What is the best Grand Tour of the year?

[topcat]

What's wrong with tennis?

Tennis was good to watch in the 80's but now it just irritates me. Also, some ppl like to repeatedly refer to tennis on a cycling forum.

 

[tobydawq]

Tennis was good to watch in the 80's but now it just irritates me. Also, some ppl like to repeatedly refer to tennis on a cycling forum.

It's certainly good to watch now, too...

 

[topcat]

It's certainly good to watch now, too...

I wouldn't know. I'm clean from watching tennis for years. I think I'll stick to watching re-runs of Alaphilippe's masterpiece at last year's wcrr (pure cycling porn).

 

[yaco]

It's not just GC action which constitutes a good or bad GT - The last two editions of the Giro have also suffered from average course design and the quality and quantity of breakaway wins.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

just fyi I 100% agree with this in its entirety. And u can find my many posts that say this verbatim. I guess the forumites wanting suspense to the very end at all costs appear way more vocal in all other threads always complaining. I feel like I read that ALL THE TIME.

we disagree on 2012. Not the greatest. But, damn, that Stelvio stage was absolutely epic. 2022 Torino was good and great race design. None of the contenders are “epic”, all similar and rode defensively until the last three kms of stage 20. It was absolutely abysmal.

And yet, the 2012 Giro is the complete antithesis of what you usually call for - very small gaps resulting in very cagey, defensive racing until the very final road stage - and even then if it hadn't been for the very real possibility that their appalling lack of racing intent for three weeks would enable them to lose the GC to Thomas de Gendt, the only man who could emerge from that race with his head held high (other than Matteo Rabottini as mentioned before), they likely leave it until the last kilometre again, as Purito tried his utmost to. The Giau stage of that race is the ultimate stage for the negative side of 'the riders make the race'. The organisers gave the riders a lot of options around how to make great racing on that stage. They refused to.

 

[OlavEH]

It's not just GC action which constitutes a good or bad GT - The last two editions of the Giro have also suffered from average course design and the quality and quantity of breakaway wins.

That is a good question. How high can GT be rated solely based on action on mountain stages and a top GC battle? A full 10? 9? Or lower?

IMO a perfect GT needs something extraordinary that isn't high mountains or purely GC. That could be a spectacular medium mountain stage like Torino, a great sterrato stage or some murito madness like in TA. Unless I would have a very hard time giving a GT a full 10.

 

[Extinction]

And yet, the 2012 Giro is the complete antithesis of what you usually call for - very small gaps resulting in very cagey, defensive racing until the very final road stage - and even then if it hadn't been for the very real possibility that their appalling lack of racing intent for three weeks would enable them to lose the GC to Thomas de Gendt, the only man who could emerge from that race with his head held high (other than Matteo Rabottini as mentioned before), they likely leave it until the last kilometre again, as Purito tried his utmost to. The Giau stage of that race is the ultimate stage for the negative side of 'the riders make the race'. The organisers gave the riders a lot of options around how to make great racing on that stage. They refused to.

Yet the style of racing has completely changed. Big gaps, small gaps, what does It matter? As Hinault once said: "As long as I breath, I attack!"

 

[pmcg76]

You have 100+ Tours throughout the history of TDF and just 10 grades. This means it’s impossible for every Tour to get its own grade. It’s also highly unlikely that all Tours with the same grade are completely equal quality wise…

Since we are not grading Tours best-to-worst but assigning grades 1 to 10, you are bound to have some events which are not completely equal quality wise having the same grade…

Because you don't have an indefinite number of different grades, obviously.

My grades to student analogy should clarify that quite clearly...

Except I never said other Tours cannot given the same grade as the 89 Tour. I thought it was clear that I said whilst this Tour was good, it was not close enough to the 89 Tour to be given the same grade. There are arguably other Tours closer to the quality of the 89 race than this years edition.

 

[tobydawq]

Except I never said other Tours cannot given the same grade as the 89 Tour. I thought it was clear that I said whilst this Tour was good, it was not close enough to the 89 Tour to be given the same grade. There are arguably other Tours closer to the quality of the 89 race than this years edition.

But none in the last 33 years?

 

[Kaptain Kool]

and 2017 was good too, lol. How can u not like Dumoulin? And it was the perfect balance between the strong TTer all-rounder against the climbers. And four riders with a chance to win in the very last ITT! And Dumo and the sh!t during the double Stelvio stage…

I do find it interesting. So many people here wanting suspense to the last moment. Willing to have routes designed to artificially keep certain riders in play. Frankly I think it is because they want their personal favorite rider to win. If they are kept in play, it becomes more interesting, but when they lose at the end then the GT was awful, no matter how close. Lol!!

I don't care if the GC is close or not. I don't care who wins the race, either. I care about entertainment value.
The GC was close in both the 2012 and 2017 Giros but the racing was boring. Nothing of interest until the last climb of every stage. This year's Torino stage was better than anything either of those Giros had to offer. This year's Giro was not good but one really good stage beats Giros with zero.

 

[bNator]

Except I never said other Tours cannot given the same grade as the 89 Tour. I thought it was clear that I said whilst this Tour was good, it was not close enough to the 89 Tour to be given the same grade. There are arguably other Tours closer to the quality of the 89 race than this years edition.

I was responding to the following part of your post:

why on earth would I give them equal value when I know they are not equal?

So why would you give equal values for 89 and some other Tour (not 2022) if they are not equal?

 

[ciranda]

When people talk about that one race it's like when old people ramble on about The Beatles. It's a little tiring because all you can experience now is some grainy pixelated youtube footage. What I have learned about the 1889 TDF: on halloween Greg Lemon in a grizzly bear costume was shot by some hunters omg Laurent Fignon the unusual man with the eye glasses lost overall cause of a pony omg omg Bernard Hinault was super mad all the time argh Pedro Delgado was so sleepy omg. Sounds like a fun race but I didn't watch it.

 

[Big Doopie]

I don't care if the GC is close or not. I don't care who wins the race, either. I care about entertainment value.
The GC was close in both the 2012 and 2017 Giros but the racing was boring. Nothing of interest until the last climb of every stage. This year's Torino stage was better than anything either of those Giros had to offer. This year's Giro was not good but one really good stage beats Giros with zero.

lol. Again. I have posted many many times about how I do not care if it’s close but want to see exploits/drama. I was only pointing out that I was SURPRISED that people hated those giros so universally since surely they checked the box of a close finish as so many here (not you, not me) DEMAND suspense. I was just pointing out that CLEARLY those people that demand a suspenseful finish really just want their favorite rider to stay in play as long as possible.

I agree that the Torino stage was fantastic and I have asked/posted many many times for more of these types of stages. However I had to already think about who won that stage. First I thought it was Hindley and that was cool since he eventually won the giro. But no, he completely defended that day. In ten years I won’t remember who won it. However, I will never forget The Stelvio stage of 2012, who won it, and that battle. In fact when climbing the Stelvio last September I literally replayed in my mind the battle on the snow covered valley 4K from the top.

again I am not saying 2012 and 2017 were great. I liked them, however. And I am only surprised that no one else here does since all I seem to read from most people (not you, not me) is that they want suspense and ten riders within a minute going into the third week. I agree that is almost always a recipe for boring defensive riding.

 

[tobydawq]

When people talk about that one race it's like when old people ramble on about The Beatles. It's a little tiring because all you can experience now is some grainy pixelated youtube footage. What I have learned about the 1889 TDF: on halloween Greg Lemon in a grizzly bear costume was shot by some hunters omg Laurent Fignon the unusual man with the eye glasses lost overall cause of a pony omg omg Bernard Hinault was super mad all the time argh Pedro Delgado was so sleepy omg. Sounds like a fun race but I didn't watch it.

Hinault?

I don't think he featured much.

 

[pmcg76]

I was responding to the following part of your post:

So why would you give equal values for 89 and some other Tour (not 2022) if they are not equal?

This is like some weird rabbit hole now. Where did I say I would give equal status to other Tours? Of all the Tours I have followed, the 89 edition was easily the best. This year was one of(if not)the best I have watched since, but still not on the level of 89. There may be other Tours that I have not seen that were better than this year, and people may argue they are equal to 89(in particular 86 and 87), but as i only saw a bit of the 87 version i cannot compare. I can only compare the Tours I have witnessed and recognise that the general consensus in the cycling world is that 89 was the greatest edition.

This started as a pretty simple observation, but apparently Tours from a long time ago are irrelevant to judging how good a modern Tour is.

 

[bNator]

This is like some weird rabbit hole now. Where did I say I would give equal status to other Tours? Of all the Tours I have followed, the 89 edition was easily the best. This year was one of(if not)the best I have watched since, but still not on the level of 89. There may be other Tours that I have not seen that were better than this year, and people may argue they are equal to 89(in particular 86 and 87), but as i only saw a bit of the 87 version i cannot compare. I can only compare the Tours I have witnessed and recognise that the general consensus in the cycling world is that 89 was the greatest edition.

This started as a pretty simple observation, but apparently Tours from a long time ago are irrelevant to judging how good a modern Tour is.

Look - you were posting a rhetoric question why would you give equal grade to things that are not equal. I quoted this part in my previous post. Me and @tobydawq explained that in the 1-10 grading system, things that are not equal are bound to get the same value/grade. For our discussion, it's completely irrelevant which tours we are comparing here. It's possible for 2022 Tour to get the same grade as 1989 Tour even if it was worse, as long as it's in the same percentile range... If you feel 2022 Tour is not in the 91-100 prcentile range, then it desn't get a 10. I don't care about that, it's your opinion and I think we're all fine by that. But your initial claim is that if 2022 Tour is worse than 1989 Tour, it can't get the same value. That is not true and I stand by it.

 

[pmcg76]

Look - you were posting a rhetoric question why would you give equal grade to things that are not equal. I quoted this part in my previous post. Me and @tobydawq explained that in the 1-10 grading system, things that are not equal are bound to get the same value/grade. For our discussion, it's completely irrelevant which tours we are comparing here. It's possible for 2022 Tour to get the same grade as 1989 Tour even if it was worse, as long as it's in the same percentile range... If you feel 2022 Tour is not in the 91-100 prcentile range, then it desn't get a 10. I don't care about that, it's your opinion and I think we're all fine by that. But your initial claim is that if 2022 Tour is worse than 1989 Tour, it can't get the same value. That is not true and I stand by it.

Holy mother of God. Firstly that was not my original post. This was my original post.

Yeah, my thoughts exactly. Thought this year was the best Tour in a long time, but if this year was a 9, what would 89 be? Would have to go all the way to 11.

Tour way ahead of Giro/Vuelta this year and I really liked the lack of big bunch finishes at the Tour. Again reminding me of the early Tours I followed. Long may it continue .

Pretty clear I didn't rate this year on the same level as 89. Then Tobydawg came with some argument about not comparing Tours from 30 years ago and then we entered some rabbit hole about why no other Tour could compare to 89 and something, something percentiles, then you jumped in with the same argument.

So to be clear, I had always given the 89 Tour a higher grade.
I never claimed no other Tour can get the same grade(just that imo no Tour since has been worthy of that grade).
My view has been pretty straightforward, but somehow got muddied with nonsense about percentiles, again not introduced by me.

 

[zlev11]

the tour was great and the others were bad. not even close.

 

[rallybanana]

.

Hinault?

I don't think he featured much.

 

[Panda Claws]

Tour was exciting early on but the GC battle sucked.

WvA's and Pogacar's early antics were much more exciting than how the GC battle shaped up.
It was also pretty sad that Jakobsen went in place of Cavendish (which was understandable) but then ended up being pretty bad. I know he won a stage but didn't feature in many others that he could have won on paper.

 

[Andy schleck]

Tour by far. Prudhomme finally made a great parcours, unlike vegni and guillén.
The competition at the tour, with the best riders, also helped to make a great show.

There were a lot of stages with great entertainment at the tour. Pavé stage, granon stage, hautacam stage, the stage when van aert won, after an amazing job by jumbo.
Even the mountains stages where didn't happened gaps, were good.

The giro was Boring until stage 20 when hindley beat carapaz. The parcours were boring with pratically no mountain stages or medium montain stages until last week. The fact that there were just 30 km of itt was disappointing.
Furthermore, i didn't like the climbs. Where were the mythical climbs like stelvio, gavia, mortirolo, zoncolan?! Why they canceled fauniera?

The giro was a bit better than the vuelta, but the level wasn't very high, and the mountain stages were ridiculous. Almost no stages with altitude, no steep climbs, and with just a unipuerto. The itt at the vuelta was decent.
The last week of the parcours was very easy.

I hope next year, giro and vuelta bring they're thypical stages with a lot of altitude, step climbs and more medium mountain stages. I hope climbs like stelvio, gavia, mortirolo, bola del mundo, angliru can comeback. And i hope prudhomme can make a good parcours like this year's tour, with pavé, a lot of medium mountains stages, great mountains stages with very stepness and altitude, and a 60/70 km of itt.
I hope the rumours of col de la loze, and the return of tourmalet and col iseran are true.

 

[Izzyeviel]

I don't understand how people can say the Tour sucked for GC.

Jumbo threw everything including the kitchen sink at Pogacar, and they did so several times. When he lost yellow, Pogacar did the same. Even flat stages were GC battles.

Were you not entertained? What more do you want? Dragons?

 

[Big Doopie]

I don't understand how people can say the Tour sucked for GC.

i think that hindsight is making some forget what we felt at the time.

it’s easy now to look back and say oh well GC was basically over after Granon.

the reality however at the time was different, largely because we all thought Pog was invincible, we were unsure that Vingo could defend, and pog was also willing to attack at all costs. That left us wondering probably up until hautacam was done and dusted.

and the Granon stage was likely the greatest single GC stage battle in a very long time. Only one that comes close that I can remember immediately (other than 1989) is the Galibier stage of 2011.

 

[tobydawq]

i think that hindsight is making some forget what we felt at the time.

it’s easy now to look back and say oh well GC was basically over after Granon.

the reality however at the time was different, largely because we all thought Pog was invincible, we were unsure that Vingo could defend, and pog was also willing to attack at all costs. That left us wondering probably up until hautacam was done and dusted.

and the Granon stage was likely the greatest single GC stage battle in a very long time. Only one that comes close that I can remember immediately (other than 1989) is the Galibier stage of 2011.

Exactly.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

I don't understand how people can say the Tour sucked for GC.

Jumbo threw everything including the kitchen sink at Pogacar, and they did so several times. When he lost yellow, Pogacar did the same. Even flat stages were GC battles.

Were you not entertained? What more do you want? Dragons?

I guess perhaps the fact the top 2 were so significantly better than the rest hurts it for some, but I feel it's nitpicking to complain about the GC battle between Vingegaard and Pogačar. I suppose maybe the fact there was no real battle for the podium meant there was only really the two riders that had any real relevance to it? There was a clear gulf from the top 2 to Thomas, but he was also clearly the next best in the race thus meaning there was no battle for third and so everybody else was rendered an afterthought; only all Thomas really could do was hang on to them a bit longer than the rest, kind of the reverse problem to the Giro where again the top 3 were the clear best 3 riders in the race, but whereas in the Tour the top 2 absolutely went tooth and nail at each other, in the Giro the only one that was providing any attacks was Landa, and he was clearly the 3rd strongest of them.

Even for those that weren't so enamoured of the Tour this year, though, I can't really countenance how they can justify voting for either the Giro or Vuelta as being a superior race in 2022.