Spring classics (except Belgium)

[Robyklebt]

Strade Bianche



Exactly the same route as the past years.
Right now put in ** everywhere, except the last km which is not dirt road but city cobble stone.
But that can be changed of course, if the system with first 2-3 km *, then all ** is better, can be changed very fast.

So which system do we want?

Other changes:

Cut 1 dirt km at 42, that sector is 4.3 km, so with all at 2 no reason to prolong it further. 4km now.
Km 91-92, -7 -2** from -6 -1**. The following hill being 1.9km a 5,5% we don't go far enough down otherwise.
Km 93-94: 6 4 from 6 1, see above, now 5% average, fits better.
Km 99: -4 from -3, to compensate the 10 meters we were higher than in the old version.
km 121 from 6** to 7**, 1km a 6.9 according to la flamme rouge. km 122 1 from 2
km 134 to -1 from 0, km 135 to -2 from -3, so could add the downhill dirt road there too, Now full sector here
136-137, 10** 0** from 8** 2**, 1 km at 10% according to la Flamme rouge

Until here I think all uncontroversial changes. A bit more difficult from now on.
IMO in general it makes little difference if we make all ** or start with * and change to ** from the third or fourth km. Until here that is, the 3 remaining sectors are 900/2400/1100 meters long. So with the increasing system they would all be *, with the all ** system they would be, yes, **! A highly surprising result... We could of course do a mixed system and increasing system until here, all ** from here, or look at the races from last year and decide ourselves how hard we want to make these last 3 sectors. or * */** * since the 2400 sector has a long second km.. etc etc.
Anyway, next sector
km 161: 4* until now. With the ** system I propose 6**, otherwise 5*. It's 700 meters a 7,5%, so 5.25%, but like with the Flanders classics we can make them harder than the real % per km, and IMO with the ** system makes sense, at only * 5 seems ok. Adjust the next km from -3 to -4/-5
km 166-167, the 2400 sector. right now 5 2. According to la flamme rouge the first 600 meter at 7.7%. Over a km that's 4.6%, but with ** IMO 6**3** is better. We go up to 300 meters, old route to 280. But here I'm not sure at all if that's good, maybe 5 4 is better? Or make it 3 km, 5** 2** 2* (half for the extra 400 meters?) Opinions?
km 172 1100 sector, until now we didn't have it. km 172 a -4, in reality the sector seems to go down steeply for the first 500 meter, then up 600 meters at 8.6%. According to the flamme rouge info on the comment. On the map the downhill section seems longer, more 700-400... ok ok, I check. Plotaroute measurement gives me a bit over 400 meters with 43 meters up, so 400 meters at 10%. Downhill a bit under 650 meters with the same 45, but down.
170-173 right now 2 3 -4 +4.... change provisionally to 3-4 5**1
174 to the end so far:
2 -2 0 3 -6 5 0 -2 -5 -1 6*
2 -3 2 4 -6 5 0 -4-3 -1 6*
Since I had plotaroute open looked a bit at details, but could be done differently too.. the climbs are really in between the kms

Opinions on the */** or ** question?
Opinions on the hill changes late in the race?

[Bear]

Hill changes look ok to me but I have to admit that I did not change the route exactly.

For */** I find it hard to make a decision. Most likely we agree that only * is not enough. A change in between the segments is also difficult as the first three km can make a different change depending on the length of segments. Probably all ** is the easiest, but it might be too much?

I throw in a every km change... */**/*/**/*/**... always starting with the same * or ** to have not have the ** on specific km (uphill or downhill). This doesnt really help as well because conditions of each segment doesnt really change inside the segment. Maybe this helps to make it harder, but not too hard.

[Gipfelstuermer]

We could of course do a mixed system and increasing system until here, all ** from here, or look at the races from last year and decide ourselves how hard we want to make these last 3 sectors. or * */** * since the 2400 sector has a long second km.. etc etc.
Anyway, next sector
km 161: 4* until now. With the ** system I propose 6**, otherwise 5*. It's 700 meters a 7,5%, so 5.25%, but like with the Flanders classics we can make them harder than the real % per km, and IMO with the ** system makes sense, at only * 5 seems ok. Adjust the next km from -3 to -4/-5
km 166-167, the 2400 sector. right now 5 2. According to la flamme rouge the first 600 meter at 7.7%. Over a km that's 4.6%, but with ** IMO 6**3** is better. We go up to 300 meters, old route to 280. But here I'm not sure at all if that's good, maybe 5 4 is better? Or make it 3 km, 5** 2** 2* (half for the extra 400 meters?) Opinions?
km 172 1100 sector, until now we didn't have it. km 172 a -4, in reality the sector seems to go down steeply for the first 500 meter, then up 600 meters at 8.6%. According to the flamme rouge info on the comment. On the map the downhill section seems longer, more 700-400... ok ok, I check. Plotaroute measurement gives me a bit over 400 meters with 43 meters up, so 400 meters at 10%. Downhill a bit under 650 meters with the same 45, but down.
170-173 right now 2 3 -4 +4.... change provisionally to 3-4 5**1
174 to the end so far:
2 -2 0 3 -6 5 0 -2 -5 -1 6*
2 -3 2 4 -6 5 0 -4-3 -1 6*
Since I had plotaroute open looked a bit at details, but could be done differently too.. the climbs are really in between the kms

Opinions on the */** or ** question?
Opinions on the hill changes late in the race?

In my point of view, a mixed system is realistic in this case, because in reality the race typically explodes on these last sectors... in fact I think some of these sectors are so hard that they were the reason for people to ask for ***.... too much here as we agreed, but let's go for ** then at least.

So I support the following options that you described above:

km 161: 6**
km 166-167: 5** 4**
km 170-173: 3 -4 5**1
km 174-end: 2 -3 2 4 -6 5 0 -4 -3 -1 6*

[Robyklebt]

Think I got Bears proposal, basically *-**-*-**
Opinions?

Not sure I understand Gipfel correctly. You mean the "increasing system" for the first part, so *-*-*-**-**-**... (change at km 4 now, but can be different too) but then all dirt sectors from 161 on ** ? Correct?
Opinions, opinions.

[Bear]

Correct. I think we need to decide what we want. Make it really hard and set pavé skill as gravel skill. Then we need to go as Gipfel wrote.

My proposal is more on the soft side for a change. So the classics with no pavé skill would still have a chance.

Actually I prefer Gipfels way as Strade is a race for experts on gravel. You need technique, and in c4f we might only be able to simulate this with pavé skill. Otherwise it's just one race for classics.

Maybe we need some opinions of teams with no pavé riders but with classics. Gipfel and me seem to be influenced

[Robyklebt]

I throw Denain in here as well. It's not Belgium after all





Redid , using the pavé rating from the Denain site/la flamme rouge it becomes much harder.

COBBLES SECTOR:
1. Haspres - Thiant (++++, 1700 m, Km 110.7), Adapted the second km for length, so 4 3
2. Monchaux-sur-Écaillon - Maing (+++, 1600 m, Km 118.7), Same, 3 2
3. Maing - Quérénaing (+++++, 2500 m, Km 121.8), 2 km both 5
4. Quérénaing -Verchain-Maugré (+++, 1600 m, Km 124.5), Adapted for length, 3 2
5. Verchain-Maugré - Saulzoir (sprint) (++, 1600 m, Km 129.1), On the Denain site it says 1200 meters, so only did 1 km at **
6. Avesnes-le-Sec (++++, 1800 m, Km 139.9) 2 km at 4 4

The ratings by ASO for Paris Roubaix from 2019:
23: Verchain-Maugré to Quérénaing (km 136.5 — 1.6 km) *** same
22: Quérénaing to Maing (km 140.5 — 2.5 km) *** 2 less
21: Maing to Monchaux-sur-Ecaillon (km 142.5 — 1.6 km) *** same

At first thought to make it all 1 less, but looking at this except for the 5 they agree. Keep it? Down to 4? Keep the sectors not used in PR at that rating?

Of course we could go and check on google street, but don't have the time while there's still x other annoying 1 day races to design... somebody else can try. I might give it a try later this week IF I have most 1 day races finished...

2 probable sprints at the end of the pavé moved 1 km since sprint/pavé doesn't work it seems.

Ah, more sensible mintact too, km 168, not just 10 km with only the last pavé sector.

[Robyklebt]

Correct. I think we need to decide what we want. Make it really hard and set pavé skill as gravel skill. Then we need to go as Gipfel wrote.

My proposal is more on the soft side for a change. So the classics with no pavé skill would still have a chance.

Actually I prefer Gipfels way as Strade is a race for experts on gravel. You need technique, and in c4f we might only be able to simulate this with pavé skill. Otherwise it's just one race for classics.

Maybe we need some opinions of teams with no pavé riders but with classics. Gipfel and me seem to be influenced

Personally I think the last sectors all ** is good, meaning from km 161 on.

Before that?
The argument for the increasing system is really that after a few km it becomes harder, like a climb, 1 km at 6% is still ok but make it 10 and many more riders are dropped. Same for gravel, you might be able to to follow 1, 2, 3 km, but then it becomes too hard.. that's the logic behind the increase system.
But there I don't really have an opinion, your system, *-**-* the increase system, all **, can live with all of them.

[Gipfelstuermer]

Maybe we need some opinions of teams with no pavé riders but with classics. Gipfel and me seem to be influenced

Well, I have 5 classics and only 4 pavé riders in my team! So in fact I would like it classics-friendly! Also, it is a race I have already won before! With a classic rider! Maybe the biggest win in Gipfelstuermer history! And I have pavé riders and classics in my team every year... Problem is my classics usually don't train, but ok that's a different story...

So of course you are right, generally we need more opinions and helpers! Would be boring if only Roby, Poke and I did the whole calendar!

[Robyklebt]

Put it on with the *-*-*-**-** etc system. With the final sectors all **

Seems what Gipfel says works for me too.
Harder than the *-**-*-** etc system, but then a compromise between poke's all ** proposal and the easier one. And don't think between those 3 there's that much difference finally

[Robyklebt]

Opinions after riding it?

My opinion: Much more difficult for climbers IMO, which isn't wrong, but not completely right either, as we saw today in real life... 1 Pogacar 2 Valverde. But 3 Asgreen...

It will depend a lot on how it's ridden in different groups, in our group it was very soft finally, with the clear classic favorite in the same team as one of the climbers, 83-61 with over 60 pavé. Finally they ended up in the same second in the last km attack... So still possible for climbers I think, hard, but not impossible. So from that point of view it works I think.

The early parts.. Somehow don't still don't think there's a big difference between the different proposed systems. * * * then ** or all ** or alternating * **... Ok, think the one we have has the advantage of very likely not creating trouble for climbers in the first 4 sectors, which IMO is good. The others potentially might do, but even there unlikely.

The end more decisive anyway, good like this, all **? The last one climb part could be steeper actually, but it's very short... half down half up.. More than ** definitely not IMO. But end all ** to me seems somehow fine too.

[Robyklebt]

Pavé:
1. Staatsbos (+, 2000 m, Km 28.7), **
2. Boswachterij Exloo (+, 3500 m, Km 41.1), ***
3. Bosrand (+, 1000 m, Km 42.3), ***
4. Valtherzandweg (sprint) (+, 3700 m, Km 47.5), ***
5. Weerdingerzandweg (+, 1000 m, Km 49.2), **
6. Boswachterij Odoorn (sprint) (+, 3400 m, Km 68.5), ***, 4th km **
7. Boswachterij Sleenerzand (sprint) (+, 1200 m, Km 81.3), Wezup, ***
8. VAMberg (+, 200 m, Km 101.6) ridden 4 times in total, the 200 pavé seem new but hard, but at 200 meters... cut, hill +3, GPM there

Generally I'm not so sure what to do, at times some seem 4 possible, looks really hard, but often no street view either, So just see the start/end... some like Valtherzandweg the whole thing, but didn't click through the whole way, but seemed hard... up from ** and one *** to all ***. But as I said, they generally all look horrible, maybe all 4 even better. Next year....