Do we need a new Grand Tour?

gntlmn

What if we had a tour called maybe the European Mountains Tour which had only mountain stages and virtually no flat stages or downhills? Let's say it consisted of maybe 15 stages total, including uphill time trials. This would be a tour for climbers. Whoever wins would be the best mountain tour climber. Currently, we guess about who is the best climber, looking at King of the Mountains in the Tour de France or the mountains points standings on the other tours and wondering how much the GC contenders held back on the climbs when the climb leaders were not in contention for the GC. Why not put this controversy to rest and have a new tour: the European Mountains Tour? I know I'd tune into that one for sure, but it might take a few years to gather some steam.

luke1972

I heard they were considering a world championship for mountain climbers up the Angliru in Spain. Have not heard anymore on this. A worlds for Mountain climbing would be easier to organise than a Tour.

gntlmn

That's true, considering that a tour would have to fit in with all the other Grand Tours, and a rider might decide not to attend one of the Grand Tours in order to participate in this mountain tour. However, I think it would be a better test of a rider's climbing ability to win a tour rather than a one day classic style race. I agree that the logistics would be difficult with much traveling between stages, but it would be a true test of champions. I'd really love to see a tour in the mountains rather than a one day event. For example, in the Tour de France, I find myself really zeroing in on the Tour when they hit the mountain stages. The first flat stages don't get much of my attention. With a 100% mountain tour, I wouldn't have such a lapse. I'd be on the edge of my seat the whole tour.

philoakley

A mountain tour is a great idea but the logistics would be very difficult. What about a climbing World Cup type competiton with a series of races based on the world's greatest climbs? There could be 6-8 climbs with prizes for each climb with the overall prize for the lowest aggregate time. The competition could take place between May and September. For example, 6 races could take place on the following climbs

Alpe d'huez
Col du Galibier (North Side)
Hautacam
Mont Ventoux
Stelvio
Angiluru

This admittedly has a French bias and no doubt other climbs could be superior

gntlmn

Now you're talkin'. That sounds like a great idea. Now the question that follows is whether some of these races would be stages within the Grand Tours. This would certainly increase the likelihood that at least these climbs on the world cup would be tempting morsels even for the GC contenders, days to avoid holding too much back. But then again, if these are one day stand alone events as you suggest, instead of hill climbs intermingled with mostly flat stages, the riders wouldn't be holding back at all. And it solves the problem of proving that you're not just a one day, flash in the pan. To win, you have to do the best overall on all the world cup climbs.

It would be fun to watch the leaders' cumulative results and whether the lead shifts much and why. The more I think about it, the more I like the idea of standalone races instead of pieces of tours. You have a great idea. I hope someone in high places gets a drift of this and puts it into action.

Kathrin

Guys, you have such brilliant ideas!! How I would love to see these competions! Is there a way to push the concept?

gntlmn

I think maybe we ought to work out some more details, and then start another thread and see if this is a popular idea with other cycling enthusiasts. It's kind of hard to guess what this thread's about the way I worded the title. But that's the way ideas gel; you start out thinking one thing and then you come up with something different but better.

I was looking on the internet for how the World Cup Downhill system works (skiing), and that seems to be a point system. That kind of makes sense for downhill skiing where the time differences might be fractions of a second in each race, and the snow conditions varying and so forth. The points keep adding up as the season progresses, and you have World Cup Rankings.

With this event, I'm not sure that World Cup would be a good title because people might think it would be a point system, and I don't think that would be good for uphill biking. I think it should be progressively timed like a Grand Tour. Each stage is a separate event, but adds to the overall time for GC.

One problem I'm thinking of is what do you do if a rider misses one of the climbs? With the World Cup system, the skier would simply not get points that day, and that's not so bad as missing an entire day of riding. What would be the penalty on the overall? Or would the rider be allowed to race in the other climbs? On the one hand, I would like not to see riders disqualified so that the field is bigger. On the other, I would not like to see a rider skip most of the climbs and then win a prestigious one. This is an unresolved issue. With the point system, if you allow the riders to skip climbs, they would go for wins and rest up when they felt they could not. With an overall timed system, they would make sure to enter every climbing event that was included in the GC. Otherwise, they would be DNF's and disqualified.

I would like to have it a timed event, but I'm not sure if that's practical. The competition would have to be arranged so that the riders would not feel compelled to skip any rides in order to compete in another race. I have a feeling that would be tricky.

Any ideas or thoughts?

Let's say the purpose of this entire event, including all the climbs, is to establish who was the best climber of the year. Considering that some people come on a lot stronger in the latter part of the season than the beginning, it might be a good idea to spread out the climbs through the season like philoakley suggested. Actually, the more I think about it, the more I think his original idea hits it right on the mark. Just use the 6 climbs he mentioned (or maybe whittle it down to 4 if it looks like not many will enter), and set it up like he suggested, with one day prizes and an overall prize for lowest time. But I'm still not sure about allowing 1 day entrants to compete. I think it would be better to be disqualified if you miss a day. The others still have a chance of winning a stage if they cannot win the GC. This will keep them coming back if they fall far behind the leaders.

I could see where this event would hold a lot of prestige for a climber after it ran for a few years. It would give them the opportunity to lay an indisputable claim to being one of the climbing greats of all time. Now this claim is subject to too much dispute because of the climbs being intermingled with flats and downhills. And if the climbs start right away on the uphill, having a better team is not going to help you much. This would be a true test. There would be nowhere to hide in this event.

Kathrin

A timed event makes more sense to me as well. How about that: To win the GC, riders have to participate in all climbs, and the one with the best overall time wins. But stages remain open to all riders who want to participate so they can go for stage wins.

I think 6 climbs would be a good number, 4 somehow feels too few to me. How about 2 climbs each in France, Italy and Spain?

gntlmn

Given that riders specialize a lot more now than they used to in the days of Merckx, I have a feeling that if this gained steam, riders may begin to focus on this tour. The problem is to get them to participate in the beginning, before it builds momentum. This is why I like 4 or 6 instead of 15. Otherwise, I would choose 15. But I'm wondering if 6 might be too much to begin with too. I guess it would depend on the timing of the climbs. My guess is that it may be more successful if it included top riders from the Grand Tours. So if the climbs were positioned such that they would not weaken riders who also did the Grand Tours, they might draw these big name riders. With the Tour de France and the Vuelta, I suspect that the climbs could be placed right after these Tours in the respective countries. The one I am concerned about is the Giro. I don't think there's enough time between the Giro and the Tour de France to have these climbs after the Giro. I don't think the top TdF riders would do them after the Giro. Maybe these Italian climbs should be the early season rides.

Reviewing the race schedules for several years, I observe that a good time might be the middle of April to the end of April for the Italian hill climbs. The Giro begins in mid to late May, and this would allow ample recovery for the Giro. These climbs, I suspect would be a good way to generate more enthusiasm for the Giro too. We would be looking at the results of these first two to be a possible indicator of rider form for the Giro. The Vuelta used to be in the spring followed by a week or less of time off before the Giro. Finally, they placed the Vuelta in September, and it is usually more than a month after the Tour de France. This means there's a little bit more breathing room between the TdF and the Vuelta than there is between the Giro and the Tour de France.

Although I don't like the idea of opening each stage to all riders regardless of whether they participated in the prior stages, I do like the idea of encouraging more rider participation in the tour in its beginning years. So I'm a little undecided on that one. Maybe it would be good to at least try it that way the first few years and see how it goes. I suppose if a group put this tour together, it might consider getting feedback from the riders on this rule before they finalized them. I don't know what the reaction would be from those who would have a good chance to win the overall.

gntlmn

I started a new thread called "The European Climbing Tour" under "Road Racing". If you are interested, please go there and join in the discussion.

ItalianStallion

Don't forget the Mortirolo!!