GIRO 2024

[Gipfelstuermer]

Who has time to design some stages? Could be a good idea to start now to finish by end of April.

Jerseys and Points System will be exactly the same as last year:

Maglia Ciclamino Points (same as last year)
Flat: 50 – 35 – 25 – 18 – 14 – 12 – 10 – 8 – 7 – 6 – 5 – 4 – 3 – 2 – 1
Middle Mountain: 25 – 18 – 12 – 8 – 6 – 5 – 4 – 3 – 2 – 1
Mountain / ITT: 15 – 12 – 9 – 7 – 6 – 5 – 4 – 3 – 2 – 1

IS: 12 – 8 – 6 – 5 – 4 – 3 – 2 – 1

https://www.cyclingstage.com/giro-2024- ... ification/

Maglia Azzurra Points (same as last year)
Cima Coppi: 50 – 30 – 20 – 14 – 10 – 6 – 4 – 2 – 1
1st category: 40 – 18 – 12 – 9 – 6 – 4 – 2 – 1
2nd category: 18 – 8 – 6 – 4 – 2 – 1
3rd category: 9 – 4 – 2 – 1
4th category: 3 – 2 – 1

https://www.cyclingstage.com/giro-2024- ... ification/

Bonifications
10-6-4 second at the end of the stage and 3-2-1 second for the second IS. (normal)

[lennylenny]

there was an article last week that the stage14 TT might be extended due to a municipality not wanted to grant passage, alternative would be 43km instead of 31
https://gazzettadimantova.gelocal.it/sp ... -14181240/

[olmania]

I am still waiting for Romandie details to arrive, so I will spend my time in priority designing it.
After that, I could eventually do a few Giro stages

[Tukhtahuaev]

I can design a few stages

[Tukhtahuaev]

Someone has to start I guess. I should be able to do at least the first 5 stages this week

[Tukhtahuaev]

How to handle the sterrato parts on stage 6?

There's a ~500m break between sector 1 and 2. For now I have considered it as 1 section, and made the km with that break to a * and then continuing with **.
Also there are intermediates at the end of sector 2 and 3. For now I have moved them to 1km later.
Are you happy with how it is done or do you have different suggestions?

[lennylenny]

started with the last stage, very annyoing circuit:
9.5km long, per km according to Flamme Rouge gps in Ridewithgps:
starts at 35hm
20
27
20
14
17
17
17
20
33
and then half a km back to 35

for final 3 kms Giro website has 15 to 33 to 22 to 22 , so would be 2 -1 0
so for the full circuit i think of going -1 0 0 -1 -1 0 0 0 1 2 with an extra 0 after the +2 every second lap

opinions?

[Robyklebt]

started with the last stage, very annyoing circuit:
9.5km long, per km according to Flamme Rouge gps in Ridewithgps:
starts at 35hm
20 -1 25
27 0 25
20 0 25
14 -1 15
17 -1 5
17 0 5
17 0 5
20 1 15
33 2 35
and then half a km back to 35

for final 3 kms Giro website has 15 to 33 to 22 to 22 , so would be 2 -1 0
so for the full circuit i think of going -1 0 0 -1 -1 0 0 0 1 2 with an extra 0 after the +2 every second lap

opinions?

I don't get it? I added your proposal in bold behind the altitude. And the c4f altitude behind that in normal thingy, unbolded and all.
Why -1 when it goes 3 meters up?
Why +1 when it goes further 3 meters up?
Why +2 when it goes 13 meters up?
To me these 3 all make little sense, especially the -1 when it goes 3 meters up....Why go to 5 meters if it never goes below 14?
The finish is at 20 meters according to La flamme rouge too, going down 1 meter in the last km according to them. Giro 22 to 22.. .So the last km should be a 0 for sure.
And since you start at 35, maybe you got the starting point wrong? Or wrong reading there?

Anyway, I would simply put the last kms from the Giro, 2 -1 0

[lennylenny]

started with the last stage, very annyoing circuit:
9.5km long, per km according to Flamme Rouge gps in Ridewithgps:
starts at 35hm
20 -1 25
27 0 25
20 0 25
14 -1 15
17 -1 5
17 0 5
17 0 5
20 1 15
33 2 35
and then half a km back to 35

for final 3 kms Giro website has 15 to 33 to 22 to 22 , so would be 2 -1 0
so for the full circuit i think of going -1 0 0 -1 -1 0 0 0 1 2 with an extra 0 after the +2 every second lap

opinions?

I don't get it? I added your proposal in bold behind the altitude. And the c4f altitude behind that in normal thingy, unbolded and all.
Why -1 when it goes 3 meters up?
Why +1 when it goes further 3 meters up?
Why +2 when it goes 13 meters up?
To me these 3 all make little sense, especially the -1 when it goes 3 meters up....Why go to 5 meters if it never goes below 14?
The finish is at 20 meters according to La flamme rouge too, going down 1 meter in the last km according to them. Giro 22 to 22.. .So the last km should be a 0 for sure.
And since you start at 35, maybe you got the starting point wrong? Or wrong reading there?

Anyway, I would simply put the last kms from the Giro, 2 -1 0

oh yeah, had a brain fart on that 17, so removing that -1 and the +1 at the 20 after:
20 -1 25
27 0 25
20 0 25
14 -1 15
17 0 15
17 0 15
17 0 15
20 0 15
33 2 35

and the last two km are the first 2kms of the circuit, so would be 2 -1 0 with my proposal anyway

edit: its a +2 because Giro website has last 3 kms as 15, 33, 20, so i want it to be consistent, it is also a +16 in two kms, so 1/1 or 0/2 would both be suitable to represent that

[Hansa]

i startet checking some mountains directly with the data from the official giro site.
for the ITT the last km it shows:



so it would be more like 3-2-4 for the last 3 kms

[Tukhtahuaev]

i startet checking some mountains directly with the data from the official giro site.
for the ITT the last km it shows:



so it would be more like 3-2-4 for the last 3 kms

As the stage is 40.6km I went into a slightly different direction. Last km is only the final 600m at 3%. I just put it at 1% at first to get to the correct height at the finish, but I guess 2% or 3% make more sense for that km

[lennylenny]

Stage 21 complete

[Tukhtahuaev]

Does anyone know if the final 2km of stage 15 are asphalted? Streetview from 2017 shows it as gravel, but nothing on it on the Giro site afaik

[Robyklebt]

From https://www.valtellina.it/it/eventi/apr ... o-d-italia

Segue una breve discesa, e la salita finale composta dal Passo di Eira in cima al quale si segue una strada (asfaltata) che risale la pista del Mottolino.

Asfaltata=asphaltiert in German.

[Tukhtahuaev]

From https://www.valtellina.it/it/eventi/apr ... o-d-italia

Segue una breve discesa, e la salita finale composta dal Passo di Eira in cima al quale si segue una strada (asfaltata) che risale la pista del Mottolino.

Asfaltata=asphaltiert in German.

Thanks. Removed the * then

I will do stages 18 and 19 this weekend. I can already see that taka started with 16, so I think we are only missing stages 17 and 20

[Gipfelstuermer]

I created a Race in the 'Race Editor' where you can add title, categorization and mintact of the stages, if you want.

It also appears in Calendar Preview already, so everyone else can see the details of the profiles.

[Tukhtahuaev]

Giro done now. Feel free to comment on min tact etc. if you feel something should be changed

[Gipfelstuermer]

I publish tomorrow if no comments today, ok ?

[team fl]

proposals for the min tact that differ from the proposal:

- Stage 2: would go earlier, either from 118 (unpopular I guess) or km 133. stage is not too long so action expected there already.
- Stage 8: 152 km only, so I think an early min tact could be possiblt at km 104 f.e.
- Stage 9: Long stage, I know. So km 204 looks okay. I personally would prefer km 175 though, to cover the whole crucial last part of the stage.
- Stage 10: Another short stage, I plead for km 101...
- Stage 11: dangerous km at km 186 for the sprinters, I would go for the min tact there. stage only 5 min longer then...
- Stage 13: Shorter min tact for once: Last 5 km should be enough.
- Stage 19: My inner Monk says it's more ocd friendly to cover all orange kms from km 142
- Stage 21: Last 5 km should be enough here too, although it's so short, 10 km won't hurt either.

But nice job in general!

[lennylenny]

proposals for the min tact that differ from the proposal:


- Stage 21: Last 5 km should be enough here too, although it's so short, 10 km won't hurt either.

But nice job in general!

went for 15km to give everyone a little bit more time to talk abot the whole tour while waiting for one last (propably) sprint

[team fl]

proposals for the min tact that differ from the proposal:


- Stage 21: Last 5 km should be enough here too, although it's so short, 10 km won't hurt either.

But nice job in general!

went for 15km to give everyone a little bit more time to talk abot the whole tour while waiting for one last (propably) sprint

good point, I fully support that!

[Robyklebt]

The Donkey will have comments too, wait a minute, especially Tukh if he's around.... so check again later, might take time...

[Robyklebt]

Stage 2: Mintact either at 104 or 118 or 134.

Stage 4: Longer mintact. 190 km stage. The longer the stage, the longer the mintact makes sense. More on that later

Stage 6: First 2 sectors together 9.2 km, why make it 10? Ok, one in the middle at * to compensate?
Then I'm not completely convinced by the climbs. Second sector is 3 1 7 5 2. La Flamme rouge says the climb is 2.5 km at 6%, click on climb details and it says 3.2 km a 5.3% The 3 km are given as 5.6 6.3 3.8 Of course la Flamme rouge IMO is not the end of all, so checked myself: According to the Giro site the sector starts at 186. Donkey measurements say it then goes up 30 meters, to 217 but on plotaroute it starts at 193, but then down again to 200. The turn off to the climb is at 204 or so. After 1.2 km. Then it's a bit over 3km to the top With plotaroute 260-32x-370
With google earth: Start of the sector at 194, goes up to to 215 in 500 meters, then flat, then after 855 meters down again. 1 km would be at 205 Down to 199, then up again to the turnoff after 1.29km, at 204 altitude. Then it goes up, flattens out again, the real climb starts after 1.92 km, at 230. After 2 km we are at 239. After 3 at 310. After 4 at 362
If we go from the start of the climb, turnoff: 204 262 326-368. That would be 6 6 4. If we start the climb from 1.93 it's 7
3 1 7 5 2.... Can be done in x ways, but this somehow doesn't feel completely right.
First 1.3 km in 2 km would be 2 -1 or 3-2. to end up at 200 for the start of the climb. Then the 3.4 (my measurements give me only 4.6 or 4.7 of gravel, not 4.8 in 3 km from the turnof would be 6 6 4.
Exactly on the km would be 1 4 7 5 1
Ok spent enough time on this...
Next, the hills after that sector. On la Flamme rouge it gives some percentages (still don't trust them fully of course, but won't check) the one at km 158 says 1km a 5.8%, that should be a 6.
Last sector, in 2.4 km according to the Giro site we gain 18 meters, here in 2 km it's 0. Should be up at least 10 meters (for me, this time just plotaroute, we start the sector and finish at 300, so just 10 up ok too)

Stage 7: According to the Gazzetta the last 3 km would be 3 or 4, 2 4. Up 35 meters, 21 and 39. But ok, we finish at the right height, so ok. without change

Stage 8: First climb IMO no 12. See Giro site. 4 10 9 8 7 the first 5 km Also the slight downhill just before the top should be 2 km long, -1 followed by -2

Stage 9: Not convinced by the hills: Especially the one at km 187/188. Gazzetta site speaks of a wall at 14% (that's peak I guess). La flamme rouge says 1.1 km a 6.7%.
Looking at the profile in the editor you have strange readings there... it shows a 7, but another mountain that doesn't seem to be there before.
Couldn't resist and did another plotaroute thing... First hill, climb. IMO starts steep, 7 or even 8, then goes down, then up slowly. Down, sprint, a little rise to 30+ meters, back down to 10, the Lucrino climb, the one you have 4 3 then is a 7 on plotaroute too. Next one at 5 5 I agree. Last one I get more 7 2 4, which is what you have in the editor too, but corrected to 7 3 3
Here of course with IMO a clear additional siebkm at km 188 (IF they have the right road on la flamme rouge, but the Giro site confirms a "wall". an earlier mintact necessary

Stage 11: I plead for earlier mintact. On the 5! (Didn't check the hills)

Stage 13: same, even without 5, earlier mintact

Ah, mintact, short stages, long stages: Don't think only about the time it takes to ride a race, but about when it's sensible to have earlier/later mintact. Short stages? It's high tempo anyway, A 120 km sprint race, we don't need mintact from a gameplay point of view, it's high tempo the whole way, the likelyhood of an attack gaining 25" before somebody reacts is incredibly small.
Long stages on the other hand... 240 km flat let's say, Sprinter teams have to take it slow. Speed up as late as possible. Which opens possibilities for attackers earlier than on a 120 km stage. And in a stage race, where energy management of course is critical it's even more likely that sprinters try to speed up as late as they can. Which again makes the likelyhood of earlier attacks bigger. So long stages need longer mintact to allow for more reaction time for chasers or attackers too actually, organize their groups.

Generally on flat stages: The decisive km is 20 from the end, then mass attacks with mass following are ok. That means that clever managers try the attack BEFORE the sprinter teams speed up because that critical 20 km points comes. So mintact 30 km from the end is very sensible. The Donkey said so. So of course he demands 30 km mintacts, since that seems hopeless I'll settle with 20... just wait until the Donkey designs a stage race again!.

Stage 15: Tired, just deleted what I wrote there too... good it was only 2 lines. Seems fine. Mintact 200 would work too. Then not 30 km I know, but I rather have longer mintacts in flat stages and suffer a shorter mintact in a mountain stage where we all know nothing of importance will happen.... but 190 is fine too.

Ok, give up for today, since tomorrow on, ok ok , give up completely.

Anyway, very happy to see that we finally have a designer for the Giro that looks at the Giro info and draws accordingly!

[Tukhtahuaev]

Stage 2: Mintact either at 104 or 118 or 134.

Stage 4: Longer mintact. 190 km stage. The longer the stage, the longer the mintact makes sense. More on that later

Stage 6: First 2 sectors together 9.2 km, why make it 10? Ok, one in the middle at * to compensate?
Then I'm not completely convinced by the climbs. Second sector is 3 1 7 5 2. La Flamme rouge says the climb is 2.5 km at 6%, click on climb details and it says 3.2 km a 5.3% The 3 km are given as 5.6 6.3 3.8 Of course la Flamme rouge IMO is not the end of all, so checked myself: According to the Giro site the sector starts at 186. Donkey measurements say it then goes up 30 meters, to 217 but on plotaroute it starts at 193, but then down again to 200. The turn off to the climb is at 204 or so. After 1.2 km. Then it's a bit over 3km to the top With plotaroute 260-32x-370
With google earth: Start of the sector at 194, goes up to to 215 in 500 meters, then flat, then after 855 meters down again. 1 km would be at 205 Down to 199, then up again to the turnoff after 1.29km, at 204 altitude. Then it goes up, flattens out again, the real climb starts after 1.92 km, at 230. After 2 km we are at 239. After 3 at 310. After 4 at 362
If we go from the start of the climb, turnoff: 204 262 326-368. That would be 6 6 4. If we start the climb from 1.93 it's 7
3 1 7 5 2.... Can be done in x ways, but this somehow doesn't feel completely right.
First 1.3 km in 2 km would be 2 -1 or 3-2. to end up at 200 for the start of the climb. Then the 3.4 (my measurements give me only 4.6 or 4.7 of gravel, not 4.8 in 3 km from the turnof would be 6 6 4.
Exactly on the km would be 1 4 7 5 1
Ok spent enough time on this...
Next, the hills after that sector. On la Flamme rouge it gives some percentages (still don't trust them fully of course, but won't check) the one at km 158 says 1km a 5.8%, that should be a 6.
Last sector, in 2.4 km according to the Giro site we gain 18 meters, here in 2 km it's 0. Should be up at least 10 meters (for me, this time just plotaroute, we start the sector and finish at 300, so just 10 up ok too)

Stage 7: According to the Gazzetta the last 3 km would be 3 or 4, 2 4. Up 35 meters, 21 and 39. But ok, we finish at the right height, so ok. without change

Stage 8: First climb IMO no 12. See Giro site. 4 10 9 8 7 the first 5 km Also the slight downhill just before the top should be 2 km long, -1 followed by -2

Stage 9: Not convinced by the hills: Especially the one at km 187/188. Gazzetta site speaks of a wall at 14% (that's peak I guess). La flamme rouge says 1.1 km a 6.7%.
Looking at the profile in the editor you have strange readings there... it shows a 7, but another mountain that doesn't seem to be there before.
Couldn't resist and did another plotaroute thing... First hill, climb. IMO starts steep, 7 or even 8, then goes down, then up slowly. Down, sprint, a little rise to 30+ meters, back down to 10, the Lucrino climb, the one you have 4 3 then is a 7 on plotaroute too. Next one at 5 5 I agree. Last one I get more 7 2 4, which is what you have in the editor too, but corrected to 7 3 3
Here of course with IMO a clear additional siebkm at km 188 (IF they have the right road on la flamme rouge, but the Giro site confirms a "wall". an earlier mintact necessary

Stage 11: I plead for earlier mintact. On the 5! (Didn't check the hills)

Stage 13: same, even without 5, earlier mintact

Ah, mintact, short stages, long stages: Don't think only about the time it takes to ride a race, but about when it's sensible to have earlier/later mintact. Short stages? It's high tempo anyway, A 120 km sprint race, we don't need mintact from a gameplay point of view, it's high tempo the whole way, the likelyhood of an attack gaining 25" before somebody reacts is incredibly small.
Long stages on the other hand... 240 km flat let's say, Sprinter teams have to take it slow. Speed up as late as possible. Which opens possibilities for attackers earlier than on a 120 km stage. And in a stage race, where energy management of course is critical it's even more likely that sprinters try to speed up as late as they can. Which again makes the likelyhood of earlier attacks bigger. So long stages need longer mintact to allow for more reaction time for chasers or attackers too actually, organize their groups.

Generally on flat stages: The decisive km is 20 from the end, then mass attacks with mass following are ok. That means that clever managers try the attack BEFORE the sprinter teams speed up because that critical 20 km points comes. So mintact 30 km from the end is very sensible. The Donkey said so. So of course he demands 30 km mintacts, since that seems hopeless I'll settle with 20... just wait until the Donkey designs a stage race again!.

Stage 15: Tired, just deleted what I wrote there too... good it was only 2 lines. Seems fine. Mintact 200 would work too. Then not 30 km I know, but I rather have longer mintacts in flat stages and suffer a shorter mintact in a mountain stage where we all know nothing of importance will happen.... but 190 is fine too.

Ok, give up for today, since tomorrow on, ok ok , give up completely.

Anyway, very happy to see that we finally have a designer for the Giro that looks at the Giro info and draws accordingly!

Took another look at stage 7, since this is mentioned for the second time now. Stage only being 40.6 and not 41 km is the reason for the difference. If I imagine the 600m kilometer a bit earlier instead of the final km it would work out to 12 3 1 2 4 2 4, which I guess makes sense and fits the Giro site too, so I could change it to that

Stage 8 was completely designed from my own route design apart from Prati di Tivo I think. Either the details for those earlier climbs were not available yet or I didn't yet realise that you could switch between the different climbs. Will definitely adjust those

Will look at everything else in more detail tomorrow. I can already tell that stage 6 was an absolute pain to design, so there might be a lot that's not really correct and mintacts where all decided on very hastily

[Tukhtahuaev]

Stage 2: Mintact either at 104 or 118 or 134.

Stage 4: Longer mintact. 190 km stage. The longer the stage, the longer the mintact makes sense. More on that later

Stage 6: First 2 sectors together 9.2 km, why make it 10? Ok, one in the middle at * to compensate?
Then I'm not completely convinced by the climbs. Second sector is 3 1 7 5 2. La Flamme rouge says the climb is 2.5 km at 6%, click on climb details and it says 3.2 km a 5.3% The 3 km are given as 5.6 6.3 3.8 Of course la Flamme rouge IMO is not the end of all, so checked myself: According to the Giro site the sector starts at 186. Donkey measurements say it then goes up 30 meters, to 217 but on plotaroute it starts at 193, but then down again to 200. The turn off to the climb is at 204 or so. After 1.2 km. Then it's a bit over 3km to the top With plotaroute 260-32x-370
With google earth: Start of the sector at 194, goes up to to 215 in 500 meters, then flat, then after 855 meters down again. 1 km would be at 205 Down to 199, then up again to the turnoff after 1.29km, at 204 altitude. Then it goes up, flattens out again, the real climb starts after 1.92 km, at 230. After 2 km we are at 239. After 3 at 310. After 4 at 362
If we go from the start of the climb, turnoff: 204 262 326-368. That would be 6 6 4. If we start the climb from 1.93 it's 7
3 1 7 5 2.... Can be done in x ways, but this somehow doesn't feel completely right.
First 1.3 km in 2 km would be 2 -1 or 3-2. to end up at 200 for the start of the climb. Then the 3.4 (my measurements give me only 4.6 or 4.7 of gravel, not 4.8 in 3 km from the turnof would be 6 6 4.
Exactly on the km would be 1 4 7 5 1
Ok spent enough time on this...
Next, the hills after that sector. On la Flamme rouge it gives some percentages (still don't trust them fully of course, but won't check) the one at km 158 says 1km a 5.8%, that should be a 6.
Last sector, in 2.4 km according to the Giro site we gain 18 meters, here in 2 km it's 0. Should be up at least 10 meters (for me, this time just plotaroute, we start the sector and finish at 300, so just 10 up ok too)

Stage 7: According to the Gazzetta the last 3 km would be 3 or 4, 2 4. Up 35 meters, 21 and 39. But ok, we finish at the right height, so ok. without change

Stage 8: First climb IMO no 12. See Giro site. 4 10 9 8 7 the first 5 km Also the slight downhill just before the top should be 2 km long, -1 followed by -2

Stage 9: Not convinced by the hills: Especially the one at km 187/188. Gazzetta site speaks of a wall at 14% (that's peak I guess). La flamme rouge says 1.1 km a 6.7%.
Looking at the profile in the editor you have strange readings there... it shows a 7, but another mountain that doesn't seem to be there before.
Couldn't resist and did another plotaroute thing... First hill, climb. IMO starts steep, 7 or even 8, then goes down, then up slowly. Down, sprint, a little rise to 30+ meters, back down to 10, the Lucrino climb, the one you have 4 3 then is a 7 on plotaroute too. Next one at 5 5 I agree. Last one I get more 7 2 4, which is what you have in the editor too, but corrected to 7 3 3
Here of course with IMO a clear additional siebkm at km 188 (IF they have the right road on la flamme rouge, but the Giro site confirms a "wall". an earlier mintact necessary

Stage 11: I plead for earlier mintact. On the 5! (Didn't check the hills)

Stage 13: same, even without 5, earlier mintact

Ah, mintact, short stages, long stages: Don't think only about the time it takes to ride a race, but about when it's sensible to have earlier/later mintact. Short stages? It's high tempo anyway, A 120 km sprint race, we don't need mintact from a gameplay point of view, it's high tempo the whole way, the likelyhood of an attack gaining 25" before somebody reacts is incredibly small.
Long stages on the other hand... 240 km flat let's say, Sprinter teams have to take it slow. Speed up as late as possible. Which opens possibilities for attackers earlier than on a 120 km stage. And in a stage race, where energy management of course is critical it's even more likely that sprinters try to speed up as late as they can. Which again makes the likelyhood of earlier attacks bigger. So long stages need longer mintact to allow for more reaction time for chasers or attackers too actually, organize their groups.

Generally on flat stages: The decisive km is 20 from the end, then mass attacks with mass following are ok. That means that clever managers try the attack BEFORE the sprinter teams speed up because that critical 20 km points comes. So mintact 30 km from the end is very sensible. The Donkey said so. So of course he demands 30 km mintacts, since that seems hopeless I'll settle with 20... just wait until the Donkey designs a stage race again!.

Stage 15: Tired, just deleted what I wrote there too... good it was only 2 lines. Seems fine. Mintact 200 would work too. Then not 30 km I know, but I rather have longer mintacts in flat stages and suffer a shorter mintact in a mountain stage where we all know nothing of importance will happen.... but 190 is fine too.

Ok, give up for today, since tomorrow on, ok ok , give up completely.

Anyway, very happy to see that we finally have a designer for the Giro that looks at the Giro info and draws accordingly!

Checking stage 6 now:

After a few stages I completely lost trust in la flamme rouge, so I only used it as a general guideline where the Giro itinerary table didn't give enough information to even know where to go (Which happened way too often, which might explain why flamme rouge sometimes was completely off with the route)

Made it 10km with * in the middle to compensate. Removing that *, but still continuing with ** afterwards would also work, but then imo it should still continue with ** afterwards, because you can't really call those 2 completely separate sectors.

Second sector I started at 185 directly after the roundabout, but now realised that the actual section starts a little bit later, so should be from about 195 instead. Slight uphill combined with the short flat part make up about 700m and gets us to 216m. From there downhill is only 350m and then 800m up to where the real climb starts at 229m. Final 3 km I plotted 302m - 354m - 370m, which would overall make it 2-1-7-5-2.

Your idea of making it 2-1 6 6 4 for sector 2 doesn't sound too bad too. Didn't see that interpretation, but makes sense

Climb at km 158 looked like 5.4% on my gpx, double checked with plotaroute and got 5.5%. Somehow unconvinced by both 5 and 6 here.

Final sector I used a slightly wrong finishing point, from what I see it should be -2 3, instead of -2 2, definitely don't see 18m gain too, so should be +1 overall.

I wouldn't be against changing sector 2 into 2-1 6 6 4 and the final sector to -2 3

Will take a look at stage 9 and update stage 8 later, not sure if I actually have the time to do that early enough to do it before the month change