Ken Brown

The Giro didn't end in Milan this year, the Vuelta will not end in Madrid. It is time for the Tour to end somewhere other than Paris, if only for some years. Agreed, the Champs Elise is special, but the occasional break would make it more special when it returns. I am finding it anti-climactical.

Caretaker

I disagree, the Tour de France can start anywhere but unless it ends in Paris it's not le Tour.

DLBroox

I also think it should stay in Paris. I loved how they went around the Arch this year. It's one if the most beautiful cities anywhere. And I didn't think that last sprint was anti climatical at all!

Keith99

Nah,

They have found an end that makes the last stage important even if all the jerseys and podium spots are totally settled.

But it might be interesting to change the route into Paris a bit. How about a climb that just might get a break off the front that could survive? How much better might it be if there was a break of 20 riders and that the teams of the sprinters were trying to pull back? And remember there would be some spots where you could see the tour pass 3 or 4 times per loop!

DiabloScott

They made the final stage a time trial (into Paris) once - that was a good year. But ASO said "never again".

ericy

Yeah, I like Paris, but the final stage is always a huge bore to me. Most of it ceremonial - the only thing that is unknown at the start is who will win the sprint/stage at the end.

seypat

I would have to disagree. Where else do you get to see a longer course crit, racing over cobbles, featuring 150-198 of the best cyclists in the world? That's right, nowhere! Not to mention, the scenic backdrop. And each lap gets faster and faster until they ring the bell. Then the riders put the hammer down and get down to business!

Pretty exciting for me.

Giacomo 1 

I agree!

It's an exciting stage with a great back drop and it looks great on TV. There isn't a faster stage in racing. I'm amazed at how fast these guys could get their bikes up to on slight uphill cobble street. Incredible...

Bacciagalupe

Philistine

I like the ceremonial aspect. It gives the riders a chance to relax and enjoy, and the sprinters one last chance to show off. Arc de Triomphe is a great place for the podium awards. It's also one of many traditions that sets Le Tour apart from the other Grand Tours.

busygizmo

I think it is a nice tradition, makes the Tour a little more special. Racing on the last day of most grand tours is mostly ceremonial unless they put in a time trial.

The last few laps when they ramp it up are always fun and I'm sure there would have been a lot more excitement if Kittel had a big name challenger. Kristoff is a very good rider but doesn't currently have the palmares or wow factor of a Cavendish or Kittel.

Leinster

Is that for definite? I can't imagine it sticking forever-ever.

i just watched the final stage of 88 on YouTube, and they went the opposite direction around the Champs to this year. So they can change it up if they so wish. I do agree that taking the finish out of Paris would just be weird, though. It's the perfect climax to the race, and it's an event that all the riders and spectators look forward to. If the Giro and Vuelta have both changed their finish city from time to time, it's surely because Milan and Madrid have never had the same iconic status in cycling as the Champs does.

Ken Brown

I have heard the arguments and stand by my position. It would still be mostly ceremonial and there would still be a sprint finish, but the scenery would be different. Lyon has hills that could spice things up. Just once, then back to Paris, then perhaps another city another year.

Cyclosaurus

Only one way to fix this problem...

Keith99

1965-1972 were all Final TT stages. (I think going back a lot before 65, that is were I got bored checking.

About half were Versailles-Paris. All ended in Paris.

68 was a nail biter. Every spot in the top 5 could easily change.

69 the lead was so great that half the riders in this forum would have been able to hold the lead, at least with some training and in our primes.

That is the thing with a final TT stage. One year in 20 it is great. The rest it is snoozeville.

1969-1972 the same rider won the final TT stage. 1974 he won the final stage which was a regular stage wearing Yellow. As far as I can determine only one other rider has won a final regular stage in yellow and he did it twice.

I don't think we will see that again.

Campagnono

Well, as a Frenchman, I really have to tell you, without any doubt whatsoever, that the end of the Tour will never take place anywhere but Paris.

Beyond the ceremonial, there is also a great deal of tradition and iconography. The Luxor obelisk, la Place de la Concorde, l'Arc, l'Avenue des Champs-Elysees, La Defense, all of it. It is the great day for Paris. And although I'm not Parisien, the idea of not having the culmination there is an impossibility.

To the rest of the world, le Tour is just the greatest bike race on earth. But to us it is a great race that serves as a tool for sharing the stories of our nation through a grand display of our history and culture and imagery.

The bike race is just the canvas that holds the paint. And unfortunately for the foreign racing fans without nostalgia, that painting will always include Paris.

I do, however, completely agree that they should make it a hilly stage like Sheffield this year, and they could start in Normandie or Picardie or Centre and go to Ile-de-France from there. There are many brutal 1-2km climbs of 8-10% coming out of the Seine, Somme, and Loire. They could snake back and forth along the lower Seine or Somme and easily have enough climbing to separate the field and create drama. There are many popular routes that could have half a dozen Cat 4 climbs and descents in 25km and that would certainly crush the bunch and add excitement. Mind you, among serious French race fans (and the ASO) I'm in the minority of this opinion.

DiabloScott

Interesting, thanks.
It appears that ALL TdF have ended the final stage in Paris, but on the Champs-Elysees only since 1975, and only an ITT once since then; probably the last time any contender rode a flat TT without an aero helmet.

seypat

Well then throw out some ideas for a better finish. If they are good, who knows?

THSdrummer

I do think it would add excitement to the race to have it return to the Champs-Elysees every few years, instead of every year, but I understand that it is the Tour of France, and as such the most proper place to finish it is within the capital city around one of the most iconic buildings in the world.

I would like to see some climbs. I was hoping a spoiler would stick off the front and ruin the sprinters' day. THAT would be an exciting end to the Tour. I find the Champs-Elysees circuit to be exciting just due to the raw speed the riders obtain and the sporadic random attacks off the front. I find the sprint to be dull and anti-climatic after a dozen attacks off the front over 60 kmph. And I enjoy watching sprints. Maybe it has just been too many years of the same.

Leinster

I don't think having a climb before the Champs would make much difference. There's still 9 (or however many they choose in any given year) laps of the Champs after that, for over 50km where the peloton can chase down a break. If a tougher climb than the drag up to the Arc is available in the city centre, maybe they could integrate that into the circuit.

I can't help thinking that if they got rid of the final stage into Paris, you'd get even more of the sprinters just quitting before the mountains. I'm sure there were plenty of times when Kittel or Greipel were dragging their heavy carcasses over the Tourmalet or Galibier saying to themselves "I just have to get over this, and a couple more of these, and then it's the Champs and I can do that."

zonatandem

Maybe it should end in Berlin, Germany, so that a Frenchman could win the final stage?

Keith99

A break of 5 sure. How about a break of 20 or even that there are 50 riders off the back.

Typically things come back because a fair sized break isn't willing to work their butts of on a chance to stay clear when tomorrow the cost for today's work may be catastrophic.

That does not hold on the last stage.

Any year imagine if there is a break and just one or 2 of the top sprinters are in the first group of 50. This year imagine the 3rd and 4th place riders are that lead group. Of course with some of their teammates.

And there is nothing magic about 9 circuits at the end. They could do fewer.

Keith99

Only final stages one could argue were not in Paris were 1968-1974. I count the suburbs as Paris, most people do.

Seems only 4 locations (3 listed in the link below, 1903 had to finish somewhere else in Paris.

Vélodrome de Vincennes - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Leinster

Any idea where 1903 finished? Wiki's entry on that year's Tour reads;
" The last stage was the longest, at 471 km (293 mi), and ran from Nantes to the Velodrome in Paris, where 20,000 spectators saw Garin's third stage win, as he sealed overall victory by 2 hours 59 minutes 31 seconds: this remains the greatest margin of victory in the Tour de France.[SUP][5]"
So, a Velodrome, but presumably not the Velodrome de Vincennes. Not that there would have been a shortage of Velodromes in Paris at the time, but odd that it isn't named.[/SUP]

Caretaker

Parc de Princes velodrome.

1903 Tour de France

rkelley23

Agreed, Also I loved seeing Jens Voigt get out in front and then see what seemed to be Horner saying "Hey me too!"