GT routes: love and hate.

No_Ta_Doctor

Well we did do a few suggestions here....
http://www.bikeradar.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=12713595



The chase idea was one of the more serious, I'd really like to see it.

Another that would be possible though far from conventional would be a distance covered event, say over 5 hours, could be done as a team TT.

I'd like to see more long hilly stages as well, throw in a couple of short sharp climbs, try and split the peloton up a bit and give a real chance for a successful breakaway (how many were there this year?). Nothing against sprints, but the tactics at the end of a stage with a three or four man breakaway with the peloton closing are great to watch, and were sadly lacking this year.

Tom Butcher

The whole Paris Roubaix route followed by the whole Flanders route the following day.
A time trial which goes over the Passage du Gois.

But in the real world I like the idea of more bumpy stages, open stages where cross winds might be an issue, descents with the finish straight after. Terrain which offers the chance for riders to do something but which doesn't make the selection for them.

No_Ta_Doctor

mididoctors wrote:

on every stage every meter of the road effectively acts as a pursuit till the end of the stage...thunk about it

if they stop and go to bed its different... if they just keep going its no different than the gap on the road or virtual GC we already have..

Not really, a proper pursuit in the final week would be a very different affair to a normal stage, you might not have any team members close enough to you to haul your arse along, nor could the yellow jersey's team pile on the pressure at the front and stop a breakaway. Tactics would become very, very interesting.

mididoctors

No tA Doctor wrote:

mididoctors wrote:

on every stage every meter of the road effectively acts as a pursuit till the end of the stage...thunk about it

if they stop and go to bed its different... if they just keep going its no different than the gap on the road or virtual GC we already have..

Not really, a proper pursuit in the final week would be a very different affair to a normal stage, you might not have any team members close enough to you to haul your ars* along, nor could the yellow jersey's team pile on the pressure at the front and stop a breakaway. Tactics would become very, very interesting.

no read the reply i made in context to orginal post made

they don't start the day as a pursuit

FJS

knedlicky wrote:

afx237vi wrote:

The only thing I really dislike is when the final climb is too far from the finish, like in Pau this year.

I think this’ll be here for a while as Prudhomme has said he likes the idea of those stages. Not sure why he does.

They're a decent chance left for French riders to win through a breakaway.

mididoctors

FJS wrote:

knedlicky wrote:

afx237vi wrote:

The only thing I really dislike is when the final climb is too far from the finish, like in Pau this year.

I think this’ll be here for a while as Prudhomme has said he likes the idea of those stages. Not sure why he does.

They're a decent chance left for French riders to win through a breakaway.

beat me to it

FJS

knedlicky wrote:

Without any innovative changes, I’d like to see more ‘bumpy’ stages, so making more use of the terrain in the Massif Central, Cevennes, Vercors, Jura and Vosges.

Agreed. Add to that the hilly parts of Brittany and Normandy, the Ardennes, Champagne, etc etc, and you can spice up even the stages that go through those parts of France. Plenty of little steep hills there, but the Tour hardly ever really goes looking for them.

mididoctors

FJS wrote:

knedlicky wrote:

Without any innovative changes, I’d like to see more ‘bumpy’ stages, so making more use of the terrain in the Massif Central, Cevennes, Vercors, Jura and Vosges.

Agreed. Add to that the hilly parts of Brittany and Normandy, the Ardennes, Champagne, etc etc, and you can spice up even the stages that go through those parts of France. Plenty of little steep hills there, but the Tour hardly ever really goes looking for them.

this narrow road issue pops often especially in relation to vosges.. I'm not convinced..

donrhummy

How about a crappy-riding rule? If your team causes at least 1 crash every other day over a 4 day period, you have to ride at the back of the peloton for the rest of the race. I'm looking at you Euskaltel!

rick_chasey

johnfinch wrote:

I'd like to see a whole load of short steep climbs (10 or so) piled up at the end of a stage.

Sounds like a certain Flemish race held in Spring!

rick_chasey

I'd like to see the following.

Many more 250km+ stages.


More interesting finishes > like perhaps the 2009 Barcalona finish, or indeed many of the Italian finishes. (the lack of space for the big show is likely the cause of this).

More 'turns' on the true flat stages - make the riders worry about the wind and positioning.

I would like to see a TT up a mountain and down the other side, though the fast change in weather conditions that happen in mountain ranges could make such a TT grossly unfair.

More HC climbs than we've seen recently. This year's tour never had more than 2 HCs in a stage, and that was one where the final climb was a long way from the finish.

I'd also like to see riders stop winging about tricky courses. Cancellara's issue with neutralising a 'dangerous' stage (though I think Schleck's rubbish bike handling might have been a more pressing thought) is a bit steep coming from someone who loves the flat 1 dayers.

In short - more stages like one dayers - in terms of distance, course (i.e. turning a lot), both flat and hilly; more variation in the finishes, even throwing a cat 2 climb in 10 km from the finish, just something to shake it, and finally; as ever, more of the MASSIVE mountains, more of the time. If they're worried that favours the climbers too much, throw in an 80km TT. I'm sure you'd find a route which could test a multitude of skills over that distance.

finchy

Rick Chasey wrote:

johnfinch wrote:

I'd like to see a whole load of short steep climbs (10 or so) piled up at the end of a stage.

Sounds like a certain Flemish race held in Spring!

Yes, a bit Tour of Flandersish, but with the hills stacked up even more closely together, the could do that around Haute Normandie, just climb, descend, climb, descend with no real respite for about 20km.

finchy

Rick Chasey wrote:

More interesting finishes

A few circuits around a town with a decent hill or two might make for an interesting finish, especially if the flat bits are kept technical and tricky to encourage attacking riding. Rouen would be perfect.

stagehopper

donrhummy wrote:

How about a crappy-riding rule? If your team causes at least 1 crash every other day over a 4 day period, you have to ride at the back of the peloton for the rest of the race. I'm looking at you Euskaltel!

Wasn't that rule the direct cause of Armstrong dropping down the GC?

rick_chasey

johnfinch wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

johnfinch wrote:

I'd like to see a whole load of short steep climbs (10 or so) piled up at the end of a stage.

Sounds like a certain Flemish race held in Spring!

Yes, a bit Tour of Flandersish, but with the hills stacked up even more closely together, the could do that around Haute Normandie, just climb, descend, climb, descend with no real respite for about 20km.

Problem with that is, what happens if the break gets 20mins?

finchy

Rick Chasey wrote:

johnfinch wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

johnfinch wrote:

I'd like to see a whole load of short steep climbs (10 or so) piled up at the end of a stage.

Sounds like a certain Flemish race held in Spring!

Yes, a bit Tour of Flandersish, but with the hills stacked up even more closely together, the could do that around Haute Normandie, just climb, descend, climb, descend with no real respite for about 20km.

Problem with that is, what happens if the break gets 20mins?

It would be a more exciting race?

rick_chasey

johnfinch wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Problem with that is, what happens if the break gets 20mins?

It would be a more exciting race?

I remember watching footage of a dutch win in I think the late '70s, where the break was a lap up on the peleton, so suddenly, half way in the pack, the winner sits up in the middle of the peleton celebrating.

Very odd - wasn't really a great TV spectacle.

rick_chasey

Realisticly though, there is stuff they could do.

I know we're all demanding bigger, tougher harder stages (surprise surprise), but putting many more turns and changes of direction on the flatter stages, and perhaps aiming for the same number of small climbs on the transition stages, but just putting them JUST before the end, would help.

I find that the Tour more or less has only 4 types of stage: Deadflat sprinter stage - massif central rolling stage for a breakaway, TTs, and mountain stages.

What about the sprinters who can get over Cat 2 climbs, like Freirre, or the Cunego type finishers uphill? If the tour organisers feel every specialist should get their chance, and I think they do, they need to cater for the different subtalties.

It's not taking anything away from Cavendish to suggest that one of the factors he is able to win as many stages as he does is because the Tour provides little or no variation in the challenges put forward for a spirnt. Flat stage, into big boulevard for final km. Else a final turn with 250m to go.

Stage 18 of the 2009 tour is an example of how to do it, and my estimation of Cavendish went up plenty more when he still imanaged to win, despite having to hall his manx ass over a 2nd cat just before the finish.


Also, the clasics style twisty turny through narrower streets is always a good test of a riders' ability to stay concentrated, but it's not in the spirit of GT, which has to cover more of the counrry

PBo

Out: Unwritten rules.......

iainf72

So, we're basically saying Grand Tours should be held in Italy and organised by RCS?

Pross

I'd go with a selection of 'northern classic' stages i.e. one based in the Ardennes, one on the pave and possibly a trip into Belgium to take in parts of the Ronde course. A couple of short, sharp stages that might encourage a break (unlike some I don't think the longer stages do much as the bunch just ride it like a club run until the end) and some more short, sharp hill finishes along the lines of the Mende stage this year. The Tour also neglects large chunks of the country year after year. I'm a big fan of the Vosges and Massif Central and think they should feature more than one stage a year or even every other year. I think a steep climb of 5 or 6km at the end of a reasonably easy day will give riders the chance to attack without too much worrying about the long term effects.

takethehighroad

In terms of shorter stages, it's a good idea in principle, but we saw in the Giro stage to Blockhaus that it actually dissuaded attacks as the peloton were closer to the finish when they had to chase

knedlicky

TakeTheHighRoad wrote:

The Colle delle Finestre is not too far from the border to make it possible to have a stage finish in Briancon

The Colle delle Finestre might be in the Giro in 2011, because they’ll probably go to Sestriere for a centenary.
Being in that area is also one of the reasons why the Giro is rumoured to be doing Alpe d’Huez next year.

Pross

TakeTheHighRoad wrote:

In terms of shorter stages, it's a good idea in principle, but we saw in the Giro stage to Blockhaus that it actually dissuaded attacks as the peloton were closer to the finish when they had to chase

I think you've hit on the crux of the problem here - too much team control. Maybe a larger number of smaller (6 or 7 man) teams is the answer. More teams to attack, less riders in the other teams to control things :?

moray_gub

Think there is a bit of change for the sake of change going on here each GT has its own routes and characteristics with some years being dull and some not so dull .Just like some versions of the Ronde or Roxbaix are dull I am all for a few tweaks here and there but in the main i think the GTs have it right with no need for major reconstruction. Its only a few weeks to the Vuelta and during that there are cries in this forum to reduce it to two weeks , probably from the same guys that want 250k+ stages :roll:

knedlicky

mididoctors wrote:

knedlicky wrote:

In fully mountain stages in the Alps and Pyrennees I’d like to see times taken twice, first about 60% along the route, then at the finish, so as if the one day is two stages. Riders wouldn’t stop at the 60% mark though, just carry on, so with a flying start. (I suppose in many ways this is a version of the chase idea I mention above).

on every stage every meter of the road effectively acts as a pursuit till the end of the stage...thunk about it
if they stop and go to bed its different... if they just keep going its no different than the gap on the road or virtual GC we already have.

I think you misunderstand my idea.
As example, on the stage to St. Jean de Maurienne, I mean that times could have be taken at the top of the Col de Saisies as well as the finish, as if the two halves of the stage were separate stages (or maybe a double-stage is a better description). The result would have been that Leon-Luis Sanchez and those with him like Moreau would have gained 5-30 on the yellow jersey and the other contenders in the first half (stage), and also would have been allowed to carry the time-advantage they’d gained into the second half (stage).
The virtual yellow jersey would then perhaps sometimes actually become the actual yellow jersey halfway through the day, without stopping for a ceremony or getting to wear yellow. He might also then lose it by the end of the day, but the time gained in the first half of the day would be retained.

Of course I wouldn’t hope these stages would evolve the same as they did the other week, rather that the main contenders, realising there was time to be gained earlier on in a stage, wouldn’t leave their attacks until the last kms of the final climb, but attack about midway through too.
I also realise riders might attack, gain a few seconds then relax and recuperate ready for the final climb, but I think even that would be better than main contenders riding alongside each other until practically the end, as now the fashion.
It might also open up totally different tactics, especially for those teams with two strong riders.

jimmythecuckoo

For me I would want to see some stages that properly split the race up, but that incentivise the riders to actually race them.

Make it too brutal and they dont bother for the first 150km. So my proposal would be

Prologue of about 10km to get some order early on.
Flat stages on the coast with a bit of wind to string them out. Remember the team time trial and Chris Boardman?
I would add a team time trial, it adds proper colour to the race.
Have the mountains start on the first weekend (after the start) but have a flat finish before a couple of summit finishes.
The revolutionary thing I would do is make the transition stages easier to try and encourage rest for the GC contenders and incentivise the sprinters to make it over the first range of mountains.
Then have a similar weekend situation the following week with a few climbs and flat finish before a couple of summit finishes.
(you can fit the rest days in after each set of mountains).
Then a couple of lumpy stages for breakways before an ITT and Paris.

Boom.

mididoctors

knedlicky wrote:

mididoctors wrote:

knedlicky wrote:

In fully mountain stages in the Alps and Pyrennees I’d like to see times taken twice, first about 60% along the route, then at the finish, so as if the one day is two stages. Riders wouldn’t stop at the 60% mark though, just carry on, so with a flying start. (I suppose in many ways this is a version of the chase idea I mention above).

on every stage every meter of the road effectively acts as a pursuit till the end of the stage...thunk about it
if they stop and go to bed its different... if they just keep going its no different than the gap on the road or virtual GC we already have.

I think you misunderstand my idea.
As example, on the stage to St. Jean de Maurienne, I mean that times could have be taken at the top of the Col de Saisies as well as the finish, as if the two halves of the stage were separate stages (or maybe a double-stage is a better description). The result would have been that Leon-Luis Sanchez and those with him like Moreau would have gained 5-30 on the yellow jersey and the other contenders in the first half (stage), and also would have been allowed to carry the time-advantage they’d gained into the second half (stage).

the riders already carry the advantage? :?:

The virtual yellow jersey would then perhaps sometimes actually become the actual yellow jersey halfway through the day, without stopping for a ceremony or getting to wear yellow. He might also then lose it by the end of the day, but the time gained in the first half of the day would be retained.
.

I am having real trouble with this help me out here

basically a time bonus equivalent to your gap on the road at that time ?

relative to who?

the time he wins half way he keeps as thou it was the end of day.. like a massive time bonus?

is that what you are saying ie

rider gains 5mins halfway through stage... keeps that 5min bonus gets caught on the line but still gains 5mins

another example


rider gains 5 mins half way gets caught and dropped for 5 mins on the line ends up losing nothing? neutral on the day?


if there are multiple breaks and groups do they all get a bonus relative to the yellow jersey on the road..think how odd that would be



or is the timing like a stage

ie the time bonus they get halfway is equivalent to a virtual gc calculation halfway as though it was a genuine stage finish

lets say rider gains 5mins at halfway point but was 3 mins down at start of the day

if the race ended there he would be 2 mins up on gc.... he keeps that 2mins as a time bonus irrespective of the stage result?

what if he started 10mins down and gained 5mins halfway his bonus is -5mins!?

wakemalcolm

Team time trial in the final week (with the time being taken at the last man if there aren't enough 'counters' left). Then we'd see the true benefit of having a strong team and it wouldn't dominate the GC standings for days after.

knedlicky

mididoctors wrote:

I am having real trouble with this help me out here

From your examples, I think you’ve got what I mean, irrespective of whether you call it a time bonus or think of it like a stage.

In the Tour, after the St. Jean-de-M stage, L.L. Sanchez was 4-41 back in the GC behind Schleck, but had LLS been deducted 5-30 from his overall time, because he was that far ahead of Schleck at the halfway stage, he would have actually been 0-49 ahead of Schleck, and thus Tour leader.
Similarly, Casar (who I think was with Sanchez at the top of Saisies) would have ‘gained’ 5-30 and would have only been 5-16 behind Schleck, instead of 10-46 (Casar would have been 6-05 behind Tour leader LLS).