It was the clearest suggestion yet that the route could — at least theoretically — persuade riders who usually build their entire season around the Tour.
A “modern and even” Giro that broadens the field
As the panel dug into the parcours, Sander Valentijn pointed straight at how unusually open this edition feels — and Jeroen Vanbelleghem didn’t hesitate to label it a “modern Giro” and “even” in its design. He stressed that the race offers something across the board: “There is a bit of everything and for different types of riders.”
Crucially, he connected that directly to the classic-style all-rounders who might normally find a Grand Tour too restrictive. Vanbelleghem mapped out a wide spread of opportunities — citing “stage 2”, followed by stages “4, 5, 8 and 9”, and then highlighting “13… and 11 actually also already” as terrain that suits riders with punch and power. Later weeks, he added, continue the trend: “Stage 17 I find a very nice one for them and in stage 18 you have a steep finale with a little wall.”
His verdict summed up how unusually open the race appears: “In every week you have a couple of opportunities for all types, including the sprinters.”
That balance stands in clear contrast to what awaits at the Tour de France, where the same rider profile faces fewer natural chances. As Valentijn put it bluntly, compared with the Tour of this year, riders like Van Aert and Van der Poel “come away with much less.”
Could big names really turn away from the Tour? “They’d need deep pockets”
If the route itself made the analysts enthusiastic, the feasibility of tempting global stars to Italy sparked a more sceptical response. Valentijn openly hoped that 2026 might lure more headline names to the Giro, but Jan Hermsen was unflinching in his appraisal of the likelihood: “I don’t think that will be their choice.”
He added that two-race ambitions could only be made realistic if RCS made a serious financial push: “It should be possible to combine it, but then the organisation would have to open the money bags.” He doubted they would, arguing that the organisers will “put all the money into Vingegaard.”
Vanbelleghem backed that up with fresh information of his own, saying: “I’ve heard today that it is almost certain Vingegaard is going to the Giro.”
And with the Dane’s versatility, he made clear that the route characteristics matter far less at that level: “Riders like Vingegaard can handle all types of parcours.”
A Giro built for attackers — but who will take the gamble?
Across the discussion, one theme kept resurfacing: this is the most welcoming Giro in years for riders who blend classics power with Grand Tour resilience. With nine stages singled out by Vanbelleghem as genuine opportunities, the 2026 edition is tailor-made for aggressive racing.
What remains uncertain is who dares to walk through that door. Tradition, sponsor demands and the gravitational pull of the Tour de France still define the choices of the sport’s biggest stars. The panel recognised the allure of this Giro — but also the reality that breaking from the Tour-first model is a bold, financially complicated decision.
Still, for the likes of Van Aert, Pedersen and Van der Poel, the Giro has rarely looked more inviting. Whether anyone ultimately makes that pivot may determine not just the character of the 2026 race, but the direction Grand Tour planning takes in the year ahead.