Cerro Torre RT wrote:I didn't talk to Rasmussen, but I decided not to design another Campeonato, no matter of whom may continue or not. In general, I agree with the little ape. I finally learned he is right, this tour is replaceable, if not even a have to.
Just to clarify again (not that what you wrote is wrong, just some people here are too fucking dumb to understand anything that isn't exactly spelled out (and some don't even get it in those cases)):
In one of my long posts I wrote that it is replaceable, yes. Unlike real GTs. Simply because it's fantasy. But also because the 2 weeks climbers Bonanza is maybe a bit unfair to the other rider types. But then I would definetly be bored by a 15 day sprinter tour or a 15 day classic tour.... if a long specialized tour=climbers.
But I'm not saying it should be replaced (see above). Just that theoretically it could. But I'm for it to stay.
Cerro Torre RT wrote:The work is not any part of the problem, it's the race that results of it.
Take this year, we have 5 field 1 races. 3 medium mountain, 3 flat stages. Of that 6, we had:
morning: everything controlled, due to Alkworld
15:00 : everything controlled, due to NoPikuze and Phoenix
18:00 : 2a group and gc attacks, 3a group (but not that early), 8a group, 9a group, 10a group and gc attack with a group with 5 of jps, 12a group and gc attack
20:00 : 2a controlled, 3a group, 8a,9a,10a controlled, 12a group with GC attack
22:00 : 2a group with gc attack, 3a group, 8a group with gc attack, 9a group, 10a group with gc attack, 12a group with gc attack
So basically, those non-mountain-stages have been either supercontrolled with very one-sided winners or the superchaos with gc-double, sometimes trible attacks or even of more guys. Both not what it was supposed to be. Only one tour has had a mixture, the 20:00. so one of 5, that's not good, my design failed completly. And as I do not see any possibility to fix that within the normal campeonato-structure, I don't want to create a race like that again. The only possibility I see is to shorten it to 8 days, 2 time trails and 6 hard mountain stages. But that wouldn't be a Campeonato, it is another tour.
Design it again! Ok, unless you don't want to because it hurts your chances for the dec tour (I once proposed not to let the designer of the Andes even participate, probably participation would be ok but hurt your chances still).
Your reasons not to design it: Either ultra controlled or GC attacks.
10-15 ultra controlled, which isn't always fun. But can happen. Will not happen every year I think though. It's probably the first year it has been like that, that the hill sprinters show up and control all. Could be the beginning of a new trend, more saw it's possible, more show up next year. But then a hill sprint team is not easy to build, lots of investment, not sure we will be overrun by hillsprinters. Plus the control of overcontrol is there in every race. Even the awesom Giro, afternoon Giro 10, only 2 stages won by an early escape finally. In the last few days, until then everything was controlled. Not by single teams, but by coalitions, sprinter coalitions, hill rider coalitions, climbers, etc. Not that much to do with the parcours, it's mostly dependent on the group. A risk that is there in all races, real or fantasy. The fantasy some designers have to design an "open" that will not be controlled is just a fantasy, that can work depending on the group. The same race can be completely open, chaotic, attacks everywhere or ultra controlled. Depends on the users. Now in the Andes single teams basically controlled everything, ok with help from the GC leaders. Which usually doesn't happen in other races that much, so there is indeed a difference. But an opportunity too, single teams, even with some help by the GC leaders always can be beaten. Need to invest something, and need to be able to hold your GC feet still so not to get everybody riding. This year that didn't seem to work in those 2 tours, maybe next year in a similar situation it will.
18: 3 groups, 3 GC attacks: Here not that uneven, even if 3 GC attacks are quite a lot too. IMO GC attacks are ok too... under some conditions. If the leader refuses to work, it's not a GC stage!!! IMO, attack. Everyday. No problem. Even if it's a flat stage, the GC leader should just control a little bit, put a guy in tempo when the first group goes, if somebody is interested in a controlled race, to show he will help a bit. If not, let them go. Then control the last kms again, with a nice green regmonster, just show you are there, you let early group win with 20 min, but don't want GC attacks. Then many managers won't do them either... and those who do, well, boring, can't win it in a real way, do it like that... But then some medium stages of course are ideal for GC attacks as well.. don't remember the Andes well enough to know if there were any there this year.
20: 1 group, rest controlled Mix, and different winners too, as you said ok. Maybe 1 more group would have been nice too, but wasn't to be.
But I think those 2 tours are probably the long term standard. Either no control, when on some days some GC guys can't resist, or basically controlled by a coalition of classic sprinters
23h you seem to have had GC attacks daily almost... IMO not much fun, agreed, probably the Andes I would have enjoyed the least.
So you say 1 of 5 acceptable...not enough. Mmh, disagree, I want to ride the Andes in 2011 after all, so design it! But IMO 23h was a special case, 10-15 was at least at 15h just a failure of the adversaries, can always happen. 10 probably harder with Alk with his stronger team and Gaurain forced to help due to 2 specialists like Samurai and Warriors who don't seem to know that it's possible to attack with just one or 2 riders. So logical for Gaurain to make sure those 2 don't gain time.
Then 18h too many GC attacks for my taste too (just from the number) but still ok. Looking at it like one, "your design" (as you say, but see above, no design can guarantee no overcontrol or no stupid GC attacks) failed in 1 of 5. In 1 ok according to you, 3 others still acceptable to me.
So why not give it another shot. No confidence in the community to race more "normally"? (Wrong question I think, I would answer no too, forget it)
change the format? Not a good idea, making it a GT in the sense of the dectour, balanced, would have me call for it to be replaced by a voted Novtour...
Less flat/medium mountain? No... ok, haven't followed the design that closely, if it's 6 flat/medium mountain every year, fix nr, then change it. Can be 5 one year, another year 7, etc, whatever looks good in the region you are etc, maybe some years even 8, then maybe harder ones etc. Think you probably have been doing that anyway, not insisting on exactly 6 of these stages per year.
I still think the Campeonato de los Andes has a future (especially since the name is grammatically correct now, hihi) and can be ridden "normally" depending on the participants. So give it another shot! If you really don't want to design another one... find a replacement again! If you can't find one who you trust.... bah, let's get one you don't trust.... after all the Andes are not only yours anymore, they are the communities too. And parts of it still likes it and wants to ride a nice, fairly realistic Andes in 11, 12 etc as well.
If we can't find anybody... grrrr.