Rate the Race: Giro d'Italia 2020

Pross

With some comments on this thread and the final stage thread I'm starting to think I dreamt that they were down to a handful of riders half way up the Stelvio with 40k or so to go, that the race smashed to pieces well before the final few Kms at Sestriere, that Tao attacked on Stage 13 and was one of the riders that prevented Sagan winning after all the work to drop Demare, the Ganna break, the Dowsett break, Stage 15. I would have said at least two thirds of the stages were good races in their own right.

By contrast, if I were to score the Vuelta at the moment it would be a 4 or 5 for 1 decent stage (the first 3 stages must have been dull, it's as though they never happened )

RichN95.

Let's not forget that two of the first stages wins were proclaimed by Rob Hatch as the 'greatest of the century'

blazing_saddles

Vengi has rated two of the teams as worthy of sanctioning by the UCI and I have to say I think he's right. If he's not, we wouldn't have got to Milan and this rate the Giro thread.

https://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/racing/giro-ditalia/giro-ditalia-boss-wants-sanctions-for-jumbo-visma-and-ef-pro-cycling-over-coronavirus-response-473917

rick_chasey

Gave it a 5.

It’s the Giro so it’s fun but I lost interest by the of werk Yeo and when it required big effort to watch (as I was distracted) I bailed and it turns out it got fun then.

Very unfair of me but I find it less exciting when riders accidentally find themselves in winning positions.

takethehighroad

I gave it a 5

It was quite sterile through the middle, several sprint stages, and even the Nove Colli stage which showed promise ended up being a damp (drenched) squib.

It had a lot of promise (Brindisi stage, mountainous final week) but in the end the main interest came in moments.

The Stelvio stage was a good 90 minutes of racing, but the addition of the Stelvio will always add 1 point to a race rating.

davidof

I fortunately only had to suffer Rob Hatch for a couple of stages as I was mostly able to watch on lequipetv. Hatch was quite the worst TV commentary I've heard since Hughie Porter.

Loved the ski jump time trial with Sagan having a go for the KOM jersey, sorry he missed out even if he is a cock.

The stages of the century were good.

Racing was good, who cares if some former star didn't turn up, if you want to win you've got to be there at the end. Obviously sorry for Yates though.

Fantastic scenery - up Etna, along the coast, Stelvio in the snow. Great punchy stages that lit up the racing.

Crazy giro weather and planned stages.

Final iTT passed the Duomo, great location.

Cheered me up in this autumn of Covid-19.

Podium girls, yeah! Keep the faith :-)

kingstongraham

m.r.m. said:

andyp said:

m.r.m. said:

I really didn't like it. Most true contenders crashed out (crash or Covid), Almeida wore the jersey for 2 weeks with not much of a challenge. The eventual podium pretty much just followed wheels, with minor attacks at the very end.

To me it didn't feel like Tao announced himself on the grand stage in a massive way like Bernal or Pogacar or even Roglic in the past. He was more like the best of the remaining rest.

Who pi$$ed on your chips?

Nobody. I think I have given out comparatively high marks on the last few GT's. Just didn't think this one was as good. To me it seems like plenty are influenced by who won instead of how it happened.

Do you exclusively consider the GC, not any of the stages?

DeadCalm

m.r.m. said:

andyp said:

m.r.m. said:

I really didn't like it. Most true contenders crashed out (crash or Covid), Almeida wore the jersey for 2 weeks with not much of a challenge. The eventual podium pretty much just followed wheels, with minor attacks at the very end.

To me it didn't feel like Tao announced himself on the grand stage in a massive way like Bernal or Pogacar or even Roglic in the past. He was more like the best of the remaining rest.

Who pi$$ed on your chips?

Nobody. I think I have given out comparatively high marks on the last few GT's. Just didn't think this one was as good. To me it seems like plenty are influenced by who won instead of how it happened.

Given that TGH was 3.44 down after stage 14, I found the way it happened pretty exciting.

RichN95.

There aren't many Grand Tours where all of the top four lead the GC at some point.

m.r.m.

kingstongraham said:

m.r.m. said:

andyp said:

m.r.m. said:

I really didn't like it. Most true contenders crashed out (crash or Covid), Almeida wore the jersey for 2 weeks with not much of a challenge. The eventual podium pretty much just followed wheels, with minor attacks at the very end.

To me it didn't feel like Tao announced himself on the grand stage in a massive way like Bernal or Pogacar or even Roglic in the past. He was more like the best of the remaining rest.

Who pi$$ed on your chips?

Nobody. I think I have given out comparatively high marks on the last few GT's. Just didn't think this one was as good. To me it seems like plenty are influenced by who won instead of how it happened.

Do you exclusively consider the GC, not any of the stages?

No I see it in context of the GC. I don't see stages as entirely separate. I didn't have the same visceral reaction to Cummings winning in the Tour a couple of years back like some others did (apropos of nothing). Plenty of stages are won by riders allowed to get away, so seeing them devoid of the greater race context seems questionable.

There were just not sufficient attacks by the GC contenders for my taste. Rich stating that Ineos winning the GC by mistake put it perfectly.
There were attacks, but really nothing like in other GT's of the past.

Some stage wins were decent, but nothing really stood out to get high marks.

I'm happy for individual riders, but that doesn't make the entire GT good or even particularly better. It's just good fortune for them and hopefully a new contract etc.

I have one day races and especially monuments for isolated racing wins. In a GT I'd like to see more challenges to the leader's jersey and stage wins in that context or that stand out for some other reason. I didn't think that was the case here compared to Hirschi or Pogacar on stage 9 & the ITT or Lopez with Roglic and Pogacar chasing or even Kwiatkowski or Kragh Andersen spoiling the sprinters with a supremely timed counter twice at the Tour. Same can be found in other GT's.

Nothing stood out like that for me at this Giro.

mididoctors

RichN95. said:

There aren't many Grand Tours where all of the top four lead the GC at some point.

This ... I think this may be unique

bobmcstuff

m.r.m. said:

kingstongraham said:

m.r.m. said:

andyp said:

m.r.m. said:

I really didn't like it. Most true contenders crashed out (crash or Covid), Almeida wore the jersey for 2 weeks with not much of a challenge. The eventual podium pretty much just followed wheels, with minor attacks at the very end.

To me it didn't feel like Tao announced himself on the grand stage in a massive way like Bernal or Pogacar or even Roglic in the past. He was more like the best of the remaining rest.

Who pi$$ed on your chips?

Nobody. I think I have given out comparatively high marks on the last few GT's. Just didn't think this one was as good. To me it seems like plenty are influenced by who won instead of how it happened.

Do you exclusively consider the GC, not any of the stages?

No I see it in context of the GC. I don't see stages as entirely separate. I didn't have the same visceral reaction to Cummings winning in the Tour a couple of years back like some others did (apropos of nothing). Plenty of stages are won by riders allowed to get away, so seeing them devoid of the greater race context seems questionable.

There were just not sufficient attacks by the GC contenders for my taste. Rich stating that Ineos winning the GC by mistake put it perfectly.
There were attacks, but really nothing like in other GT's of the past.

Some stage wins were decent, but nothing really stood out to get high marks.

I'm happy for individual riders, but that doesn't make the entire GT good or even particularly better. It's just good fortune for them and hopefully a new contract etc.

I have one day races and especially monuments for isolated racing wins. In a GT I'd like to see more challenges to the leader's jersey and stage wins in that context or that stand out for some other reason. I didn't think that was the case here compared to Hirschi or Pogacar on stage 9 & the ITT or Lopez with Roglic and Pogacar chasing or even Kwiatkowski or Kragh Andersen spoiling the sprinters with a supremely timed counter twice at the Tour. Same can be found in other GT's.

Nothing stood out like that for me at this Giro.

I understand everything you've said but a 3 seems unreasonable...

What would you rank as a good GT I wonder.

bobmcstuff

Although I guess if you're literally only watching a grand tour for the GC you are never going to give it a very high score as you're only watching half the race.

jimmyjams

I found the first week mostly boring and thought it a shame that the GC contest only really came alive pretty late on. A few exciting stages at the end didn't compensate for what went before. I prefer it when the GC contest gets serious but still undecided earlier, the contenders not waiting. Some might say it would have been different if Thomas, Kruijswijk and Yates had not dropped out, but I'm not so sure - attacking early in a GT doesn't seem T's or K's style, while Y might still be feeling hesitant from the other year. A stage going high into the Abruzzi during the second week might have better encouraged things along.

Even the less critical GC stages were tame, unlike the Tour's Massif Central and Vercors stages, which non-GC riders fiercely contested. The mountains jersey was only briefly contested by two riders, one of whom then dropped out. And as someone else pointed out, even the sprint stages weren't that competitive, because one-sided. I know that was true in the Cipollini days too, but his sprint train and his performance were both so impressive in themselves, I didn't mind.

I don't agree that there were 'few predictable wins', as a couple of people have claimed. I think there was an equal mixture of very predictable, possible and unpredictable stage winners (so a third of each). In contrast, I'd say the Tour had far fewer very predictable and unpredictable stage winners than the Giro, instead often had 2-3-4 possible winners fighting it out, which was more interesting.

m.r.m.

bobmcstuff said:

Although I guess if you're literally only watching a grand tour for the GC you are never going to give it a very high score as you're only watching half the race.

I'm not only watching for GC (as stated previously) and you can go back to these threads and will find my scores tend to actually be higher than most others here (if I remember correctly).

m.r.m.

bobmcstuff said:

m.r.m. said:

kingstongraham said:

m.r.m. said:

andyp said:

m.r.m. said:

I really didn't like it. Most true contenders crashed out (crash or Covid), Almeida wore the jersey for 2 weeks with not much of a challenge. The eventual podium pretty much just followed wheels, with minor attacks at the very end.

To me it didn't feel like Tao announced himself on the grand stage in a massive way like Bernal or Pogacar or even Roglic in the past. He was more like the best of the remaining rest.

Who pi$$ed on your chips?

Nobody. I think I have given out comparatively high marks on the last few GT's. Just didn't think this one was as good. To me it seems like plenty are influenced by who won instead of how it happened.

Do you exclusively consider the GC, not any of the stages?

No I see it in context of the GC. I don't see stages as entirely separate. I didn't have the same visceral reaction to Cummings winning in the Tour a couple of years back like some others did (apropos of nothing). Plenty of stages are won by riders allowed to get away, so seeing them devoid of the greater race context seems questionable.

There were just not sufficient attacks by the GC contenders for my taste. Rich stating that Ineos winning the GC by mistake put it perfectly.
There were attacks, but really nothing like in other GT's of the past.

Some stage wins were decent, but nothing really stood out to get high marks.

I'm happy for individual riders, but that doesn't make the entire GT good or even particularly better. It's just good fortune for them and hopefully a new contract etc.

I have one day races and especially monuments for isolated racing wins. In a GT I'd like to see more challenges to the leader's jersey and stage wins in that context or that stand out for some other reason. I didn't think that was the case here compared to Hirschi or Pogacar on stage 9 & the ITT or Lopez with Roglic and Pogacar chasing or even Kwiatkowski or Kragh Andersen spoiling the sprinters with a supremely timed counter twice at the Tour. Same can be found in other GT's.

Nothing stood out like that for me at this Giro.

I understand everything you've said but a 3 seems unreasonable...

What would you rank as a good GT I wonder.

I prefer monuments and classics to GT's.
Nevertheless, I gave the Tour 2020 a 10. I gave the Tour 2019 an 8. I wasn't able to find the "Rate the Race" threads for Giro and Vuelta on my quick search.

bobmcstuff

m.r.m. said:

bobmcstuff said:

m.r.m. said:

kingstongraham said:

m.r.m. said:

andyp said:

m.r.m. said:

I really didn't like it. Most true contenders crashed out (crash or Covid), Almeida wore the jersey for 2 weeks with not much of a challenge. The eventual podium pretty much just followed wheels, with minor attacks at the very end.

To me it didn't feel like Tao announced himself on the grand stage in a massive way like Bernal or Pogacar or even Roglic in the past. He was more like the best of the remaining rest.

Who pi$$ed on your chips?

Nobody. I think I have given out comparatively high marks on the last few GT's. Just didn't think this one was as good. To me it seems like plenty are influenced by who won instead of how it happened.

Do you exclusively consider the GC, not any of the stages?

No I see it in context of the GC. I don't see stages as entirely separate. I didn't have the same visceral reaction to Cummings winning in the Tour a couple of years back like some others did (apropos of nothing). Plenty of stages are won by riders allowed to get away, so seeing them devoid of the greater race context seems questionable.

There were just not sufficient attacks by the GC contenders for my taste. Rich stating that Ineos winning the GC by mistake put it perfectly.
There were attacks, but really nothing like in other GT's of the past.

Some stage wins were decent, but nothing really stood out to get high marks.

I'm happy for individual riders, but that doesn't make the entire GT good or even particularly better. It's just good fortune for them and hopefully a new contract etc.

I have one day races and especially monuments for isolated racing wins. In a GT I'd like to see more challenges to the leader's jersey and stage wins in that context or that stand out for some other reason. I didn't think that was the case here compared to Hirschi or Pogacar on stage 9 & the ITT or Lopez with Roglic and Pogacar chasing or even Kwiatkowski or Kragh Andersen spoiling the sprinters with a supremely timed counter twice at the Tour. Same can be found in other GT's.

Nothing stood out like that for me at this Giro.

I understand everything you've said but a 3 seems unreasonable...

What would you rank as a good GT I wonder.

I prefer monuments and classics to GT's.
Nevertheless, I gave the Tour 2020 a 10. I gave the Tour 2019 an 8. I wasn't able to find the "Rate the Race" threads for Giro and Vuelta on my quick search.

I definitely thought the end of the Tour was very exciting... I don't understand how the rest of it was really that much better than the Giro to justify a perfect score for the Tour vs a poor score for the Giro.

kingstongraham

bobmcstuff said:

m.r.m. said:

bobmcstuff said:

m.r.m. said:

kingstongraham said:

m.r.m. said:

andyp said:

m.r.m. said:

I really didn't like it. Most true contenders crashed out (crash or Covid), Almeida wore the jersey for 2 weeks with not much of a challenge. The eventual podium pretty much just followed wheels, with minor attacks at the very end.

To me it didn't feel like Tao announced himself on the grand stage in a massive way like Bernal or Pogacar or even Roglic in the past. He was more like the best of the remaining rest.

Who pi$$ed on your chips?

Nobody. I think I have given out comparatively high marks on the last few GT's. Just didn't think this one was as good. To me it seems like plenty are influenced by who won instead of how it happened.

Do you exclusively consider the GC, not any of the stages?

No I see it in context of the GC. I don't see stages as entirely separate. I didn't have the same visceral reaction to Cummings winning in the Tour a couple of years back like some others did (apropos of nothing). Plenty of stages are won by riders allowed to get away, so seeing them devoid of the greater race context seems questionable.

There were just not sufficient attacks by the GC contenders for my taste. Rich stating that Ineos winning the GC by mistake put it perfectly.
There were attacks, but really nothing like in other GT's of the past.

Some stage wins were decent, but nothing really stood out to get high marks.

I'm happy for individual riders, but that doesn't make the entire GT good or even particularly better. It's just good fortune for them and hopefully a new contract etc.

I have one day races and especially monuments for isolated racing wins. In a GT I'd like to see more challenges to the leader's jersey and stage wins in that context or that stand out for some other reason. I didn't think that was the case here compared to Hirschi or Pogacar on stage 9 & the ITT or Lopez with Roglic and Pogacar chasing or even Kwiatkowski or Kragh Andersen spoiling the sprinters with a supremely timed counter twice at the Tour. Same can be found in other GT's.

Nothing stood out like that for me at this Giro.

I understand everything you've said but a 3 seems unreasonable...

What would you rank as a good GT I wonder.

I prefer monuments and classics to GT's.
Nevertheless, I gave the Tour 2020 a 10. I gave the Tour 2019 an 8. I wasn't able to find the "Rate the Race" threads for Giro and Vuelta on my quick search.

I definitely thought the end of the Tour was very exciting... I don't understand how the rest of it was really that much better than the Giro to justify a perfect score for the Tour vs a poor score for the Giro.

Rog and Pog are the two best stage racers in the world right now (or at least two of the top three). Hindley and Geoghan Hart aren't (yet).

bobmcstuff

kingstongraham said:

bobmcstuff said:

m.r.m. said:

bobmcstuff said:

m.r.m. said:

kingstongraham said:

m.r.m. said:

andyp said:

m.r.m. said:

I really didn't like it. Most true contenders crashed out (crash or Covid), Almeida wore the jersey for 2 weeks with not much of a challenge. The eventual podium pretty much just followed wheels, with minor attacks at the very end.

To me it didn't feel like Tao announced himself on the grand stage in a massive way like Bernal or Pogacar or even Roglic in the past. He was more like the best of the remaining rest.

Who pi$$ed on your chips?

Nobody. I think I have given out comparatively high marks on the last few GT's. Just didn't think this one was as good. To me it seems like plenty are influenced by who won instead of how it happened.

Do you exclusively consider the GC, not any of the stages?

No I see it in context of the GC. I don't see stages as entirely separate. I didn't have the same visceral reaction to Cummings winning in the Tour a couple of years back like some others did (apropos of nothing). Plenty of stages are won by riders allowed to get away, so seeing them devoid of the greater race context seems questionable.

There were just not sufficient attacks by the GC contenders for my taste. Rich stating that Ineos winning the GC by mistake put it perfectly.
There were attacks, but really nothing like in other GT's of the past.

Some stage wins were decent, but nothing really stood out to get high marks.

I'm happy for individual riders, but that doesn't make the entire GT good or even particularly better. It's just good fortune for them and hopefully a new contract etc.

I have one day races and especially monuments for isolated racing wins. In a GT I'd like to see more challenges to the leader's jersey and stage wins in that context or that stand out for some other reason. I didn't think that was the case here compared to Hirschi or Pogacar on stage 9 & the ITT or Lopez with Roglic and Pogacar chasing or even Kwiatkowski or Kragh Andersen spoiling the sprinters with a supremely timed counter twice at the Tour. Same can be found in other GT's.

Nothing stood out like that for me at this Giro.

I understand everything you've said but a 3 seems unreasonable...

What would you rank as a good GT I wonder.

I prefer monuments and classics to GT's.
Nevertheless, I gave the Tour 2020 a 10. I gave the Tour 2019 an 8. I wasn't able to find the "Rate the Race" threads for Giro and Vuelta on my quick search.

I definitely thought the end of the Tour was very exciting... I don't understand how the rest of it was really that much better than the Giro to justify a perfect score for the Tour vs a poor score for the Giro.

Rog and Pog are the two best stage racers in the world right now (or at least two of the top three). Hindley and Geoghan Hart aren't (yet).

Yeah I agree, I wasn't trying to suggest that the Giro was better than the Tour. But a perfect 10 for the Tour and a 3 for the Giro? That's what I was questioning.

Pross

I actually felt the Tour and Giro were very similar. Both had some interesting stages, both had a very tight GC with the winner coming late in the day on the final TT. The Tour had a more A list cast but Jumbo made the GC race a bit more dull whereas the Giro was decided by B / C list riders but with no team really dominating the GC stages opened up much earlier. On balance I felt the Giro was slightly better (I think I may have given the Tour an 8 too). The Vuelta, so far, is looking a 4 or 5 but the big days are still to come.

bobmcstuff

Pross said:

I actually felt the Tour and Giro were very similar. Both had some interesting stages, both had a very tight GC with the winner coming late in the day on the final TT. The Tour had a more A list cast but Jumbo made the GC race a bit more dull whereas the Giro was decided by B / C list riders but with no team really dominating the GC stages opened up much earlier. On balance I felt the Giro was slightly better (I think I may have given the Tour an 8 too). The Vuelta, so far, is looking a 4 or 5 but the big days are still to come.

I thought the Tour final TT had way more genuine jeopardy in it - we all expected Tao to beat Hindley but Pogacar was not expected to overhaul Roglic like that (OK some people may have mentioned it as an outside possibility and are exaggerating it in hindsight, but it wasn't a mainstream view). For me the best TT I can remember watching and that alone makes the Tour quite special.

I probably gave the Tour an 8 as well. I'm starting to consider the Giro could have had a 7, but I still think 8 is a fair reflection of how much I enjoyed it...

bobmcstuff

And yes too early to say for the Vuelta. Yesterday's stage didn't inspire me very much though.

rick_chasey

Way too many 8s here

mrfpb

Some people complain if a GC team lock the race and defend the leaders jersey (or top ten position) for two weeks, then complain again when GC is blown open and other teams have to regroup and rethink and promote their "lesser riders".

I'm sure if G or Yates had stayed i the race and got shephered to Milan in Pink for 14 days then everyone would say how boring it was.

Sunweb and Ineos turned out to be the best at the "regroup and rethink" than the others. Sunweb were an exciting team at the Tour and Giro.

gregster04

My rating is heavily influenced by the fact that I was just glad to get the Giro on and then get it through to the end.

That said, I thought it was pretty good fun. Some impressive wins by Démare, couple of cracking breakaway stages and the eventual GC battle was up in the air through the last week.

I couldn’t give it more than a 7 because the biggest names either did the Tour, withdrew or never really impacted the race. Also taking into account that some teams disappeared midway through.

So I enjoyed it but won’t remember it as one of my favourite races.

lettingthedaysgoby

8, easy. Lots of fantastic individual stage and a GC that went to the wire and gave us Tao as a victor.

mididoctors

rick_chasey said:

Way too many 8s here

Surely You are the anomaly?

rick_chasey

mididoctors said:

rick_chasey said:

Way too many 8s here

Surely You are the anomaly?

It would seem so

m.r.m.

No, it seems that is me. 😇😁

exlaser

You can only beat the people that last the distance. Jai and TGH put the old stagers and the second rank riders to the sword. The most exciting thing of the last week was the fact that these two riders had never been in this position before and you never knew at any point if they would crack . In some ways it’s the most interesting grand tour in decades. Whether it’s the best is another matter 😀