2016 Tour de France Ranking/10

bobmcstuff

Title says it all

I struggled choosing between 5 and 6. In the end I went with 6 because there were many elements which I enjoyed. Ultimately even Quintana's failure to perform was interesting.

10 - Best Tour of all time/I loved it more than my own children
5 - Meh/Minimum "I didn't actively dislike watching it" level.
1 - Worst Tour of all time/Hated it more than endless motorised doping speculation

rick_chasey

If an average Tour is 5 this was a 2 or 3.

above_the_cows

Good for the renaissance of Cav.
Good for the return of Bernie's smiley face to the TdF peloton.
Good for the lack of nonsense doping twattery - here at least.
Pleased for Bardet.
Nice to see a well executed plan pay off.
Good for the lack of any major injuries.
Pleased for Froome.
Good that the Toblerone finally lasted a whole GT without melting.

EDIT:

Another reason on the side of 'good' was the presence of Haimar Zubeldia. I saw him at least 4 times on the TV and they interviewed him on the Cycling Podcast. I for one now believe the man actually exists.

6/10.

bobmcstuff

Rick Chasey wrote:

If an average Tour is 5 this was a 2 or 3.

I think if I was just comparing it to other Tours I'd have to drop it to a 4 or 5 just because we didn't get a proper unadulterated GC mountain stage.

But I was ranking based on how much I enjoyed watching it, out of 10.

FocusZing

Yes, atleast a six. Giving it a three must mean you miss the days riders danced up mountains like blue faced loons.

rick_chasey

I do resent this constant assumption that if you find a race boring you're immediately some dope loving pantomime lover.

Races can be boring if riders are full to the brim with EPO or none. Some of Armstrong's were also tedious, some weren't.

Mad_Malx

Did Michelle give the 10?

jimmocrates

6
Lots of exciting moments and some great stages, but the GC lacked any excitement/suspense.
No doubting Sky's brilliance, but no one falls in love with any sport because of a team showing ruthless efficiency and utter domination over all others.

above_the_cows

Mad_Malx wrote:

Did Michelle give the 10?

Nah that was Frenchie, popping back to mess with us.

specialgueststar

I would give this a 7 based on a complicated formula involving: Course : GC: Points: stage wins and relative drama


but I'm on the 6 side of 7

crescent

I would go for a 7. Dominance from Sky, but not in the usual boring way - still plenty of racing on a day to day basis and some new faces starting to make their mark as some of the old guard retire. Feel a bit cheated out of the Ventoux summit finish but definitely the right decision, would have added to the overall spectacle though.
Best tour in recent years, in my opinion, was 2011.

rick_chasey

2011 was a classic!!

Very fine vintage.

hypster

Mad_Malx wrote:

Did Michelle give the 10?

No, I did. Every Tour gets 10 out of 10 from me for being the most awesome sporting contest on the planet.

Lanterne_Rogue

I think the biggest problem was a growing consensus view that the Tour is entirely about the GC battle in the high mountains and that anything else is unimportant.

For me the daily battles and minor skirmishes are what really makes it, and there was still plenty of that to look for this time round. Who could have watched EQS falling apart today and not felt the warm feeling of schadenfreude? Who can sit stony faced as Astana blow the front of the race apart only to discover that the rider they were working for hadn't received the message? What sort of mind watches Sagan's obvious glee at being in a breakaway with the yellow jersey and GC favourite alongside him ("I said 'hey, we're really strong, yeah?!'") and thinks 'this would be so much better if only it were Quintana and Froome grinding away for twenty days..."?

Pross

Average so a 5.

wombly_knees

3 or 4. Voted 3. A few decent stages with the standout being the Sagan-Froome escape (Izagirre's win was also good for a breakaway stage). The mountains were largely dull because sky rode a perfect race with a heavy hitting team and the descent finishes didn't help in hindsight. Ventoux promised before turning into the farce it was.

I know it's a pipe dream but I'd like to see Froome and Quintana switch teams. Just to know what effect it'll have.

yourpaceormine

Gave it an 8, which is really a 7 tempered by it being the TdF, so is automatically elevated by at least one point.

Good bits - seeing some closely competed sprints (was it 4 photo finishes?); Cav being Cav again; Sagan not coming 2nd all the time; no P+P commentary; ITV4 commentary team, whilst still learning, getting good - liked the interviews mid race, Holy David's race insights spot on and very informative, whilst I missed CB Jensie and Renshaw were good stand ins; ECHELONS; comedy down hill racing; Adam Yates.

Negatives: didn't really feel like there was a proper mountain stage(I know there were, but Ventoux's curtailment left a big hole); riders riding for top ten or podium rather than the win (inevitable I guess, but need more Dan Martin what the heck attacks); Bertie abandoning (whilst not a fan, he does animate a race).

So whilst not a classic, it was much more interesting than some of Big Mig's victories.

blazing_saddles

I gave it a very average 5.
Apart from Froome's 3 wtf moments and fun of the breakaways, there is very little meat on this tour's carcass.
All the jerseys never looked like going anyplace else.
The sprints were your standard tour sprints, regardless of who won.
Most of the top 10 were just happy to be there.

supermurph09

6 for me, didn't really have me gripped, Froome I think comes out with a lot of credit though. Great to see the progression of Yates, but for the misfortune I think he would have been on the podium. Cav winning was probably the most emotive aspect of the tour for me, that was unexpected. A real shame for Domoulin though.

andyrac

Supermurph09 wrote:

6 for me, didn't really have me gripped, Froome I think comes out with a lot of credit though. Great to see the progression of Yates, but for the misfortune I think he would have been on the podium. Cav winning was probably the most emotive aspect of the tour for me, that was unexpected. A real shame for Domoulin though.

I agree. The first week was pretty enjoyable - but after that it never took off. A combination of Sky being well drilled and other teams seemingly not having any tactics to mix things up. It was the first Tour that I can remember thinking that it has really dragged on.....

I still think 2011 was the last decent Tour....

dougzz

5 or 6. I enjoyed Cummins, and Cav's wins. Froome was very strong and a worthy winner. Yates was a bonus. I liked GVA in yellow, Alaphillipe's attitude on a couple of stages, Bardet on the podium. Sagan is a machine, the usual scenery, it was a great way to avoid too much work for 3 weeks.
What I didn't like was that the other GT contenders seem to think a plan for winning is to follow Froome and presumably wait for a mistake or some other intervention. Maybe it is all they have, but it seems to me that they're already beaten at the start line with that mentality.

above_the_cows

dougzz wrote:

What I didn't like was that the other GT contenders seem to think a plan for winning is to follow Froome and presumably wait for a mistake or some other intervention. Maybe it is all they have, but it seems to me that they're already beaten at the start line with that mentality.

Worked for Nibali.

TheBigBean

hypster wrote:

Mad_Malx wrote:

Did Michelle give the 10?

No, I did. Every Tour gets 10 out of 10 from me for being the most awesome sporting contest on the planet.

Is it every tour, every GT, every pro bike race or every bike race that scores a 10?

thomthom

Do most of you rate your score on a who won a stage and not a second of the 5 hours prior to Cav going over the finish line (or whoever won..)

Also, 3. I was on a 2 but the rain, ironically, did provide a somewhat exciting 19th stage.

The_Boy

I voted 4, but feel that was mean. Was basically an average GT, nothing more or less - so 5 would seem fair.

bobmcstuff

ThomThom wrote:

Do most of you rate your score on a who won a stage and not a second of the 5 hours prior to Cav going over the finish line (or whoever won..)

Also, 3. I was on a 2 but the rain, ironically, did provide a somewhat exciting 19th stage.

Re: the Cav winning a stage, the rest of a sprint stage is usually pretty damn boring regardless of who wins, there's nothing unusual about this Tour in that regard. The only excitement is if the break looks like it might stay away, or if you get crosswinds - which actually did happen this year.

bobmcstuff

The_Boy wrote:

I voted 4, but feel that was mean. Was basically an average GT, nothing more or less - so 5 would seem fair.

You can change your vote

thomthom

bobmcstuff wrote:

ThomThom wrote:

Do most of you rate your score on a who won a stage and not a second of the 5 hours prior to Cav going over the finish line (or whoever won..)

Also, 3. I was on a 2 but the rain, ironically, did provide a somewhat exciting 19th stage.

Re: the Cav winning a stage, the rest of a sprint stage is usually pretty damn boring regardless of who wins, there's nothing unusual about this Tour in that regard. The only excitement is if the break looks like it might stay away, or if you get crosswinds - which actually did happen this year.

Which is why 8 flat stages in a row is well idiotic.

TheBigBean

ThomThom wrote:

bobmcstuff wrote:

ThomThom wrote:

Do most of you rate your score on a who won a stage and not a second of the 5 hours prior to Cav going over the finish line (or whoever won..)

Also, 3. I was on a 2 but the rain, ironically, did provide a somewhat exciting 19th stage.

Re: the Cav winning a stage, the rest of a sprint stage is usually pretty damn boring regardless of who wins, there's nothing unusual about this Tour in that regard. The only excitement is if the break looks like it might stay away, or if you get crosswinds - which actually did happen this year.

Which is why 8 flat stages in a row is well idiotic.

You can't the fundamentals of French geography. Italy has an advantage on that front.

hypster

TheBigBean wrote:

hypster wrote:

Mad_Malx wrote:

Did Michelle give the 10?

No, I did. Every Tour gets 10 out of 10 from me for being the most awesome sporting contest on the planet.

Is it every tour, every GT, every pro bike race or every bike race that scores a 10?

Every Tour de France rates a 10 from me because it is the biggest race of the year and the one that every pro cyclist would like to win. It also has the advantage because it is the most prestigious race of the year that it has had the most TV coverage over the years which makes it the most accessible. I'm talking UK terrestrial television here as well. I would imagine there is a lot more coverage of all sorts of races on the Continent.

Because of the rise in cycling awareness in the UK the Vuelta has started to get coverage and I have enjoyed that race too but unfortuantely I don't think it has the same cache at the TdF. Similarly the Giro gets no Freeview coverage in the UK at all and because of it's position earlier in the year tends to suffer somewhat with having enough of the big names to really make a fight of it. If it were on Freeview I would watch every stage of that also and I'm sure I would enjoy it immensely.

It's not my intention to start a discussion or comparison of the Giro vs Tour vs Vuelta. I'm sure there have been years where one or the other has been generally thought to be a more exciting race than the other, it's just for me the Tour de France is the highlight of every sporting year.

bobmcstuff

ThomThom wrote:

bobmcstuff wrote:

ThomThom wrote:

Do most of you rate your score on a who won a stage and not a second of the 5 hours prior to Cav going over the finish line (or whoever won..)

Also, 3. I was on a 2 but the rain, ironically, did provide a somewhat exciting 19th stage.

Re: the Cav winning a stage, the rest of a sprint stage is usually pretty damn boring regardless of who wins, there's nothing unusual about this Tour in that regard. The only excitement is if the break looks like it might stay away, or if you get crosswinds - which actually did happen this year.

Which is why 8 flat stages in a row is well idiotic.

But then they had the Euros on in France during the first week so presumably they decided it was better to put the stages with less prolonged action in them during that week anyway as no-one was going to watch the lot.

I thought the finale of the flat crosswind stage was really good anyway...

Personally I think they should have put the stage finish of the Joux Plane stage up at Avoriaz - then there would have been another MTF after a load of hard cols. Although without the rain that stage might have been totally different as people might have gambled on attacking over the top and holding the gap on the descent.