91st Ronde - April 8, 2007

The route for the 2007 Ronde van Vlaanderen or
Tour of Flanders will be rolled out today

Davey figured some bikie news would make a change
from the usual pharmacological speculations that
have become almost 'de rigeur' in RBR of late

The route isn't expected to differ much from
previous years but the final decision will be made
having regard to meteorological and route
accessibility factors prevailing at the start
on April 8

But it is almost a virtual certainty that it will
start in Brugge and end in Meerbeke

--
Davey

On 07-11-2006 11:41, in article , "slackrat"
wrote:

The route isn't expected to differ much from
previous years but the final decision will be made
having regard to meteorological and route
accessibility factors prevailing at the start
on April 8

But it is almost a virtual certainty that it will
start in Brugge and end in Meerbeke

One thing's for sure yet, no Koppenberg in 2007.
Apparently the road condition is too bad.

Koen

koendp wrote:
On 07-11-2006 11:41, in article , "slackrat"
wrote:

The route isn't expected to differ much from
previous years but the final decision will be made
having regard to meteorological and route
accessibility factors prevailing at the start
on April 8

But it is almost a virtual certainty that it will
start in Brugge and end in Meerbeke

One thing's for sure yet, no Koppenberg in 2007.
Apparently the road condition is too bad.

Koen

bummer... but apparently the gaps between the cobbles are too wide.
Well, for a road that's been there 1800 years, and cobbles that date
back to about 300 years or whatever, it's not hard to understand.

There's plenty of other narstee climbs... the paterberg is horrendous!

Marlene Blanshay wrote:
bummer... but apparently the gaps between the cobbles are too wide.
Well, for a road that's been there 1800 years, and cobbles that date
back to about 300 years or whatever, it's not hard to understand.

But it was completely repaved a few years back!
http://www.grahamwatson.com/2002/kop...ppencover.html

--
E. Dronkert

In article ,
Ewoud Dronkert wrote:

Marlene Blanshay wrote:
bummer... but apparently the gaps between the cobbles are too wide.
Well, for a road that's been there 1800 years, and cobbles that date
back to about 300 years or whatever, it's not hard to understand.

But it was completely repaved a few years back!
http://www.grahamwatson.com/2002/kop...ppencover.html

Poor Jespy Skibby. That series of shots is so cool. I wonder what he thinks about
that now?

--
tanx,
Howard

Never take a tenant with a monkey.

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?

Ewoud Dronkert à écrit:

Marlene Blanshay wrote:
bummer... but apparently the gaps between the cobbles are too
wide. Well, for a road that's been there 1800 years, and cobbles
that date back to about 300 years or whatever, it's not hard to
understand.

But it was completely repaved a few years back!

Probably to 'European' specifications as mandated by those overpaid
idiots that lay down the laws for the European Common CessPoool in
Brussels and Strassbourg

But at least the Kappelmur/Grammont/Geraardsbergen clmb is still
rideable, even if the local Burgmeister has banned the throwing away
of waterbottles and other cycling refuse on the Kappelmur

--
Davey
Votez LePen et Front National
EEC? Dit 'NON'

On 8 nov, 03:03, Ewoud Dronkert wrote:
Marlene Blanshay wrote:
bummer... but apparently the gaps between the cobbles are too wide.
Well, for a road that's been there 1800 years, and cobbles that date
back to about 300 years or whatever, it's not hard to understand.But it was completely repaved a few years back!http://www.grahamwatson.com/2002/kop...ppencover.html

--
E. Dronkert

Indeed, it was. I went to see the Koppenbergcross last week and i have
to tell you all the work they did 5 years ago seems to be lost. I
don't know what happened but there were some nasty gaps between the
cobbles (often 2 tires wide), it was slippery (fall= wet + rotting
leafs), a lot of moss too.

The Muur of Geraardsbergen was also repaved 3 years ago but he doesn't
show any signs of decline. But what did happen on the Muur is that the
cobbles seem to be pivoted a bit around their horizontal axes. Their
sharp edges are now at the surface which makes that the surface in
general seems less "flat" and that you "feel" the cobbles a lot more.

Both the climbs are only used in 2 pro races: the Muur in the Omloop
Het Volk and the Ronde, the Koppenberg in the Ronde and partially in
the Koppenbergcross. Both also have trees along the climb which makes
them dark and often wet. But the main difference is that only the
Koppenberg is open for traffic. I think that is the main cause of this
increasing deterioration. It should be a good idea not to have cars
riding over this monument.

Anyway the Ronde won't be less hard without the Koppenberg. I even
think it's a good idea not to climb it in 2007.

Kenny

On 08-11-2006 09:58, in article
, "Kenny"
wrote:



On 8 nov, 03:03, Ewoud Dronkert wrote:
Marlene Blanshay wrote:
bummer... but apparently the gaps between the cobbles are too wide.
Well, for a road that's been there 1800 years, and cobbles that date
back to about 300 years or whatever, it's not hard to understand.But it was
completely repaved a few years
back!http://www.grahamwatson.com/2002/kop...ppencover.html

--
E. Dronkert

Indeed, it was. I went to see the Koppenbergcross last week and i have
to tell you all the work they did 5 years ago seems to be lost. I
don't know what happened but there were some nasty gaps between the
cobbles (often 2 tires wide), it was slippery (fall= wet + rotting
leafs), a lot of moss too.

The Muur of Geraardsbergen was also repaved 3 years ago but he doesn't
show any signs of decline. But what did happen on the Muur is that the
cobbles seem to be pivoted a bit around their horizontal axes. Their
sharp edges are now at the surface which makes that the surface in
general seems less "flat" and that you "feel" the cobbles a lot more.

Both the climbs are only used in 2 pro races: the Muur in the Omloop
Het Volk and the Ronde, the Koppenberg in the Ronde and partially in
the Koppenbergcross. Both also have trees along the climb which makes
them dark and often wet. But the main difference is that only the
Koppenberg is open for traffic. I think that is the main cause of this
increasing deterioration. It should be a good idea not to have cars
riding over this monument.

Anyway the Ronde won't be less hard without the Koppenberg. I even
think it's a good idea not to climb it in 2007.


Another thing not to forget is the stealing of the cobblestones, usually by
souvenir hunters after the Tour of Flanders.
Some tourists take them and when public construction-workers repair the
street they tend to just redistribute the remaining cobbles, which causes
the big gaps.
It's the gaps that make the cycling difficult. The smallest steering mistake
and your off the bike.

Koen

"koendp" wrote in message
...
On 08-11-2006 09:58, in article
, "Kenny"
wrote:



On 8 nov, 03:03, Ewoud Dronkert wrote:
Marlene Blanshay wrote:
bummer... but apparently the gaps between the cobbles are too wide.
Well, for a road that's been there 1800 years, and cobbles that date
back to about 300 years or whatever, it's not hard to understand.But it
was
completely repaved a few years
back!http://www.grahamwatson.com/2002/kop...ppencover.html

--
E. Dronkert

Indeed, it was. I went to see the Koppenbergcross last week and i have
to tell you all the work they did 5 years ago seems to be lost. I
don't know what happened but there were some nasty gaps between the
cobbles (often 2 tires wide), it was slippery (fall= wet + rotting
leafs), a lot of moss too.

The Muur of Geraardsbergen was also repaved 3 years ago but he doesn't
show any signs of decline. But what did happen on the Muur is that the
cobbles seem to be pivoted a bit around their horizontal axes. Their
sharp edges are now at the surface which makes that the surface in
general seems less "flat" and that you "feel" the cobbles a lot more.

Both the climbs are only used in 2 pro races: the Muur in the Omloop
Het Volk and the Ronde, the Koppenberg in the Ronde and partially in
the Koppenbergcross. Both also have trees along the climb which makes
them dark and often wet. But the main difference is that only the
Koppenberg is open for traffic. I think that is the main cause of this
increasing deterioration. It should be a good idea not to have cars
riding over this monument.

Anyway the Ronde won't be less hard without the Koppenberg. I even
think it's a good idea not to climb it in 2007.


Another thing not to forget is the stealing of the cobblestones, usually
by
souvenir hunters after the Tour of Flanders.
Some tourists take them and when public construction-workers repair the
street they tend to just redistribute the remaining cobbles, which causes
the big gaps.
It's the gaps that make the cycling difficult. The smallest steering
mistake
and your off the bike.

Koen

On my visits to the Koppenberg in 2000, 2004 and 2006 in the days before
and after the race I have only once noticed any cobbles missing and that was
a grouping of 5-6 stones total this year. I agree with your other
observations.

Somewhat off topic but from a post to my club's forum:
"Last spring, we climbed northeastward up the narrow, twisty
Kloosterbosstraat on our 'Het Volk' day. The Eikenmolen climb reaches the
same hill top but from the ESE.

Good to see the reinstatement of the Kluisberg (even if it is a Wallonian
climb) and GTC kickoff climb the Knokteberg, however these are added at the
expense of the Foreest and Steenberg. The Foreest is a cool climb.

This means the tough part starts a little earlier in the race but isn't
(theoretically) as intense in the last hour of racing. Riders always make
the race."
-Mike