Beech Mtn said:
Good route, except for the tired opening TTT. Angliru stage looks a beast. A little much with all those transfers. Did I see that they've sprung for an extra helicopter this year, so we might be able to see more of the race on TV? Good development.
The extra helicopter wil be used to show more of the landscape, landmarks and monuments along the route. That's what they said, literally. :p
:mad:
 
Re: Re:

DFA123 said:
Flamin said:
Stage 3 and a flat ITT stand out as positives, but apart from that, it's just the usual crap. Many MTF/HTF's and all of those stages are designed to totally discourage any racing before the final kilometers.
At least they guarantee racing in the final kilometres of most days if nothing else. Sticking in loads of gentle climbs instead would make the Vuelta as controllable and dull as the Tour.
Like Formigal you mean? ;)
 
Re: Re:

Brullnux said:
DFA123 said:
Red Rick said:
DFA123 said:
There surely can't be a harder 50km stretch in grand tour history than the Cobertoria, Cordal and Angliru. Isn't that enough to make it a queen stage?
A cat 1, a cat 2, and an HC climb (not using Unipublic measures) in a stage under 120km? Hell **** no.

Also, Sierra Nevada stage of 120km? ****

Somebody tell Contador to please go full genius in a 220km+ stage the next time he does it
Fair enough, but those categorisations don't really do it justice. Angliru is twice as hard as a lot of Tour de France HC climbs. I make it around 3800m of climbing in 120km. With about half of that above 9% gradient. That's a pretty tough day in the saddle whether or not it is 'queen stage'.
It's not that hard a climb, I think you are slightly overestimating it. It's hard alright, and steep but not as hard as Stelvio (because of the altitude more than anything else) and is on par with some others (finestre, mortirolo, zoncolan, galibier including telegraphe etc.) and it is certainly not twice that of 'a lot' of HC climbs.

It's also a very difficult 50km stretch indeed. That nobody can deny.

Edit: i mention these long high climbs mainly because of the altitude which changes the dynamic of the climb quite a bit
No way is Stelvio harder, altitude or not. The difference is that Angliru (and Zoncolan) forces riders to repeatedly go anaerobic for significant stretches. Compact chainset or not, no-one can race up the Cuena les Cabres without going deeply into the red. Stelvio can be ridden comfortably at threshold throughout - the altitude doesn't change that. If you make an attack on Stelvio you can consolidate and recover on the 7-8% slopes. If you attack on Angliru, there is no where to recover - you're struggling all the way to the top.

Also, there's still a significant drafting effect on Stelvio, with riders averaging close to 20km/h. On Angliru, it's basically each man for themselves. If there's any damp on the road there can also be problems with traction on Angliru; the density of the crowd forces you to go up the steepest part of a lot of the hairpins. There is a reason why riders call Angliru and Zoncolan the hardest climbs in pro cycling - they are just so much more demanding than your standard HC climb.

Even for amateurs, who they don't have to race up the toughest parts of Angliru and can go at 6km/h if they can stay upright, it's much harder than a climb like Stelvio. Anyone who can put out 4 w/kg can climb Stelvio staying below threshold, despite the altitude.
 
Re: Re:

It's not that hard a climb, I think you are slightly overestimating it.
??? OMG Angliru is insanely hard!! And some stretches are just ridiculuous.

Its one of these climbs that are borderline TOO HARD and maybe shouldn't even be raced!

I thought i was gonna die up there two years ago. I get now why riders sometimes complain about extreme climbs/gradients. On my sofa i used to roll my eyes hearing those complaints
 
Re: Re:

DFA123 said:
Brullnux said:
DFA123 said:
Red Rick said:
DFA123 said:
There surely can't be a harder 50km stretch in grand tour history than the Cobertoria, Cordal and Angliru. Isn't that enough to make it a queen stage?
A cat 1, a cat 2, and an HC climb (not using Unipublic measures) in a stage under 120km? Hell **** no.

Also, Sierra Nevada stage of 120km? ****

Somebody tell Contador to please go full genius in a 220km+ stage the next time he does it
Fair enough, but those categorisations don't really do it justice. Angliru is twice as hard as a lot of Tour de France HC climbs. I make it around 3800m of climbing in 120km. With about half of that above 9% gradient. That's a pretty tough day in the saddle whether or not it is 'queen stage'.
It's not that hard a climb, I think you are slightly overestimating it. It's hard alright, and steep but not as hard as Stelvio (because of the altitude more than anything else) and is on par with some others (finestre, mortirolo, zoncolan, galibier including telegraphe etc.) and it is certainly not twice that of 'a lot' of HC climbs.

It's also a very difficult 50km stretch indeed. That nobody can deny.

Edit: i mention these long high climbs mainly because of the altitude which changes the dynamic of the climb quite a bit
No way is Stelvio harder, altitude or not. The difference is that Angliru (and Zoncolan) forces riders to repeatedly go anaerobic for significant stretches. Compact chainset or not, no-one can race up the Cuena les Cabres without going deeply into the red. Stelvio can be ridden comfortably at threshold throughout - the altitude doesn't change that. If you make an attack on Stelvio you can consolidate and recover on the 7-8% slopes. If you attack on Angliru, there is no where to recover - you're struggling all the way to the top.

Also, there's still a significant drafting effect on Stelvio, with riders averaging close to 20km/h. On Angliru, it's basically each man for themselves. If there's any damp on the road there can also be problems with traction on Angliru; the density of the crowd forces you to go up the steepest part of a lot of the hairpins. There is a reason why riders call Angliru and Zoncolan the hardest climbs in pro cycling - they are just so much more demanding than your standard HC climb.

Even for amateurs, who they don't have to race up the toughest parts of Angliru and can go at 6km/h if they can stay upright, it's much harder than a climb like Stelvio. Anyone who can put out 4 w/kg can climb Stelvio staying below threshold, despite the altitude.
That is all true, I got it wrong with Stelvio. However Angliru's difficulty is imo pretty similar to Mortirolo and Finestre as well. It is a lot more demanding, but is more like 50-70% harder than a lot of HC climbs but not double the difficulty.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY