Facebook login is not available anymore due to Facebook policy. If you need access to your old account send a mail with username and your actual mail.

IMPORTANT: Routing and Elevation API are limited to 7000 calls per day. In case they are expired, they won't work until limit is re-charged. You can try in this case to do a GPX on RideWithGPS site and import it on the editor

Please don't spam us mail and PMs that we won't answer and notice that the official language of forum is English.

Roadbooks: LINK

Comment with us the races in the discussion thread or in the Telegram Chat

2021 Season Contests
Contest #4: Giro d'Italia - VOTING
Contest #5: Battle of the North

Contest #3 - Improved spring Classics [Cat. 2] - Voting

Compete in the contests and become the best stagemaker!
User avatar
Direttore Sportivo terza divisione
Direttore Sportivo terza divisione
Posts: 813
Joined: 17/05/2011, 15:47
Location: Milano

Contest #3 - Improved spring Classics [Cat. 2] - Voting

Post by emmea90 »

In this topic you can vote for the Improved spring Classics, according to the following rules.


How to vote

1 - You have to judge the track according to the requirements: contests/contest-spring-classics-t7402.html

2 - You have to write in a post your best FIVE routes, from worse to best, providing a brief motivation for each choice




How does it work?
- First choice got 6 points, second 4, third 3, fourth 2 and fifth 1 point.
- Presentation bonus grant you 3 points (we will add later with penalties who took the bonus)
- Ranking will be made according to points obtained
- In case of equality I will decide the winner
- You can also comment other people's reviews regarding your or other one's routes

Who can vote?
- Every user that submitted a contest (full points vote)
- Every user in the La Flamme Rouge Staff (Emmea90, Pigna, Sagan99, Matthorse, Nasdon33, Linkinito, Bose12)
- Every user that has registered BEFORE today and has at least 10 tracks in the editor. In this case, his votes counts half of the points scale

- Every user that submitted a contest and doesn't submit a valid vote (with 5 choices and motivations) will get a 10 points penalty for all his routes.
- It's FORBBIDDEN to ask for votes. Who will be caught public or privately asking for a vote to some users will get a 50 points penalty in first instance, then the exclusion from all the contests of the year
- Vote penalties for unpracticable routes will be assigned by staff during this phase

Requisites for the +3 bonus
- Providing link of the tour in the post
- Providing viewable image of each stage with a description in the post

Deadline for vote phase is june 6, h 23.59

Mauro: maps/tours/view/18494 +4 pres+spoiler
Belgian4444: maps/tours/view/18558 +4 pres+spoiler
Jibvalverde: maps/tours/view/18589 +4 pres+spoiler
Jajoejoe: maps/tours/view/18449 +4 pres+spoiler
Micek_52: maps/tours/view/18622
Diego12Alpe: maps/tours/view/18448 +4 pres+spoiler
AjachiChakrabarti: maps/tours/view/18461 +4 pres+spoiler
JoostvandeBeek: maps/tours/view/18470 +4 pres+spoiler
Software Engineer, Cycling Fanatic
User avatar
Posts: 36
Joined: 08/02/2017, 13:38

Re: Contest #3 - Improved spring Classics [Cat. 2] - Voting

Post by Belgian4444 »

Tough contest, tough to grade since the routes are so varied. :p So I had to work out some sort of system with penalty points, routes with some minor commentary and good routes (E3 and Wevelgem were good for all of them imo).

Since there are only seven, I'll just give my feedback to my two non-selections as well. As usual: if I say nothing about a route, the route mostly had only minor flaws or none. So the feedback may seem a bit too negative.

Multiple red flags: unrealistic final circuit in the Omloop (and P-R as well although less), no Kwaremont in KBK (imo part of the identity), RVV & AGR more as a criterium with the same laps, Brabantse Pijl does not follow the rules of the contest.

Tracking error in KBK I think (downhill Kwaremont and Paterberg), Poggio goes over an unrealistic route (roads are too small), AGR is more of a criterium and Flèche Wallone is unrealistic (5km between Huy climbs).

FIFTH PLACE: AjachiChakrabarti
Heaviest part of the Omloop is in the beginning, it's a too easy towards the end due to the circuit you made. AGR is a criterium, which most did (AGR's loops should all be unique and not the same thing over and over again). Not sure about the Tirasso in San Remo, looks even harder than Le Manie. But some very nice routes otherwise (RVV and Flèche I don't really like as well, but not too major).

FOURTH PLACE: JoostvandeBeek
Lots of good routes, but there are 2 major flaws: San Remo goes over 300km. Would be a different story if it was 299,5, but I feel like going over 300 is kinda cheating? Route is fine otherwise though. And having the finish not on the Mûr in the Flèche is against the identity of the race imo. Without these, you may have gotten first place from me.

THIRD PLACE: Diego12Alpe
One major issue: length of the Strade. Only other minor flaws is using too many southern (below Oudenaarde/Brakel) sections in the Omloop, which kinda goes in against the identity of the race as that's KBK territory & I feel like the AGR goes back to the same issues it had before the changes the past few years.

Only minor issues: going south in the Omloop & long section of flat after the Molenberg in RVV. Rest is fine, but you lose out on first due to having kept 3 routes the same.

FIRST PLACE: Jibvalverde
Going north in KBK, finale seems a bit late in the RVV (but I'm on the fence with that). Same doubts on if AGR is hard enough and if LBL's final climb isn't too far, but these are just doubts and not really issues.
User avatar
Posts: 31
Joined: 16/10/2019, 21:43

Re: Contest #3 - Improved spring Classics [Cat. 2] - Voting

Post by Micek_52 »

As usual I scored using a points system, although this time i gave 6 points for the best classic, down to zero for the worst one. The only exceptions were E3 and BP with 3 points and SP with 4 points. The maximum achievable score was therfore 70.

1st - Diego12Alpe - 49 points
You did a really good job with Roubaix and Strade Bianche, I liked how much tougher you made them. The only really bad track was your Scheldeprijs with too many cobbled sections, which in my opinion ruin the idea of a sprinters race. All other tracks were good or at least sufficient.

2nd - Jajoejoe - 45 points
You had the same amount of points as my third place, and you got second because of a very good Fleche Wallone. Otherwise, I was not convinced by your OHN, and some of the races were kind of lost in the average. Overall, still nice.

3rd - AjachiChakrabarti - 45 points
Simmilar quality as Jajoejoe. Some races were good, some were lost in the average, and again one really bad race - Ronde van Vlaanderen. In my opinion Kwaremont/Paterberg in the final kilometres is part of the race identity.

4th - Belgian4444 - 40 points
Gent-Wevelgem lacked the actual climbs used in the race, again not the best Ronde finish and Roubaix was too long (275km). On the plus side OHN and Sanremo were quite good.

5th - Jibvalverde - 34 points
Three races with zero points - Kuurne/Bruxelles/Kuurne (as it has too many climbs), AGR (didn't like the finish) and Liege (also an anti-climatic finish). Other races were ok, with Milano-Sanremo being my favourite.

Honorable mentions:
6th - JoostvandeBeek - 31 points
7th - Mauro - 27 points
User avatar
Posts: 26
Joined: 28/03/2015, 11:54

Re: Contest #3 - Improved spring Classics [Cat. 2] - Voting

Post by Diego12Alpe »

Here are my votes:

1st | JoostvandeBeek:
- Omloop: I think your race is not hard enough before the last climb to make there the difference and then see a little group going trough the last cobbled sectors
- Kuurne: In my opinion yours is the best Kuurne, the only thing I could say is that it is 2,5km above the 200km limit
- Strade: Two sectors added after the two main ones, I think that won't change the race too much
- Sanremo: Two main things, in my opinion adding Bussana between Cipressa and the Poggio is making the race almost impossible for the sprinters. The other issue is that you make the race again over the limit, despite being only 500m
- Harelbeke: A few changes are needed, at least changing a climb for other next to it or something like that. I don't like to see the race just as it is in real life
- Gent-Wevelgem: I like the idea of making the race a little bit different adding the Kasselberg but I don't like the climbs being too much close to each other in the last part
- Ronde: I don't like the Kapelmuur - Bosberg as last climbs of this race, but I think you made it very interesting with those two climbs at the end of it
- Scheldeprijs: I love this race. You have made even more important the first part adding more narrow roads exposed to the wind and after that you decided to go straight to the finish circuit in Schoten.
- Paris-Roubaix: I would like a few changes, at least adding or deleting one or two cobbled sectors
- Brabantse Pijl: I like your final circuit but honestly I don't know if we can consider Overijse as part of the race identity
- Amstel: Good one, if you want to finish in Maastricht you can't do the race much harder than you did
- Flèche: I would love to see this race, but I think finishing in the Mur de Huy is the identity of this race
- Liège: You made the race a little bit harder before La Redoute and added one last climb after Roche-aux-Faucons, I like it

2nd | jibvalverde:
- Omloop: Overall the race is good, but I think there are too much hills in the first part of the race that are not going to make any difference
- Kuurne: Too much climbs in the first part of the race. The middle part of the race is good
- Strade: Only one white road section added in the middle part which is not a big change but that can change a lot the race because there are five big sections very near to each other
- Sanremo: Too hard that side of Cipressa
- Harelbeke: In my opinion Kapelmuur is not part of the identity of this race, but it is the Paterberg - Oude Kwaremont in the final part and you didn't add it
- Gent-Wevelgem: Not much different, any climb or cobbled sector moved or changed
- Ronde: Very good race, I like the way you added the Kapelmuur in the middle part of it
- Scheldeprijs: I like the final circuit a lot. There are windy roads in your race but I think those should be a little bit narrower and with more turns and changes of direction
- Paris-Roubaix: I would like to see a few changes, at least adding or deleting one or two cobbled sectors
- Brabantse Pijl: I like the way you made a little bit harder the race in the middle part. In the last circuit I would like to see the climbs closer to each other
- Amstel: Good race if your idea is to see the riders attack from far, but I would like to see some of the hardest climbs nearer the finish of the race
- Flèche: Good final part of the race, using Deux Thiers instead of the typical climbs of Cherave
- Liège: I understand that you want to make La Redoute the main climb of the race and I like it, but I think you should add Roche-aux-Faucons to the race

3rd | jajoejoe:
- Omloop: This is the best you could do if you wanted to finish the race in Gent. I like the finish in Ninove but this race is great
- Kuurne: Good amount of cobbled sectors and climbs. I would like to see a few more distance between the Kluisberg and the finish line
- Strade: Not a bad one, a few more white roads added but those won't make much difference
- Sanremo: Great race maintaining the finish but giving the option if someone want to make the race a little bit harder or try a very long attack
- Harelbeke: Not much changes but this is a nice race
- Gent-Wevelgem: The only thing you changed is make the race shorter and I don't like that
- Ronde: Good race, a little bit of everything through all the race
- Scheldeprijs: I would like to see a few changes and not the same race as in real life
- Paris-Roubaix: I would like a few changes, at least adding or deleting one or two cobbled sectors
- Brabantse Pijl: Good race. A few more cobbled sectors added and a few changes in the final circuit
- Amstel: The same race as in real life, I just don't like to see any changes
- Flèche: I like your final circuit, five climbs on it would reduce a lot the group which is going to fight for the win
- Liège: Almost the same race only adding three more climbs and deleting one. I think this is the perfect example of how to modify a little bit a race that you like how it is in real life. I like it

4th | Belgian4444:
- Omloop: More or less the same amount of hills and cobbled sectors as in real life so that's good. I'd like to see a few more cobbled sector in the final part of the race but it is a good one
- Kuurne: I think the climbs are too close to the finish of the race and also there are a lot of them and very close to each other. That will make it very difficult for sprinters to fight for the win
- Strade: A few more km and a few more white roads sections, I like it. Also having the two main sectors at more distance of the finish line could mean seeing attacks from longer
- Sanremo: Too hard that side of Cipressa and good idea adding that little climb at the end to make the race different but I think that the Poggio must be the final climb in this race
- Harelbeke: Maybe too much cobbled sectors in the first part of the race
- Gent-Wevelgem: Too much climbs together which are not very hard but will make it impossible for sprinter to come back after the Kemmelberg
- Ronde: You added cobbled sectors and hills which is not bad at all but adding the Koppenberg after the Paterberg makes that then is too much distance to the Oude Kwaremont again. I think the last climbs of this race should be Oude Kwaremont and then Paterberg
- Scheldeprijs: Apparently not much changed but I think you should have kept some of the narrow and twisty roads in the first part of the race which are the ones with a lot of wind and part of the identity of it
- Paris-Roubaix: I like the idea of not giving any rest after Arenberg, but I think in the end you have made your race with the same distance from Arenberg to the next cobbled sector as in the real race. I don't like that between the sectors 16 and 22 there are that much KMs without cobbles despite being a good idea to add Phalempin à Gondecourt
- Brabantse Pijl: A few changes in the last circuit, not a bad race
- Amstel: Good race, trying to have the hardest climbs near the finish and without time to rest between them
- Flèche: I like your final circuit, I like to see more climbs near the Mur de Huy
- Liège: Good race, maybe the final part of the race would be more interesting with three climbs after Roche-aux-Faucouns

5th | AjachiChakrabarti:
- Omloop: I don't see the point of having all the cobbled sectors and climbs in the first part of the race and the doing a circuit with Kampelmuur and Bosberg
- Kuurne: Too much cobbled sectors at the start, any climb in the middle part of the race and the final climbs too close to the finish line. Also your are above of 200km
- Strade: Good idea, the main white roads sectors are in the middle of the race and in the last part there are little ones but very hard
- Sanremo: I like the idea of adding another climb before the Capos but Monte Tirasso is too much hard
- Harelbeke: Too much climbs since the start, this looks more like a Ronde van Vlaanderen
- Gent-Wevelgem: Any change in the second part of the race but at least you added some cobbled sectors in the first part which could be interesting for the race considering also the wind
- Ronde: I like the addition of the Kemmelberg at the start because that is also an important climb in Flanders. Also good addition of the Kapelmuur. But I think in your race the real action and hard part starts too late and I don't like those for climbs after the Oude Kwaremont - Parerberg because are too close to the finish line
- Scheldeprijs: The identity of this race is narrow roads in the first part of the race with a lot of wind and the final circuit in Schoten. I think you should have kept at least the Schoten circuit
- Paris-Roubaix: I would like a few changes, at least adding or deleting one or two cobbled sectors
- Brabantse Pijl: Good changes in your final circuit, you change the direction of it and add two climbs
- Amstel: I think the last circuit is not as hard as the first one and I don't like that. I also think that a part of the identity of the race is to climb as many hills as possible in the region
- Flèche: Good final circuit with hard climbs near the finish
- Liège: Very good race. Not much changes but adding those two climbs after Roche-aux-Faucons can make the race better

6th | Micek_52:
- Omloop: It is true that some of the cobbled sectors and hills of the first part of the race in real life don't make any difference but despite of that I would like to see a few more in the first part of your race
- Kuurne: I just don't understand this race
- Strade: A lot of white roads sections but I think 173km is too short for this race
- Sanremo: Why make Turchino harder and add another climb before it. Also I don't see the point of making Cipressa and Poggio climbs that could be in Liege-Bastogne-Liege
- Harelbeke: Exactly the same race as in real life, I think you should have made at least a few changes that don't change the identity of the race
- Gent-Wevelgem: Climbs are too near to each other and I don't like the idea of making a circuit
- Ronde: I like the way you added the Kapelmuur. But I think the first Oude Kwaremont is too soon in the race. I also think the second and third pass through the Oude Kwaremont and Paterberg are very close to each other. Other issue is that I don't see the Koppenberg in your race
- Scheldeprijs: I would like to see a few changes and not the same race as in real life
- Paris-Roubaix: Carrefour de l'Abre and some of the last sectors in the wrong way
- Brabantse Pijl: A few changes to the original race are something I'd like to see
- Amstel: I just don't like the last circuit
- Flèche: It is not possible to climb the Mur de Huy two times in the last five KMs
- Liège: I think the race is much better ending in Liège with a downhill instead of in a climb

7th |mauro:
- Omloop: Too many climbs trough the race and only a few cobbled sectors at the end, not good at all. Also it is not realistic having that circuit in the middle part of the race
- Kuurne: I think you changed completely the identity of the race, instead of having climbs and cobbled sectors in the middle part you decided to put them in the start and finish parts
- Strade: Less white roads at the start, one more in the final part. I think it is a very simple one
- Sanremo: Any change but the Cipressa. I think that side of the climb is too hard for this race
- Harelbeke: Firstly, I think Kapelmuur is not a climb for this race and less if it is at the start. What I think is the identity of this race is the Paterberg - Oude Kwaremont just at the end and you didn't do that. I also think it has no sense making a circuit in the middle part of the race
- Gent-Wevelgem: Too much of everything and again I don't understand why you make little circuits everywhere
- Ronde: Circuits everywhere
- Scheldeprijs: I don't understand why you have been making circuits in all the races and in this one which ends in a circuit you didn't. Also I think this race should start in the Netherlands
- Paris-Roubaix: Roubaix is not a race with circuits
- Brabantse Pijl: If you have made your race end in Overijse with that circuit it would be a great one
- Amstel: I don't like the last circuit, is not hard enough
- Flèche: Your changes don't make the race much harder than it is now
- Liège: Where is Côte de Saint-Roche and Roche-aux-Faucons?
User avatar
Posts: 103
Joined: 16/11/2017, 5:28

Re: Contest #3 - Improved spring Classics [Cat. 2] - Voting

Post by jibvalverde »

FIFTH PLACE – jajoejoe
Few little red flags for me to really like your races. Not fan of the final in Amstel, too much cobbles in Ronde, I really don’t like Gent for arrival in Het Nieuwsblad and La Manie was the period of the worst Milan-SanRemo. I love your Liege however.

FOURTH PLACE – Diego12Alpe
Pian del Corsi was a great idea for SanRemo but why a so tough road after that ? Too bad… Amstel without Keutenberg is not an Amstel (even with Berghof). Your other races are pretty good but these two really bother me.

THIRD PLACE – JoostvandeBeek
Probably the nicest Liege of all and a really good work pretty everywhere. But you lost places because or your choice of arrival in some races, like Gent fort Het Nieuwsblad or Alsemberg for Brabantse. Really not what I expected and not in the spirit of the race i think.

SECOND PLACE - AjachiChakrabarti
Nice work in Flanders classics but I think SanRemo need a little more mountain so so much ^^ And Keutenberg in descent is impossible ! Otherwise, it’s a really good job.

FIRST PLACE - Belgian4444
Not a fan of your SanRemo, too much for attackers but I really love the others race. Nice idea for the Ronde and I love your final in Liege.
User avatar
Posts: 24
Joined: 24/08/2016, 9:34
Location: Eindhoven

Re: Contest #3 - Improved spring Classics [Cat. 2] - Voting

Post by JoostvandeBeek »

Seventh place: mauro: Your Brabantse Pijl did not meet the requirements so I did not even rate that, and the rest of your Flanders classics had weird circuits everywhere, which did not add to the race in any way. Your Kuurne is totally out of line with the tradition of the race (They did not go to Brussels since 1968) and the same goes for the Scheldeprijs, which has never gone outside the province of Antwerp before they decided on the extra echelon section. For your Ardennes Classics, I'm not a fan of your Amstel, because the final circuits at the end have proven to make for a very boring race and your FdW is not hard enough. I did not understand your LBL, adding the climbs in the north of Liège did not add to the race and there is no historical connection at all.

Sixth place: Micek_52: Too little changes made to the routes and the changes you made were questionable. KBK again has nothing to do with Brussels, and the route is way too easy, Strade and MSR are too hard. Your Gent-Wevelgem ends with the useless plugstreets, which virtually add nothing to the race at all. For your ronde I like that you go back to the old final with the Muur and the Bosberg, but the extra lap over these hills make it a weird and impractical route. For P-R I like the effort, but again I think the race will become too hard. AGR ends 6 with laps (!), which make it a boring WC course. Your FW is just impossible with the two Murs in the final 5 km. LBL is fine except for the final stretch.

Fith place:AjachiChakrabarti: I really don't like your Omloop with the two circuits at the final, too much like the final stage of the Binckbank Tour and not like a classic race. KBK's identity is not Brussels (!) and too little going on the middle of the race. Your Strade has too much climbing stretches in the final. I like your MSR, the Alassio climb is good addition to tire the sprinters without making them chanceless. E3 and GW are fine. Your Ronde idea does not excite me at all as the climbs are too close to the finish, which would make the race too much of a waiting game. The Scheldeprijs and Brabantse Pijl were decent. AGR has too many laps. Your FW final is decent, but again I don't like the repetitive circuits. For your LBL, adding the Pierreuse as the final climb will make it too much of a waiting game and I don't think cobbles should be present in the final of LBL.

Fourth place: Jibvalverde: I thought that your Strade had too little changes in the end, where it needed it the most, I don't like the idea of shortening the riviera section for MSR, as for me it defines the race, and the Cipressa from that side is too hard. I don't like the addition of the Varent in your RVV, as I think the RVV should be decided on a climb. I like your AGR with the finish in Maastricht but the Eyserbosweg and Keutenberg are too far from the finish. Your Liège is good and I would love to see this parcours one day. For the rest of the races they were good, but nothing special

Third place: Diego12Aple: Your added some nice sectors in your Strade Bianche without making the race too difficult, and your MSR is certainly an interesting parcours, maybe a little bit on the hard side. I did not like your GW with the plugstreets in the end and your Scheldeprijs had too many cobbles. I like the addition of the Karnemelkbeekstraat to the RVV. I did not really like your AGR and LBL however, the Cauberg in the final km's freezes the race in AGR and I don't see the point of making LBL harder in the middle without removing the Roche-aux-Faucons in the end.

Second place: Belgian444: Overall some good races. Not a fan of your OHN, but the KBK was good. Interesting changes in Strade, although I think it would make it too much of a climbers race. For your MSR, adding the Via Duca Degli Abruzzi does not really work for me, as it rules out the sprinters. Your GW was the best with the addition of the French Flemish climbs and removal of the useless plugstreets. Your Ronde is certainly interesting, but the final 30 km is too flat and I don't think the Kopppenberg that late in the final is practical. I like that you tried to change PR, but now there is too much flat roads after Mons-en-Pevèle. Your BP was the best and did include the Bruine Put and Alsemberg, which was a plus for me. I'm not a fan of the AGR with the Cauberg in the end. I like your LBL although I think the Saint-Nicolas is a little too close to the finish.

First place: Jajoejoe : The best OHN, by removing the finish to Gent where it should be. Your MSR is the closest to the race identity and hardens it. I like your change to the E3 and if you want to keep the finish of the RVV in Oudenaarde this route is the best. Leaving the Amstel like this is a good decision and I really like your LBL-idea. Overall some very solid routes, with no real flaws
User avatar
Posts: 59
Joined: 13/01/2019, 18:56

Re: Contest #3 - Improved spring Classics [Cat. 2] - Voting

Post by jajoejoe »

7th place: Micek
Omloop: Shame you didn’t change it because there is a lot to improve
Kuurne: Same as Mauro, making the route touch Brussels means it completely diminishes it’s 50/50 identity. Your race will be a 100% mass sprint
Strade: Downhill finish. Don’t know why you think that’s good but it’s just as stupid as it can be.
MSR: Steep poggio and Cipressa diminish the identity of the race.
E3: Not changing anything is fine if you give a good reason. Not like this.
GW: Your G-W is actually decent. Start in Gent and a great hard part of the race.
Ronde: I’m not a big fan of Muur-Bosberg but this way it’s ok.
Scheldeprijs: Here you also didn’t make any real changes but now a good reason because it doesn’t need any.
P-R: t’s decent.
Brabantse pijl: Again not a good reason not to change it.
AGR: Cauberg as final climb should never be done again. Also they use a different final lap in real life. Not this one.
FW: Final lap is way too short. It won’t work logistically.
LBL: Uphill finish won’t work. There is a reason they moved the finish to the flat and that is that it otherwise will be a waiting game.

6th place: Mauro
Omloop: Muur-Bosberg doesn’t really work as a whole and with the finish even further away it won’t work more. Te part before that doesn’t show much inspiration with a local lap of non cobbled climbs.
Kuurne: I like the idea of actually touching Brussels, but with staying under the 200km mark it doesn’t work and violates the rule that a race has to keep it’s identity, and that is that both attackers and sprinters can win, this version will be a 100% mass sprint.
Strade: So you added 2 new sectors which are okay, but you took away the whole first part to montalcino, why? It’s an essential part of the route which tests riders early on. Now the race is shorter and way easier
MSR: You kept it unchanged pretty much, don’t like the change away from Via Roma, like changing the P-R finish away from the velodrome like TdF 2018.
E3: Also pretty ok, but removing the Oude Kwaremont in a race nicknamed mini Ronde van Vlaanderen is a no go.
GW: Now this variant by you has the same problem as KBK but the other way around, there it was favoured more to sprinters, now more for attackers. Also removing the passage through de Moeren is a big fat no. This is not Gent-Wevelgem anymore.
Ronde: Your Ronde is a big hot mess, I’m sorry. The finish is terrible as well with a hairpin just before the finish.
Scheldeprijs: A really good and fun alternative to the real variant. It follows the Schelde really nicely just like it should be. The end is well changed but still keeps it’s identity. Well Done!
P-R: It was a nice idea to do that circuit, but it practically won’t work, it’s too short which means that basically all the riders and traffic from the front group will be there at the same time as all the traffic and riders at the back, concluding in a big logistical mess there..
Brabantse pijl: It’s a good idea to do route as a practice for the World Championships.
AGR: The Cauberg-Bemelerberg local circuit just doesn’t work. It’s dull and doesn’t invite anything. There is a reason they removed the Cauberg from the original AGR finale. 0/10
FW: It’s a pretty good idea but I would have added another climb between de Neuville and Ben-Ahin
LBL: Why remove Roche-aux-Faucons? it’s not like it’s too far away from your route, you just make it worse by forcing a change, sometimes it good to leave things unchanged. The finish isn’t good at all man, the 2 climbs after Saint-Nicolas also don’t add a lot to the race as they aren’t steep enough to make a difference, furthermore your finish is just like Ronde van Vlaanderen not good enough, to much (sharp) corners. Please pay more attention to this

5th place: AjachiChakrabarti
Omloop: I like the idea to put focus on Muur-Bosberg. I said earlier I don’t like the normal Muur-Bosberg, but this has potential. Just like that stage in the BinckBank Tour.
Kuurne: In general great but the finish is terrible. Too close after a corner.
Strade: Some great changes to the route. A longer final loop around Siena instead of the dull up and down section through the city.
MSR: This route is great but I would have introduced a similar climb like the Tirasso a bit earlier on because now sprinters will maybe not survive
E3: Nothing much to say here. Good route
GW: Great great changes. Overall really good.
Ronde: i’m not even gonna give some feedback here because of the horrible horrible finish. Why man?
Scheldeprijs: Decent route. Maybe not so good to remove the local circuit.
P-R: Unchanged which is ok.
Brabantse pijl: Great changes and introduced the World Championships parcours this year. 8/10
AGR: No. Just No. Limburg has so much more to offer than this.
FW: great route, hard route just good.
LBL: It’s a bit meh but good enough. Don’t know if a cobbled climb is the best.

4th place: JoostvandenBeek
Omloop: Finish in Gent so +1 automatically. Great route and something different than Muur-Bosberg
Kuurne: not much to say here. Decent route
Strade: Filled in some gaps good. Also decent
MSR: Not a big fan of the extra climb. It’s not hard but it’s a bit meh. But nor bad enough to completely make me despise this route
E3: Unchanged which is ok
GW: Also not much to say as it’s just a good route
Ronde: I think you executed a Muur-Bosberg finish well here.
Scheldeprijs: Think removing the local circuits isn’t really great, but also not terrible.
P-R: unchanged but that’s good
Brabantse pijl: I like the originality here. Increasing the difficulty but not too hard
AGR: Instead of Jibvalverde you ised smaller roads to go to Maastricht which is good. But your finish is just after a corner
FW: Finish after Mur would be better, but now the finish is immediately after Mur which won’t change a thing. Will make gaps even smaller I think.
LBL: great route. Nicely done.

3rd place:Belgian4444
Omloop: You added the Congoberg after which is nice as it shortens the otherwise pretty much long and straight flat road to the finish. As said earlier not a big fan of Muur-Bosberg but it’s not too bad
Kuurne: I like this one, instead of adding more climbs and cobbles, you concentrated them more together instead of the normally spread out nature of them, creating a certain level of difficulty in another way than other races
Strade: You made Strade really really hard and I don’t know if that is necessarily better.
MSR: Adding that last small point climb really is a mistake I think. Part of the Milan-San Remo is the exciting tactical battle on the flat part after it. It makes the outcome even more uncertain and more exciting to watch. Adding that climb would add a degree of certainty, instead of Poggio attackers holding a bit back on the flat creating those exciting battles between different groups, they will just power through and increase their advantage on the following climb.
E3: Small changes, but good ones as it doesn’t really need a lot.
GW: So also here the passage through De Moeren is removed which is just really sad. On top of that It just completely removes the chances sprinters have as it’s already barley possible for them now. E.g Sam Bennett and Danny van Poppel this year
Ronde: Some nice changes, but choosing a straight road from the Koppenberg to the bottom of the Kwaremont may not favour attackers. There’s a bunch of smaller twistier roads parralel to it.
Scheldeprijs: I mean it’s just fine. Great thoughts about the finish
P-R: Also some nice small changes to the route
Brabantse pijl: Also not much to say about it here
AGR: Everything is good untill the finale. Cauberg finish will make it a waiting game no matter what you put in front of it.
FW: Some good changes here too
LBL: Finale is not great. The 2 climbs between Saint-Nicolas and Roche will just make riders more timid to attack on the Roche, the 2 climbs after aren’t steep enough to make a difference either

2nd place: Jibvalverde
Omloop:- it’s a great route, but for me it’s maybe too hard now and too much Ex-Ronde van Vlaanderen than a semiclassic should be.
Kuurne: - Not a lot of changes but that’s ok. Don’t think the newly added part woll change a lot but it’s something.
Strade: - The change with Monte Sante Marie is a great one. But the Montalcino one is maybe impractible. The tower they pass through at the end isn’t really wide but maybe it can work. Btw you didn’t mark it but those last steep kilometers are on gravel.
MSR: - It’s some decent changes. Not much to say about it
E3: - Idem
GW: - Gent-Wevelgem isn’t a race that needs big changes and you did that really well.
Ronde: - Don’t know if the Varentstraat is a great idea, but it’s always worth a try. It at least solves the Chasse Patate after the Paterberg
Scheldeprijs: - It’s all good untill you arrive at the finish. A hairpin so close before the line is absolutely abismal and shouldn’t be in the unofficial World Championship for sprinters.
P-R: - You didn’t change a thing and there’s nothing wrong with that.
Brabantse pijl: - I think it’s great to make the route harder in the first part because the second part lacks difficulty.
AGR: - I like the idea of putting the finish in Maastricht, but the roads you used to get there are long, straight, wide roads which won’t suit attackers at all. Also would be better to return back to the finish on the Maasboulevard in Maastricht to keep it more to the history of the race
FW: - It’s decent. I think everyone here has almost the same route as eachother so hard to judge
LBL: - A good idea to put Redoute as last, but not executed well. Again like AGR too long straight wide roads. What it does is that gives a psychological advantage to chasers because they see who they chase. Also removing Roche-aux-Faucons is not done

1st place: Diego12alpe
Omloop: Muur-Bosberg again not my favourite, but I mean gain it’s ok.
Kuurne: So the route has become a little too hard from my liking. Adding the extra turns in the final circuit is a great idea, but Myself I would have aded them in the first part of the circuit to still make sure the sprint preperation is too dangerous.
Strade: If I was a nitpicker I would criticize going over 200km but it’s not a big deal. This race just overall has some good changes to it.
MSR: I’m a bit torn in this one because I think it’s gonne be a bit too hard for sprinters this way, but maybe also not.
E3: You changed the race well to suit the nickname Mini Ronde.
GW: Also here some great changes. Not too drastic but good enough to make a positive impact
Ronde: Just like the previous races not much to say about it. It’s just decent.
Scheldeprijs: You made this race easier for attackers, which shouldn’t be the case for the unoffcial sprinters World Championship.
P-R: Small decent changes. It’s ok
Brabantse pijl: Good changes to make the local circuit harder as that is what this race lacks.
AGR: Just like I said earlier. Cauberg as last climb will never work. No matter what you put in front of it. It will always be a waiting game. Removing Keutenberg is alsoo a bad decision as it’s one of the most iconic climbs in The Netherlands. The climb you called Berghof is called Doodeman by the way.
FW: Great changes, but I think everyone changed it to this so it’s just good
LBL: It’s a great solution, the finale isn’t the problem in LBL and you solved it nicely.
User avatar
Posts: 26
Joined: 18/07/2019, 18:44

Re: Contest #3 - Improved spring Classics [Cat. 2] - Voting

Post by AjachiChakrabarti »

I like your intent on many of the routes, and love your Koppenberg-focussed Ronde.

FOURTH PLACE: jajoejoe
Great Ardennes week, with probably the best Flèche route in the contest.

THIRD PLACE: Joostvandebeek
I like your retro routes, but don't like that Flèche does not end on top of the Mur de Huy.

I like that you make the plugstreet more prominent in Gent - Wevelgem, and that you added some difficulty to the early final at MSR.

FIRST PLACE: jibvalverde
I love your MSR and LBL, and your changes to the other routes make a lot of sense.
User avatar
Direttore Sportivo terza divisione
Direttore Sportivo terza divisione
Posts: 813
Joined: 17/05/2011, 15:47
Location: Milano

Re: Contest #3 - Improved spring Classics [Cat. 2] - Voting

Post by emmea90 »

Final classification of Contest #3
JibValverde 29
Diego12Alpe 26
Jajoejoe 24
Belgian4444 21
Joostvandebeek 20
AjachiChakrabarti 15
Micek_52 0
Mauro -5
Software Engineer, Cycling Fanatic