Which criteria is yours ? Quel critère est le vôtre ?

You know that our superlist is based on three criteria : sport (difficulty), mediatic (wellknown climbs, cycling history) and touristic (scenery,...) criteria. Which one(s) is yours ?
Vous savez que notre superliste est basée sur trois critères : la difficulté sportive, le côté médiatique (ascension connue, histoire du cyclisme) et le côté touristique (paysages,...). Le(s)quel(s) est le vôtre ?
Multiple choices is allowed. Le choix multiple est autorisé.

Hello Daniel and others,

For me the 2 most important reason is the difficulty and bicycle history and the next level is how wonderful, nice the landscape is.

In the hungarian forum I just calculated this years numbers (sumamrized BIG values and the summarized values of the difficulties of the climbs that we climbed in 2010) for the TOP 3 hungarian overall member: Kreicsi Gábor, Karlovitz Kristof and me.

And for me the numbers/values showed everything: who collected more BIGs with less difficulty values and who (me) less BIGs, but with the highest average difficulty level (799 / BIG in 2010).
Other thing is when for example the bicycling history or other thing lift the BIG value of a BIG.

connection: when I will finish uploading my pics abot this year's tour, you will see pics about the Tourmalet history pictures for early 1900s.
That exhibition was a fantastic memory for me ! :-)

It is actually difficult to me answer the question. One factor influence the other two. For example in the '90 Zoncolan was important for the sport (difficulty), then was discovered as a beautiful area and touristic area (Carnia) and then became also mediatic after the discovery by Giro.
The same may be applied to other famous climbs at least in the Alps.

As distribution in all countries/regions, I would add a fourth relevant criterium which can be named as local representiveness. If you visit Provence or Liguria BIG should offer the best in term of sport, tourism and media.
I think the media criteria is the most difficult to evaluate especially if there is no professional race there. Should we consider a successful granfondo to measure the media value ?

Gabriele

gbrunetti wrote:

...Should we consider a successful granfondo to measure the media value ?

Gabriele

Yes, why not ? It's not yet the case in the media score (only professional classics, tours, and pro-tours 5->10pts, other races 1->4 pts). But well, it can be. Ötztaler Radmarathon gives popularity to Timmelsjoch (Rombo), Stalle(r),...

I'm very surprised to see the media's current score. Members come from Italy, Spain, Hungary to see really on the field the famous climbs of Liege-Bastogne-Liege or Tour of Flanders, when you're watching the ranking of the bigs, it's all the classics and great tour's climbs (Galibier, Ventoux, Cauberg, Wanne,...) that are first ranked and no matter the media ?
Why do some foreigners come to climb the Wall in Grammont or Huy, the Koppenberg ? For tourism and nature ? For sport ok , But never because they've watched this climb in the television ????

It's very surprising me, indeed !

Daniel, maybe not the media is the best word why we search for such climbs:
My word for it is: cycling history !

That's true that if I didn't watch those races (true for periods in 1950s, 1960s) I read about them in books, but that is also media.

But not the media is important, but the cycling history!

Gabor

Ohoh ! OK ! It's certainly a translation's problem.
"Mediatique" in french is something like "very well known due to the fact that much people talks about it and that it appears on newspapers, reviews, radios, televisions,..."

Well, replace in the vote "media" with "cycling history" and it would be ok ! But well, the vote is a little bad now !
No worry, it's just a poll to have an idea about the main vision on those criterias, nothing more...

Yes I understand the word and I know that there is strong connection between the 2 words. Because we need media to be an event historical :-)

But if we see it exactly, Poggio on MIlan - san remo is mediatic, but because of it couldbe interesting, but again we are at the point that - with the help of media - it bacame part of wellknown climb and part of cycling history.

So we can speak about it: if a place is well known from media that will it become part of cycling history ?
Only the well-well known.
For example: The climb of HEW classics is known from TV, but isn't interesting for me, but the La Redoute is a climb that is a MUST because of LIege - Bastogne - Liege which is known from TV and is also part of cycling history. :-)

My choice is sport
always sport