cycling4freaks.com

As every year since 2007 we'll have a december tour decided by voting by our esteemed and hated users.

AS the self appointed absolute dictator of the december tour, here are the rules:

-10-14 days: Maximum 13 days riding. (That means you can do a 13 day tour without rest day or a 14 day tour with 1 rest day)
-Maximum 1 day with half stages.
-No extreme tour, flat, pavé, mountains TT etc.
-1 tour per designer
-Number of riders 6-9

On October 1 I will open a thread to post your tours. Post them there, not here. Posting in October, 1st to 31st. No discussions in the other thread, but in this thread here, comments, praise, criticisms about all tours of course are more than welcome.

Voting procedure:
First round voting will start in early November. Nov 1st ideally, but if the dictator forgets it the second or so works too. Vote open 2 weeks.
First round: Votes per person depending on tours submitted.. Number of submissions/2, then rounded down. That means:
3 tours=1 vote
5 tours=2 votes
7 tours=3 votes
9 tours=4 votes.
But we'll cap the number of votes at 4, so even if we have 97 submission, it will stay 4 votes per person. Unchangeable votes. 2 weeks time for voting.
Second round: Normally the first 2 teams will advance to the second round. If it's very close more might be in, decision would be made by a committee of 3 composed of people with no submission, appointed by the dictator. 1 week vote.


January tour will be the second placed tour. Length, max 11 days, so at least 2 days will have to be cut, by the designer. (I guess he can cut more if he feels it's needed to keep the spirit of his tour...)

Quite a nice innovative design, with an entertaining story !

Grrrr, already had to move one post, comments HERE, not in the presentation topic!!!!

Mh, should I critize Roby for a December Tour presentation, which is supposed to play in the Andes, as I am the Campeonato 2019 designer?... Could backfire on me...

Anyway, I like to do the criticism... So, this 4 ciudades tour...

Pros:
- Brave design for the start: Haven't seen 3 Time Trials in a row, so new things are always interesting for a competition!
- Interesting concept: 4 cities as the major hubs for the stages is rather new as well. Good innovation.
- Order of the stages: I envy to have TT's first, flat/medium stages following and HC mountain stages at the end. Why? Would simply prefer a decision in the mountains as compared to a decision in the TT,because TT is a bit boring in RSF, unfortunately. So yes, good order of stages with the final climb on the last stage.

Cons:
- No extreme tour? 103km TT in a 12-day tour is not extreme? Well, not sure if Roby's tour passes the Roby criteria for December Tour.
- Continent/Area of the race: Why design a race in Andes? Not really sure... Maybe you knew, I would not do Colombia, but my riders would prefer not to have two weeks Andes in November and then two weeks Andes in December...
- 3 TT, 3 Hilly, 3 Flat, 3HC: Somehow interesting, but doesn't seem very balanced to me. Well, does a December Tour need to be balanced? Maybe not... Might be interesting because it is difficult to control the race...

Ok, so if it was only the difficult to control December Tour, might even be in favor of this tour and would like to ride it. But with the extreme amount of 103km Time Trial... Not so sure... Might be fun if a strong TT-Leader doesn't have the team to control afterwards... But generally the tour seems too extreme to me for a December tour. For instance, there's really only one stage for a pure sprint team in my point of view.

So, looking forward to see the other December Tours! Good chance that I vote for a different one.

OK, new contender online. Tukh with his Philippines.

Pros:
- Muuuch more balanced than the 4 ciudades! 4 Flat, 5 Middle, 3 HC, 1 ITT... Nicely balanced for a December Tour!
- Flat Stages are not too boring. Always with small hills somewhere. I love the finish of stage 2. Will need a strong sprint team there.
- Middle Stages offer a lot of variety too. Some with a longer flat part at the end, others could even classify as HC due to their mountain finish.
- Most of the HC Stages nicely placed at the end of the tour. Should make GC fight interesting
- Hilly ITT in the middle of the tour looks also fine, at least not completely boring as some other ITT's.

Cons:
- Arbitrary classifications of climbs and stages. Don't like that arbitrary style, but seems Tukh's intuition is very good. No major mistakes.
- Philippines: The whole island of Mindanao lives under the laws of war. Germany has issued a travel warning. Sounds dangerous.

Hard to find other cons. I like the tour a lot because it is well balanced and has some stages which look like a lot of fun and seem unpredictable. Stage 2, 6 and 9 look exciting.

I join Gipfel in criticism!

4 Ciudades de Colombia

Brilliant concept! Well, in many things I actually agree with Gipfel...

Not the location though, that is perfect. THE cycling country in South America, Spend the Andes in the Andes and then the December tour too? Pff, that ignores a lot of things, first that not all teams will go to the Campeonato, it's a stage race for specialists, climbers, the December tour not. And then of course Chile and Argentina, same language as Colombia, same mountain range, but ignores the cultural differences between Chile, Argentina and Colombia. That's like saying that after the Giro riders don't want to ride the TdS or Dauphiné and then the Tour de France, since they all pass through the Alps. Pff. And the spectators, after Argentina and Chile were you can expect 7 spectators per stage on average, 2 of them only because they have to wait before they can cross the street, in Colombia you will have 7 per square meter! Cycling crazy country, it's high time they finally get a December Tour!

The concept, I haven't been so excited about a RKL tour since last year Ok, no, longer actually. But it's mostly because of the concept and more specifically the TTs. But for the plan to work there, of course the TTs have to be rather long. With 20/20/20 it would just be 3 times the strongest on paper. Like this... in a perfect dreamworld it will be interesting. Long TTT, for stage, go with 5? 6? all 9? But lose more energy and possibly the chance for an individual stage win the next day? The same on the first ITT, 35km, if you don't have the reg (of the 16 TT guys with 80+ TT with at least one current point, 6 have 40 or less reg, 8 41-50 and just 2 over 50 (58+59)) I think you have to make a choice between the 2 stages, which one. And depending on the leader's jersey situation the same, if after the TTT you're in the fight for it, how do you try to get it? In reg for the first one? Or below reg, but not too much? Same for the GC win. Right now there are 40 riders with 70+ mountain and 60+ TT with at least 1 point. 15 with 40 or less reg, 11 with 51+ reg. How do you handle that, how do you minimize/maximize the time loss/gain? Could be interesting. And as well what team do you bring, mountain team to defend later, TT team to get an early advantage? Very interesting. In theory. In practice it could end up not playing out like that at all of course and you get 3 easily predictable stage wins and a clear GC favorite that is clear from day 1.

Then the middle mountain stages (here too agree with Gipfel, the order is right).... as those who have read the presentation might have noticed, the designer himself is not too happy with them. First one ok, rather hard, change of leaders jersey likely. But then... second one bah, classic group, here a flatter finish better, to give the sprinters a chance to maybe come back, or at least the hill sprinters. Third one, bah again, another classic group, hard start, then easy, A harder end better, but not hard enough to make it for climbers.

Sprint, there's 2 clear sprint stages here actually, the first one long, but if sprinter teams don't manage to make that a sprint, they are not sprinter teams. Second one as a one day race is a sprint too, in a more sprinter friendly stage race too, here since we can't expect many sprinters.. .critical. Was thinking about redrawing it and finding a easier hill for the middle, but wasn't sure I'd find the finish again, with the +5 that I like in there, so let it be. Of course with few sprinters to be expected all 3 might end up as escape things... but still 2 of them have to be regarded as clear sprint stages, with a few sprinter teams some help, active or passive (by staying in the peloton) by GC teams... sprint.

Mountain, they are tough, but of course having them grouped together sort of castrates them too, the first one GC moves are mostly possible with lots of energy investements, who wants to do that with the second one that has lots of altitude meters waiting? And the third one, with the only "real" mountaintop finish, waiting for the end not unlikely too.

So... I like the TT thing, for the rest don't really think all that much of it either. Clearly not enough sprint, thought about making one day with 2 half stages, but that would have sort of destroyed the concept, and RKL isn't known for his mental flexibility. Maybe some day somebody makes a similar start, but a more flexible rest of the tour? I think it would be interesting to see how that TT festival plays out.

Ah, the extreme tour thing? Of course it passes the Robyklebt criteria for the December tour. No extreme tour doesn't mean that one speciality can't be decisive... .plus here it's not as simple as TT is decisive, even with a 80mountain 70 TT guy with a strong TT team, he will need the mountain helpers to win. And reg, reg here in a way is as decisive as TT, this 103 km TT are in 3 stages, each followed by one where you preferably start fit. Pokemon's just posted 60 km ITT before a rest day IMO actually is more pro individual TT skill than the 3 TTs here, half is team-dependent, the other half reg dependent.

Generally I would say 4 ciudades the Colombia is an interesting experiment, but IMO not sprint friendly enough for a December tour. Failure in middle mountain stages too, that IMO can be overlooked, after all it's the same almost every year with RKL stage races, the middle mountain stages sort of suck. The few sprints not, 2 sure, 1 possible is not enough.
And the big risk of the unfortunately spreading "buy the stage race with a 600k+ team", since that's what seems to be needed to start as the big favorite. In that sense it is indeed an extreme tour, since the stages in 2 specialities are rather extreme. (But the no extreme tour in the rules wasn't meant in that way) On the other hand it allows for non GC teams that are cheaper and competitive on a number of stages, sprint+TT guy, sprint + classic guy with some sprint, or all 3.

Philippines Tour

Nicer presentation. The text below the profile is much better than above it, will try to remember it for next year. Bolding the stage title too. And providing the % of the important km very nice too. Just the link like RKL... bah. Best would be both actually.

Sprint, 4, IMO 5 would be better, or at least a 5th one with chances, don't think that's there. But stage 2 is very nice with the slight uphill finish, including the sprint. Another problem I have with the sprint though, first 4 stages 3 sprints, then only 1 more, would have been nice to spread them a bit more. 1+2, then not 4 but 5 or 6... and ideally the last stage would have been a sprint too.

Middle mountain: Ha, RKL will be happy. I just realized Tukh has a similar problem to me, the 4 stages for classics are somehow all very similar, like in RKL's case!
Stage 3 nice, longish final climb, 29 km from the end, downhill, flat. Good.
Stage 6, which I like a lot, short climb, downhill/flattish, 2 km flat.
Stage 8, harder prelude to the final, but will come down to the final, which is the same type as stage 6
Stage 13 Short steep climb with a break, 22km to the goal, downhill, flat. This seems somewhere between stages 3 and 6/8.

Somehow all similar too, maybe that's what middle mountain stages are after all

TT. 30 km, looking at the mountains seems a good distance. Not too short, followed by a hilly stage which is good, so reg will at least play some role.

Mountain: 4 basically, even if only 3 are classified as such.
Stage 5: a) very small differences between the favorites in that final climb. Which is ok for a first mountain stage. b) theoretically offers the chance for a long range attack, which is nice too. But since most GC teams should be fit at that point, normally it won't happen.
Stage 9: Looks great. Like it could permit even a long range attack. Here the link to the profile thingy would help. Because maybe the flat part between Antipolo and Silangan is too long? But can't really say... Visually a great stage. Except... later. What's good too is that it's followed by a flat stage, so allows to invest energy, without the big risk of paying the next day.
Stage 11: Good, long technical final climb, looks great, the first mountain makes a long range attack an option too, even if a strong team won't have much trouble avoiding that by controlling. Of course differences risk being small again, blockage in the last climb, early attack in most cases won't pay off. But on the other hand if you need to get rid of a 70TT guy with good mountain, 80 or so, here you can try with siebs.
Stage 12: Good, allows long range attacks, allows to use energy. Only worry is that maybe the downhills towards the end are a bit flattish? But well, to gain time you need to invest something, good.

The worry that I had in stage 9... The saw. Which appears in other stages too. Don't want to accuse Tukh of not checking well enough (but sort of do anyway?), but those repeated steep km, followed by a short downhill or flat km, then go up again... this somehow looks suspiciously like bad data, very often in those cases the climb is actually even, but due to switchbacks or other reasons the gpx file shows it as uneven.

Generally a good tour. Of course, it's clearly inspired by the great Tour designed by RKL in 2013 First half Mindanao, second half Luzon, same climbs at times... After SPIH, the Philippines, clever designers know, follow in RKL's footsteps. You don't need to reach the brilliance of the original. I just wish somebody would try Ethiopia....
But no, good tour. The criticisms I have are for the most part minor.
-Biggest one, is stage 13, just make it flat after the 2 climbs early, then you have that 5th flat stage I like (I have no relation with RKL, so don't tell me 4 ciudades is worse)
The rest is minor.
- Sprint a bit front loaded.
- Middle mountain stages a bit similar (RKL who?) (Might retract this one completely after some study, maybe all middle mountain stages are always similar, just never occured to me, will need to check a bit)
- Mountain a bit backloaded. (still don't know this RKL) 9-11-12. But the combination 9-12 works very well in itself.
- No fancy concept, pah, fancy concepts are fancy! And better a concept than no concept. Major problem actually now that I think of it.
- Winner of 2018 not taking a voluntary break the following year.

Can imagine voting for this not only in the first round, but in the second one also. But first will have to see the other tours.


Warning to Whisbone: 1 post per stage race. No comments in the other thread. If you have problems with the profiles, which seems to be the case, a) Try to change the profiles, if they are changed and saved under the same name as before, they will update in your original post automatically. b) If the editor is buggy (it is, at least for me, old profiles don't change even with new additions, but don't know in what cases, how long after the original saving, sometimes they change for me, most of the time not) then just edit the original post after saving the stage under a slightly different name. Anyway, once all is in order in one post I will delete/move the others... unless delete yourself, which would be much preferable

Ok, only 4 days left to present your December Tour.... Hoped for some more tours over the weekend, but 4 designs are in the competition already. So that should be fine.

I have outlined the Pros & Cons for "4 ciudades" and "Philippines Tour" already above.

So now let's talk about "Volta a Brasil" and "Burundi and Rwanda Tour":

Volta a Brasil

Pros
- It is a real December Tour: Yes, what do I mean? It is balanced with a bit more focus on Sprint and Classics, but including some Mountain stages.
- Stages for Sprinters: Many stages, which can lead to a sprint, while they are not too easy. Always a bit long or a few hills. Should be interesting between GC / Sprint teams and the escape specialists.
- Stage Length: Everything around 160-200km, so it is a realistic and normal length. No extremely short or extremely long stages. Probably good for a December Tour.
- Jacob likes it: The only guy in my team, who goes to training each week... He said, he likes the tour. So I like it as well.

Cons
- Super long TT: Too long for me. It looks a bit hilly but will be nearly impossible for mountain riders to win vs the classics with TT.
- Super long TT and then rest day: Why this??? If you do a long ITT, could be interesting to have that Reg-Effect on the next day. Like this, it looks a super boring ITT.
- Ridiculous GPM / IS: I understand, you want to pour some money into the game during Winter, so people can spend it on the important races in the summer season. But this ridiculous with sometimes 15-20 GPM/IS on one stage. It will set the wrong incentives for the peloton, I am afraid. People will be in escape even if they are stage favo beacuse there is more money to be made. Well, could finally force the GC riders to control, but I think it will only create chaos.

Burundi and Rwanda Tour

Pros
- Nice concept: Creating peace somewhere in the world. Always a good idea.
- Hilly stages: They look interesting with diverse finishes. (Could be good for Jacob, hihi.) But a bit difficult to judge without the exact percentages.
- TTT and ITT: Both not too long, sounds fair to all participants who wish for a balanced, but diverse December tour.
- Mur de Kigali: Looks like an interesting thing. Can you explain it a bit more?

Cons
- Design problems: Ehm, looks like Whis has some challenge with the race editor. Hope, you can solve it, if you win.
- Design the minimum altitude! You can do it. Really difficult to judge those stages which play above 1000m for the whole race.
- Classics vs. Sprint: Really really difficult to judge without the percentages, but could be a bit imbalanced, that either too many stages for pure sprinters or too many stages for classics. Would have to look into more detail.

Let's defend a bit my Dec Tour :

I understand the reg argue, else if here with a long TT, for sure not all can't ride at full. But this point is OK when the fight is between 1 or 2 type of riders. For one time, the interest is to keep a lot of different type of riders as much as possible in battle for GK, and I was affraid that a stage after that TT could oriented too much the second week of the Volta, so I prefer a rest day.

About the point on IS/GPM, maybe a lot yes, but Pokemon Cycling Organization have some money, and want to have a good fight for all jerseys, so it is important to reward all the riders who will animate the race

I do not understand what is happening with my profiles. When I posted my profiles, everything was perfect, and now I find myself with profiles with the French flag
I hope the profiles sent in the Data Base are good.
Can you check it?

Wall of Kigali :https://www.lequipe.fr/Cyclisme-sur-rou ... erg/751003

Whisbone: Now all the profiles show up correctly in your second post. And all is saved too. But sometimes the profile you linked to in the presentation isn't the same one as the file you saved it seems.... profile the same, but different name. Links here are to mostly (but not all) "tanga" then stage number, while the saved files are under" burundi_and_rwanda_tour_____stage_x"
Normally just post the file you saved it after?

The criticism:

Burundi and Rwanda:

3 sprints, that is the IMO not enough. Stage 2, 3 and 4. And stage 3 finishes with a +3, stage 4 with a +4..... (while checking if all was saved I saw the thing anyway, so had a closer look) So 1 clear sprint, the +3 critical, but possible, the +4 very difficult... for me not enough sprint. And actually even less than the concept tour.

middle Mountain: Lots, 1, 5, 8, 11, 12, 13. So nominally 6, but I think stage 4 with the +4 finish in the end is either for classics with an attack or for an escape too.
I like stage 1a a lot (but not 1b), 5 a sieb km not far from the end, 8 the siebs are further, lots of downhill (you classified it as mountain, but IMO clearly for classics) 11 sieb quite far again, 12 is 3 km from the end, 13 is a nonsieb climb for the end. Good varied classic stages actually, but just a bit too many IMO. Respectively the sprinters don't get enough.

Mountain: 6, 7, 10, 6 you classify as classic, I think mountain, climb 10 8 8 then -1 -4 -10 and 4. Stage should go to climbers, or very strong classics.... or 80-70.
Stage 7 is harder, a bit bigger differences, chances for climbers to gain some time to the classics or TT guys.
Stage 10 then the long final climb.

TT and ITT: Not too long both, fits well. Personnally I never like the TTT after a half stage, ride actively, kill your team, be killed the next stage, ride defensively... bah, don't like it.

GC: Very open actually. Can be climbers, can be a classic with TT that gains time on one of the classic stages. But for climbers those stages should be controllable. if they want. And while there is no huge time win in the mountain stages, the time loss in the TTs shouldn't be to big either, can really go either way. Classic with TT vs climbers with some TT.

But clearly not enough sprint, even worse than 4 ciudades. 3... +3 +4 finishes? I would have preferred a 4th, like stage 11 for sprint instead of one more classic sprint (possibly hill sprinter ok)
With one more sprint, real one, I would have voted for this in the first round for sure, as it stands, second round then depending on the opponent, like this no.

And one big problem with stage 13, the circuit is not correct, the whole thing gets a bit lower each lap!

Ill also be in to Trojers 10 years anniversary ... just hope that luques will fix my editor problem in the next days ... the tour itself is ready :/

Deadline extension

Since quite a few potential drawers have had or have problems with the editor, the deadline for submission has been extended to next Sunday. 03.11.2019. 19/11/03. Whatever way you want to write it. Midnight central european time.
Voting then will start on the 4th. The first round, traditionally 2 weeks might be shortened a bit. But the dictator hasn't decided on that yet.

Robyklebt wrote: ↑

Wed Oct 30, 2019 3:05 pm

Deadline extension

Since quite a few potential drawers have had or have problems with the editor, the deadline for submission has been extended to next Sunday. 03.11.2019. 19/11/03. Whatever way you want to write it. Midnight central european time.
Voting then will start on the 4th. The first round, traditionally 2 weeks might be shortened a bit. But the dictator hasn't decided on that yet.

Thank you very much for that i really hope luques will solve it until then!

Is it okay if i send my "pre"-presentation already today or tomorrow and just add the stage profiles when luques was able to help?

That's really up to you....

What you could do as well is:

a) Do you remember previous passwords? You must have changed it since you last designed, if you remember the password you had at the time, there's a good chance it still works.

b) Upload the files, generate the profiles, without doing the complete altitude cleanup or making the stages complete, just the necessary things, intermediates, GPMs. Then link to the profile. Even while not being saved they should show. Then once you have the password, do them properly.

Test:



Some earlier version of my stage 5 it seems....
I see it now, possible it disappears after a while, I'm not really sure. But since it's provisional anyway, would work. A bit more work for you, but again, no need for adjustments to make the altitude fit, the GPMs don't need to be 100% correct either, just as a general idea.

Robyklebt wrote: ↑

Thu Oct 31, 2019 3:14 pm

That's really up to you....

What you could do as well is:

a) Do you remember previous passwords? You must have changed it since you last designed, if you remember the password you had at the time, there's a good chance it still works.

b) Upload the files, generate the profiles, without doing the complete altitude cleanup or making the stages complete, just the necessary things, intermediates, GPMs. Then link to the profile. Even while not being saved they should show. Then once you have the password, do them properly.

Test:



Some earlier version of my stage 5 it seems....
I see it now, possible it disappears after a while, I'm not really sure. But since it's provisional anyway, would work. A bit more work for you, but again, no need for adjustments to make the altitude fit, the GPMs don't need to be 100% correct either, just as a general idea.

I think i could try several passwords i used back then including also the old name maybe? Anyway luques told me he will help me soon so i will finish presentation as far as possible tonight and as you proposed send some "preview" and just enter the rest while the weekend

Volta a Brasil

Generally agree mostly with Gipfel on other tours, but on this one not really. No idea what kind of glasses he put on to see all those sprints and the balance and the cool stuff.

Sprint: 3: 1+2+5. Stage 3 is hard for sprinters IMO, the 6 is far enough from the goal, 19km, the race flat enough before, a 7 earlier, but no problem. The problem for sprinters here will be the slight up and down which favors the classics/hill sprinters. on - you win less time, on + the 60-80 lose less to the 50-85 than on 0. It's not impossible of course, depends on the group too, but with only 3 clear ones, lots for classics, I think will be very hard. So IMO again not enough.
Plus again the problem Tukh and Whis have too, sprint finished soon. (Bunched too, like Donks too)

Middle mountain: 5 of them. stage 4, depending on the strength of the sieb, hill sprinters, if not classics, and with the 5 after that classics have an attacking chance. Nice middle mountain stage. 6 too, sieb, then slight uphill, nice middle mountain stage. 9 on the other hand looks visually good, but don't find it that great looking at the %. Looks like a boring Donk middle mountain stage finish.... 11 kind of standard too somehow, for strong classics. 12 I like more again, for strong classics or 80-70 or even climbers. Good varied hilly stages I think.

Mountain; 2. Stage 8 and 10. 8 with cobbles, but should easily be for climbers. And they have the chance to gain time. Very nice stage. Stage 10 is about the last mountain. Theoretically of course sending somebody ahead possible too, but easily defended IMO. Climbers will have chances for the stage on other stages too, stage 12 of course, others maybe in sprint

ITT 62 km very long, reg rather unimportant (everybody can go down to 300, going under 200 according to Aix is bad anyway, you start slowing down a lot there he said... A very very very decisive stage. Not necessarily for the win, but for eliminating almost all riders and rider types from the fight for the GC. According to Poke somehow the opposite, hihi. Agree that having the rest day after keeps more in, with another stage the day after it would have been ITT and reg, thus limiting the the possible winners of the GC even more. LIke this relatively low reg keeps you in. And with a good support team for the rest of the tour IMO the reg won't be a decisive factor.

Pavé stage: Another very decisive stage, that allows for big differences again. Love the description, unpredictable. Very predictable....

So, stage hunt isn't bad, 3 sprints, 1 hill sprint (haven't counted them for other tours really) hilly stages for different types, 2 for climbers, with chances on others. I'd like one more sprint of course.

GC... the many different kind of riders Poke wants to have fight for the win? The classic with 70+ TT. The TT guy with 70+mountain. The pavé rider with 70+ TT and mountain. Ah yes, the 80 mountain 70 TT, but this rider is a favorite in all tours anyway. Of course we don't have that many of those guys (all the different types!) in the game, 33 riders with 70+ TT and mountain, only 7 who have 65+ pavé as well. And only 1 of those 7 has points. Of the 33 without pavé only 5 have points in October.
Despite that IMO it will be rather easy in most editions to predict the winner before stage 1. The ITT and pavé stage eliminate all pure climbers. 1 mountain stage can give climbers a good chunk of time back, but never enough. And since it won't be enough anyway, most likely nobody will actually try to get that much time back, go for the stage win late. The middle mountain stages will all give rather small differences IMO, hard for climbers to gain time on weaker classics too.
The fight between weaker classics vs stronger classics promises to be more interesting, depending on how far apart they are in pavé and TT of course. Ideally you have a 75 mountain guy with a bit less TT fighting against sronger TT guys with 68 or so mountain.

So don't really see how Gipfel sees this as balanced, as Dec tours should be...focused on sprint and classic stages... On sprint??? Seriously? Classic stages?`Well, 5 of them, varied once yes, but if the GC is already for them, then 5 more for stage wins, not sure I'd call this balanced. Nobody would if the GC was for climbers and they had 5 stages in addition to the GC. Doesn't make it a bad tour, not enough sprint, very decisive ITT, with 1 mountain stage and the pavé stage as other key points, for the rest what looks to me like very controllable stages. Because it will be a control tour, that's how TT guys have to ride for their GC wins. And since the offensive riders really have little chance to crack the TT guys... to me looks very controllable.
Too much money around of course. That in a way is a positive though, it will make the control more difficult, money escapes every day, GC team(s) will have enough to do to avoid a possible GC challenger getting a ride in front.

For me the Philippines is all around better.
And this one makes me feel much better about 4 ciudades too. Different approach, similar result. A certain predictability coupled with a certain unpredictability on the details. Not enough sprint. Unless it's an emergency I won't vote for 4 ciudades anyway, never voted for my own tour so far, but if I would consider a vote for it... not sure if I'd vote for Brasil or 4 ciudades, would have to re-analyze all a bit. Philippines still the Donksfavorite though.

Generally after having reviewed 4 tours, 1 thing is obvious. Sprint at a minimum. From 4 in the philippines to... 1? 2? in Africa. A tour with 4,5 or 5 sprints IMO has an excellent chance this year, due to the fact that all the other tours do the minimum for sprint.

South Africa later... I try to do all after Gipfel.

Oh, and some Falkentour too now. Good! More and more. 6 tours with the Chense one coming too.

Robyklebt wrote: ↑

Fri Nov 01, 2019 2:32 pm

Volta a Brasil

Generally agree mostly with Gipfel on other tours, but on this one not really. No idea what kind of glasses he put on to see all those sprints and the balance and the cool stuff.

Mh, maybe I am biased having Jacob as a sprinter, but to me looked like stages 1-5 can be a sprint. No sprint guaranteed, but if there is one or two good sprint teams, they can make it together with GC favos...

Anyway, two more nice tours online! Both in South Africa! Now it is already 6 tours, right? Well, maybe the Donkey wants to delete the two unnecessary posts from whisbone in the presentation-thread? Can he do it as December Tour Dictator or I have to do it as moderator? Would be nice to have Nr. of posts in presentation thread = Nr. of tours to vote on.

Anyway, time to make the Pros & Cons for SAF and SEAT. Really confusing to have these two names, but I will give it a try:

South Africa Tour (SAF)

Pros
- Location: A bit odd to have two tours in South Africa, but we don't go there often. Think it is a good idea with a variety of interesting roads.
- Sprint: Stages 2-5 and 9 can be a sprint, but are not a guaranteed sprint. Again (like all December Tours this year?) no easy sprint races this year. I don't mind one or two "easy" sprint stages, but OK to have it more hilly and challenging. Jacob says thanks
- Pietermarityburg: Stage 7. Looks really interesting. After long TTT and before mountain stage. Could be a fantastic stage for (GC) attacks.
- Pilgrims Rest: Stage 13, last stage. Could be a very nice final after 218km, especiallz with the long ITT and 225km the day before that... then the finish looks exciting as well. Climbers will need a strong team to bring them there.

Cons
- Random IS: Not a big deal, but looks like some hilly stages have more IS than flat stages. Bit weird to me.
- Too long TTT: I like TTT's, but this one is too long, mainly because there is another long ITT coming. Classics with TT say "thanks for the Dec Tour win". They will need reg and a good team... but I don't believe climbers have a chance with only Hela Hela and Pilgrims Rest being (relatively) short moutain finishes.
- Too long ITT: Well, essentially same argument as above. But this really kills it for me. 35km ITT after 40km TTT in the first week in a Dec Tour with only 2 (maybe 3) not very difficult mountain stages... Probably strong TT teams have a different view, but I think people will not even bring their mountain riders for a tour like this.

South East Africa Tour (SEAT)
Ok, my memory hook will be: SEAT is a longer name than SAF, because SEAT visits more countries than SAF.

Pros
- Location: What is true for SAF, is true for SEAT as well.
- Two short TT's: Perfect. Give some money and some seconds to TT specialists, but let mountain riders have a chance in this tour.
- Menoaneng Pass: Really cool thing. Love it. Especially in the middle of a stage! First I thought ** is a bit extreme, but it is designer's freedom and makes it a nice Strade Bianche type stage. Although I would have preferred a Colle delle Finestre type stage, really cool. Eventually, it is no Strade Bianche, it is no Colle delle Finestre. It is Menoaneng Pass!
- Balance: It looks quite balanced. Sprint: Stages 5,6,7 and 12 look like they could be mass sprints. Mountains: Stages 4,8 and 10 should go to mountain riders probably. Every second will count with only short TT's, not too much mountain, a bit of dirt road. I think it could be exciting.

Cons
- Why only 12 days? No ideas for a 13th stage? Well, fine, but still a little disadvantage for me.
- Minimum elevation!!! Bah, really difficult to judge those stages, where you stay above 1000m the whole time... I don't have time to look at every km to make my own opinion!

OK, so far so good, I will probably make a ranking or something when everything is online. But let's first wait and collect all the Pros & Cons

Chense wrote: ↑

Tue Oct 29, 2019 9:59 pm

Ill also be in to Trojers 10 years anniversary ... just hope that luques will fix my editor problem in the next days ... the tour itself is ready :/

Chense, you want to write me a PM and I give you my design-password? It is different from my ingame-password, so it would be OK for me.

Checked your Jacob.. With him as a benchmark for sprint we'd have more sprints anywhere. 70+ mountain!

Lots of review...
Later today or tomorrow. Will start the voting tomorrow too.

Tour #7 and #8 online! Fantastic! Let me do the Pros & Cons again!

Tour du Maroc

Pros
- Long hilly ITT between two hilly stages: Could be interesting to see how GC teams play it here. Reg will be important.
- Sprint: Maybe the most sprint stages out of all proposals yet? Looks like 5 sprints to me.
- Presentation: 10 years TTV, ok, good reason to celebrate and very good details presented for each stage.
- Rabat: Quite funny to have that stage in there. Anecdote from work: The works council used to say "We don't offer any Rabatt (German word for discount), Rabatt is a city in Marocco"

Cons
- Nearly nothing for normal classics: Only stage 3 perhaps.... Then for the rest: I love mountain stages, which are not save for mountain riders, but maybe a bit too much in this direction here? Stage 5, 9, 11 & 12 all look like a fight mountain riders vs. super strong classics. An 80-70 with sprint could win all 4 stages, if I see it correctly. Then stage 13 will be save for mountain riders. A team with two mountain riders could rule these stages. Just take a team like Lorient during this Vuelta. He will win half of the stages easily... Well, a team with a super strong classic could take is as well. A guy like Freudenfeuer with Tigiyev... If they were both in the same race, ok, could be interesting to watch... But better don't expect that. Maybe I'm a bit peesimistic, but I'm afraid it will be too much of a race for those super strong teams who have won everything in the normal season already
- Marocco: Not sure why I feel uncomfortable with this country, but there was this Casablanca guy with only Maroccon riders, who was a multi. And then there is some travel warning issued by Germany for this country as well. Seems dangerous for my riders.

Hasmonean Tour

Pros
- Sprint stages: 1,2,3,5,8,10,13. May even sound too much, but some of these stages have quite a lot of hills. (Some early, some later). At least at first glance, it looks like interesting stages, although sprinters may be favorites here.
- Half stages 11a & 11b: Interesting to have half stages late in the race, and then with a mountain stage plus an ITT. Also before the important mountain stage Nr. 12. So this could be a super exciting finish of the tour.
- A bit of dirt road: Quiet a lot of it in this year's proposals, but I like it. It's realistic for the road conditions in most of the Non-European countries!
- Death Sea: Funny to see these profiles. Not the first time, but still entertaining for designers.

Cons
- Presentation: Only profiles so far, which is ok, but would like to know more about the race...
- No details on the profile: Stages 4, 7 and 9... no idea... Mountain rider? 80-70 with sprint? Classics? I just cannot say that without having the de-tails.
- Ok, I looked it up on my own and it is too much in favor of mountain riders for my taste: Stage 4 final is 7-6-8-1-3-2. Stage 7 final is 14 8 10 2 -7 -11 -10 -6 4 -4 -4. Stage 9 final is 9 7 8 4 -10 -7 -2 -9 -7 -1 4 2 10 4 2 -4 -6 -9 -5 6 4 -5 -3 -3. Very difficult for classics here... Mountain riders will have difficulties to gain much time, but will be very difficult to win stages here with classics as well... So basically nearly nothing for normal classics again.

Gipfelstuermer wrote: ↑

Sun Nov 03, 2019 4:08 pm

Tour #7 and #8 online! Fantastic! Let me do the Pros & Cons again!

Tour du Maroc

Pros
- Long hilly ITT between two hilly stages: Could be interesting to see how GC teams play it here. Reg will be important.
- Sprint: Maybe the most sprint stages out of all proposals yet? Looks like 5 sprints to me.
- Presentation: 10 years TTV, ok, good reason to celebrate and very good details presented for each stage.
- Rabat: Quite funny to have that stage in there. Anecdote from work: The works council used to say "We don't offer any Rabatt (German word for discount), Rabatt is a city in Marocco"

Cons
- Nearly nothing for normal classics: Only stage 3 perhaps.... Then for the rest: I love mountain stages, which are not save for mountain riders, but maybe a bit too much in this direction here? Stage 5, 9, 11 & 12 all look like a fight mountain riders vs. super strong classics. An 80-70 with sprint could win all 4 stages, if I see it correctly. Then stage 13 will be save for mountain riders. A team with two mountain riders could rule these stages. Just take a team like Lorient during this Vuelta. He will win half of the stages easily... Well, a team with a super strong classic could take is as well. A guy like Freudenfeuer with Tigiyev... If they were both in the same race, ok, could be interesting to watch... But better don't expect that. Maybe I'm a bit peesimistic, but I'm afraid it will be too much of a race for those super strong teams who have won everything in the normal season already
- Marocco: Not sure why I feel uncomfortable with this country, but there was this Casablanca guy with only Maroccon riders, who was a multi. And then there is some travel warning issued by Germany for this country as well. Seems dangerous for my riders.

Just a short answer maybe some criticism myself later on First thanks for your comments on it.
So some answers also

Hilly ITT: Yes that was exactly the plan - Make the teams think and make at least some reg important.

5 Sprints should be sure maybe a 6th one but that more for hill sprinters.

About the normal classics and what i thought about the mentioned "80-70" stages even if i might have totally missjudged the outcomes then:

Stage 5: with 16 10 14 14 and only 11 kms to go afterwards only one of those less than +4 or -4 this was designed as a clear mountain stage for me not one for extreme differences as some guys might be tired after the ITT and i dont want the tour to be decided after day 5 already - but hard enough to make differences and to get rid even of 80-70s and superclassics.

Stage 9: Yes here you are right indeed - That one should most possibly go to a 80-70 if one is out there or a mountain rider but also it could give some brave GC team the chance for an early attack if the favorites dont work properly with the Ameslane hill beeing pretty unrhytmic which i hope leads to some faults made in terms of controlling. Otherwise i clearly wanted it to be no stage for some lets say 72-78 riders and also think less then 80 mountain might be too less if not perfectly helped then.

Stage 11: Here you are right too thats the one for the superclassic or a duo of 2 strong classics in a team in my opinion

Stage 12: Here i think totally different then you Both hills are not very steep and its 40km (much downhill) into the finish after - My intention on this one was to make it the harder "brother" of stage 7 - 7 will be a fight hill sprinters vs classics with advantages for a strong hillsprint team while 12 should be the fight stronger classics vs weaker classics with sprint and the question if those have a team that is enough to control there after a hard day 11 where the superclassics teams could maybe be outclassed with some early action. (even thought about making the flat part of stage 7 shorter after the sieb but i also wanted a stage thats on the one hand for hillsprinters if some attend and on the other hand make it hard to control if none of those is there but some kind of 65-85 with sprint guys

Anyway i wish you all a nice competition already! Thanks in advance for also the other tours that look really nice and i hope ill find time to also say something about the other tours then

Shorter now

SAF:
4 sprint, maybe 5? Stage 2 might be one too. Anyway, decent number, good, already + Last one stage 9, much better than anything we had before here. Stage 2-5 all sprint, not fully convinced. Spread out a bit more better. Individually nice sprint stages though.
4 middle mountain stages: Stage 1, 7, 10, 12. With some chances on stage 2. Stage 1 a very nice start for the tour, stage 7 after the TTT opens up GC chances too. 10 with a +4 finish chances for climbers too of course Stage 12 normally for strong classics even tough the hard climb is far from the goal. Not much flat after that. And a 12 in the last GPM:
2 mountain stages: 8 and 13. Both in a way similar, finish after a not too long climb, but another climb right before.
1 TTT rather long and on stage 6. By now it should be widely known the the Donkey dislikes late TTTs. It's anti newcomers, it's anti sensible riding, it's pro sucking etc. But well, here it is again. After 4 sprints, with hills, so maybe not as bad as usual?
1 ITT: 35 km. This makes the tour rather TT dependent too. With the TTT a bit less individually, more team,. After both the TTT and the ITT hard stages coming, good.

I like the sprint stages here, good. Too concentrated early, somethign else in between there would have been nice, but ok.
Then very ITT dependent IMO, will be hard to make up time in the hilly stages and the HC stages. Stage 8+12 are GC Stages too of course. Favorites for GC, the usual climber with 70 TT, he's favorite almost everywhere, if he exists. Otherwise, climbers with TT vs classics with TT, depends a lot on the time trial teams they bring. Same result in the TTT, then the climber with 60 TT is favored, 55 still with chances.

SEAT:

4 sprints. 2, 5, 6, 12. With 7 some small chances, but look very small IMO. The stages are all very easy, it's really 4 guaranted sprints.
3 middle mountains, stage 3 looks good, more details would help, how hilly is it after that 3. Stage 7 could be an escape too, yes, the notorious reluctance of classic teams to actually ride for their wins. So escape. Nothing wrong with the stage itself though. Stage 11 the same then Only 3 hilly stages, but for me that's enough anyway.
HC: 4, 8, 9, 10. 4 is perfect. Nothing special, but it makes the first week very good and varied. Some little GC stage on stage 4, nice. Followed by sprint again. Stage 8 2 climbs in the end, not short, to decide. 9b, bah, stupid pavé when there is no pavé, just costs energy, influence in the hills not too big, favors flat. Which is the big problem of the "cool gravel road designs". A climb like Finestre is for pure climbers, some are not too good on the gravel yeah, so they are a bit weaker than they would be if it was paved, but it certainly doesn't favor Philippe Gilbert over Chris Froome. He won't manage to stay closer to Froome, even if he tried. At RSF it does. In the name of realism, it's made unrealistic. Still an interesting stage. I prefer 10 though, more down than up but still a HC stage, cool.
2 TTs, prologue and very short TT, so clearly a tour for climbers here. 20km TT are not 0, a 60 TT guy will only gain roughly a minute to a 50 TT guy. Depending on mountain skills, that's all recoverable.

What I like best about this tour is really the varied start, a mountain stage already on stage 4. Negative, the end maybe could have been a bit different, not a hilly and a flat stage to end it, at least the second last stage a GC stage... like this the GC normally is finished 2 days before the end, IMO one day would be better. But can imagine voting for this. No stress in flat stages (a bit more hard wouldn't be bad either...) 2 interesting climbing stages with lots of up and down. Nice.

Maroc:

5 sprint, maybe 6, like it, sets it apart from the rest. 1, 2, 6, 8, 10 all look like easy sprint stages. Maybe too easy, 1 or 2 could have been a bit more difficult. Stage 7 then is the quesiton, but since the sprinters have 5 basically sure ones, they should show up with strong teams, chances are they can come back. Not sure, the climb isn't short, 13 km from the first 6, 10 from the only 7. The question of course how fast the first peloton goes, for classics? For hill sprinters? Interesting stage, like it a lot. But, another similar, or a bit easier one might have been ok too. But for me works like this, 5 easy sprints, one that depending on the group might be one.
Middle mountain: 3? 3 is for strong classics, nothing wrong with that, you pay the high salary for them, why shouldn't they have their stage chances too? 11 the same, uphill, so it will not be easy to drop the climbers, some teams might ride for their climbers, with sprint, in the last 2 km. If they have a classic there. It is for 80-70 and superclassics, but will most likely need a team. Different stage from 3, but similar result yes. But here no downhill needed, so it is different. 12 is different, it could be a Donkey middle mountain stage, a group to be expected, last sieb rather far, flattish on top, flattish in the end, normally a lot of classics can come back.
HC: 3: 5-9-13. Superclassics-80-70? Not really, but not out of the question either. 3 maybe not, even if there's 2 (maybe 3 since we don't have info on all km on top) km flat, flattish on top. And 2-4, 2+4... But yes, would need to be a real superclassic to get the climbers, IF they try for it. One that doesn't want to work can destroy some groups easily, shouldn't most of the time, but could. 9 again is similar, should be for climbers, but the 4 km in the end... normally not enough after that climb. 13 then superclassics or 80-70 only if there are no climbers at the start. For me one of 5-9 somehow is unnecessary, second one a harder one that allows more time gain maybe better?`LIke this the time gain possibilities for climbers (vs other climbers mostly) are not huge. Attack costs energy, so everywhere it's a bit, you try, you risk being caught.

ITT: 1, rather long if you see what comes later, but ok, without the length it's not doing anything for the reg. Rather hilly, so.... I always forget, do the differences between 2 85 climbers, but one with 50 and one with 60 TT decrease compared to if it was in the flat?`It should... but not sure it does, but logically it should, so let's assume it does. So the differences between climbers will not be as big as in a completely flat one. So in the end works out quite well. TT classics normally..... difficult but not impossible either. Stage 13 long, but unless there's somebody with 2 climbers, dropped late. If early, then a better classic rides, time loss small, if a climber helps the classic.. very small. ON the other 2 stages not huge time losses either. The win in the TT will be smaller than in a flat one too, but still, it works.


So for GC quite interesting, lots of sprint, good, finally we have a really sprinter friendly tour. Middle mountain stages maybe not ultraexciting, but since I regard myself as a bad middle mountain designer I still find them ok. HC stages I'd like a bit more, but since it works for GC somehow.. .good.

Not too happy with going to 3000 meters in Maroc in December... the presentation says it too, it's a ski resort!

Good presentation text, like everybody else, no map with the stages (Burundi Rwanda with a map at least!), but the text here is good, so gets a plus for presentation too.

Hasmonean

5 flat: 2, 3, 5, 8, 10? And 1 as an option. even if those * on slightly uphill km are always a bit of stress for low pavé value sprinters, but at * if fit should be no problem. The early climbs... if the sprinters are not spooked too much by the pavé later, they can get that back I think. Definetly an interesting starting stage, like it. Big question how steep the climb to Malin is.
2+3+5 look rather easy, all ok, but the clustering early again a bit.
8 looks more difficult, but certainly doable, question is again how steep those climbs are. The big ones and the cat 4 before the dirt road. And a concern about the dirt road. Downhill, is it -3 or more? Because then pavé would be buggy. -1/-2 ok for downhill pavé, more=bugs

Middle mountain: 4: 1 we talked about, then 13 and?`Unclear from the text which of the others is classified as hilly. So we combine it with the 3 HC stages
4 Excellent, early little GC fight, like that. Not super hard, final might allow classics a come back, but 7-6-8, at 7 most classics are siebed, then lose time in the following 2 km. 80-70 stay though, at least until 8. Might be the missing middle mountain stage? Still like it. Good. Would have like it even better harder though:)
7: This looks harder, HC after a TTT. Energy for most people should be ok, TTT around this length don't cost that much, unless I forgot it... But nice finish, things could start for climbers from the climb at 166. Good stage.
9: Similar to 7, climbs not too long, but can start early. With a second climber why not even try from the first climb? Suspect this might be the missing middle mountain stage, but to me looks like for climbers really, pretty clearly for climbers.
11: Prefer the first 2 HC stages (if they are indeed classified as such), here differences normally small, 9-8 followed by 3 flatter km, normally too early to go then, then 8-6-7, classics not strong enough to come back, but to limit losses for the climbers ahead of them, if one has been dropped badly. Expect small differences here.
12: Good stage. Hard climb, long downhill. Early attacks without help difficult due to the flat looking part between 141-158, but with a guy ahead, why not.
13 then a classic classic stage. smallish classic group normally.

TTT 1, too late IMO as you might have guessed. Here for GC, ok, after 2 flat stages, but this on the other hand penalizes sprinter teams, maybe they want to go for a TTT win? Even if it's slightly uphill, only few critical km, so not hopeless with a top TTT team. Having 2 sprint stages before that makes it possibly difficult for them. But if it has to be late, after 2 sprints is not a bad place, still not a fan. Length seems good to me.
ITT: Shortish. good length.

GC the climber with good chances, TTT dependent of course. Classics... they will lose some time on 7-9-12, IMO more than they gain in the short 16km ITT, I think. So the TTT will decide, team over individual finally. Biggest criticism from me here though: ah, no 2: 11a and b, kind of castrates a. But since that's a little difference stage anyway... why not. Still not a fan here either. The bigger one: Downhill 3 very downhill dependent GC stages, the only one with the arrival on top is 11a. With 2* and the TT coming. Yes, a complete rider, even more a climber needs to have downhill too, but 1 stage just for climbers without necessarily downhill, without a +2* at the end wouldn't have hurt. Otherwise a good tour, was in the fight for the last of my 3 votes, very very very very narrowly lost out. Mostly because of that downhill combined with 11a-b. 11a with a normal a bit longer climbing finish. ideally not a half stage, and it has my vote I think... very close.
Good intro too (even if the disclaimer, we leave it because a) b) c) is a bit of a downer)
Another thing I forgot, like how the hard stages alternate with the easier ones a lot. 7-9-11 hard, the ones in between not. Allows for more offensive riding. Hard stages all in a row is nice too at times (we have that with 6-7 and 11a-b, grr) but this hard, soft hard soft is really underrated and underrepresented at c4f.

Finally 8 tours, won't boycott any of them, so all good enough for my high standards.
IN the end Philippines, SEAT and Maroc got my 3 votes, Hasmonean unlucky, on another day might beat Maroc... so if anybody is unsure between those 2... give it to Hasmonean!
My favorite in the first round the Philippines, but might change in the second round, further study might make me change my mind. And since I have 3 sprinters I might look at the sprint stages even more then.

Damn, Atlas tour last year.. had forgotten, minus for Maroc, had I remembered that Hasmnean might have gotten it.

I vote fore colombia

Good work from all designers. Hard to decide for which I should vote...maybe I read the analyses again.