The Debrief #3 - Arne Jacobs' GC Chase in Tour de la Guadeloupe (UCI 2.2)

Welcome to The Debrief #3! This one is a little different. Before, I looked at someone else’s race file and tried to reconstruct what happened from the outside. This time the race is mine!

I already wrote a daily blog throughout the race on my profile, so I am not going to rewrite ten daily race reports. You can always check those out if you want to know more about a specific stage. This is The Debrief of the full 10-day stage race, where I will zoom out a bit, analyse how the race unfolded and pull in some external data from other riders as well.

Ten stages, 1,226.6 official kilometres and just over 29 hours of racing. My files eventually added up to 1,231.94 km and 12,897 metres of elevation. Final result: 7th GC at +6:42 to Owen Cole, with three top-ten stage results along the way: P7 in the Stage 8 TT, P8 on Stage 3 and P10 on Stage 2.

The parcours
Before talking about the race, the parcours needs some explanation. Tour de la Guadeloupe is not hard in one single way. The parcours covers a wide variety of terrain. The official route covered 1,226.6 km over ten stages, with two individual time trials, enough punchy short steep climbs, exposed windy sections and longer climbs. Plus: heat! The only things that are not really included in this stage race are a real ‘mountain’ stage or a pure sprint stage.

1 / 10

Apart from the TT stages, Stages 3, 6 and 9 were the most important stages for GC. The other stages were more suited to a break or group sprint. However, it turned out that the breakaway on Stage 4 would play a crucial role in the final GC.

Guadeloupe asked for a versatile rider. You needed to time trial, handle the heat, survive positioning chaos, climb well enough, and still race aggressively and stay alert on days where the profile looked too easy to create differences.

Not your typical stage race
Tour de la Guadeloupe is not a normal stage race. The island is part of the race. The heat and humidity change a lot. My Garmin indicated 36–38 degrees on most days and humidity is often 80% or higher. Roads and asphalt are not great either. They are covered with oil and other slippery stuff due to mediocre car conditions, turning wet roads into slippery slopes. So don’t expect power PRs and super high average speeds. The conditions are simply not suited for that.

1 / 4

Before the race I wrote that Guadeloupe treats this thing like its own Tour, Giro and Vuelta. That turned out to be completely true across all ten stages. The team presentation had a huge crowd. People are cheering you on everywhere, inside and outside the race. The final uphill finishes on Stages 3 and 9 felt like riding through a wall of sound.

Strength of the field
The start list contained five continental teams: Aarco, Vorarlberg, Vendée U, Atom6 and Competitive Edge Racing. The first three were definitely the strongest on paper. Vorarlberg is one of the stronger European continental teams, Vendée U is the development team of TotalEnergies, and Aarco is a relatively new Belgian team but has several decent riders who have already shown good results.
Beyond the continental teams, there were also some strong individual riders spread across the club teams. Especially with the local teams, that was difficult to judge beforehand. Cycling is huge in Guadeloupe, but I didn’t know the riders and had very little reference for the level of racing in the Caribbean region.

It turned out to be quite mixed. Some of the local and club riders were absolutely capable of competing for stage wins and riding at the front of the race, while others were already struggling or DNFing during the opening stages.

Overall, I would describe the level at the front as a proper UCI 2.2 field. Definitely not a bunch of 'pancakes'. The strongest continental riders were genuinely strong, but there was also quite a large spread in level once you moved further down the bunch. That is important context for the numbers later in this Debrief: when I compare myself to the front of the race, I’m mostly comparing against that stronger group (20-30 riders) of continental riders and the best individuals from the club teams.

The GC trap
On stage 2, I made the break. Thirteen riders, most major teams represented, maximum gap went out to around six minutes, stage win possible, GC suddenly wide open. Thanks to my decent TT on day one, I finished P10 and moved to 3rd overall. The next day, on the first uphill finish, I finished P8 and moved to 2nd overall.

That sounds great, because it was great! But it also changed the whole race. Before that, I could race like someone looking for a stage. After that, I was a GC rider whether I wanted to be one or not.
It changes how the bunch reacts to you and also how you react to others. I was no longer allowed to jump into any useful break myself and, vice versa, I vigorously tried to prevent any of the continental teams or their GC riders from getting ahead because we ‘needed’ them in the bunch to control the stage.

Stage 4 was the perfect example of how GC works against you. I managed to control this for the first 60 km, but at a high cost: 375 W NP. Eventually, a break still went with all the continental teams represented and none of us. Absolute doom scenario.

Having the second rider in GC, we quickly took responsibility and started chasing. We managed to bring the gap down to around 1:20, where I expected some of the other teams to jump in and help keep it under control. That did not happen. We got no help and eventually the gap went out to five minutes. Ironically, the break contained eventual GC winner Owen Cole. In hindsight, allowing the eventual winner to gain around five minutes that day effectively decided the GC.

This is also part of GC racing in a ‘smaller’ race. There is less control and probably also less insight into who the strongest contenders really are. In hindsight, Cole should obviously never have been allowed that much time.

That is the GC trap. I was no longer allowed into the useful breakaways myself, while at the same time spending significant energy making sure the wrong riders didn’t get into them. Stage 4 was the worst of both worlds: a very expensive opening hour, followed by chasing the break we absolutely did not want anyway. High effort, no reward.

The climbing reality check
There are a few files worth looking into a bit more detail as they provide interesting insights.

Stage 3 - lowest stage NP, decisive climb
Stage 3 is funny in the data because the full-stage NP was 302 W, the 'easiest' NP of all stages. But it was still one of the most decisive GC days. Why? Because the important part was compressed into the final climb: about 4.5 km at roughly 5 percent, ridden after a nervous run-in, a crash for the yellow jersey, and a final corner where holding momentum is essential.

I started the climb around 10th wheel, survived until roughly 500 m to go, then lost 13 seconds on the last very steep section. P8 on the stage, up to 2nd on GC. Effort needed: 9.23min at 445NP and last 3min at 500W. That's around 6w/kg and 6.8w/kg for me respectively.

Stage 6 - the front of the race was simply faster
Stage 6 was the biggest climbing day: 135.3km, 2,250 m elevation, 329 W NP.

1 / 4

The lead-in of stage 6 was easy, but the second part of the race was nasty:

• 2.6 km at 6.4 percent, with the first 1.5 km around 10 percent. 4.07min at 475W
• 3 km at 8 percent. 9.14min at 425W
• final climb of about 9km with last 7 km at 7.2 percent. 27min at 366W

This was the day after I crashed in stage 5. I was relieved to wake up feeling relatively unbothered by the crash and just having some road rash and swollen limbs😆. By the last climb the group was already reduced to around 25 riders. Stüssi attacked basically from the bottom. I did not follow. I was suffering way more on that second climb than I should at that power, so decided to directly take my own pace. Which was the right decision as I was suffering and overheating really bad on that stage.

I particularly like Stage 6 from a data point of view because Stüssi, the fastest climber that day, uploaded his file to Strava. We rode the second climb in the same group, allowing me to calculate his weight at around 69–70 kg from the power and W/kg comparison. On the final 7 km climb he pushed 425 W. So we’re talking 6 W/kg+.

That is serious power. Especially when you put it into perspective: Stage 6 of a stage race, two hard climbs already completed and very, very hot conditions. Naturally we’re not talking WorldTour numbers here, but for a UCI 2.2 race that’s a very strong climbing performance.
Even though I didn’t have my best day, I also have to be realistic: on a good day I would not have been able to follow those numbers on a longer climb.

Stage 9 showed the same pattern where I could keep up, and even decide racing, very well on all shorter efforts. But had to settle in my own pace on the longer final climb, although I was clearly performing better compared to stage 6 by pushing 390W in the last 20min.

Stage 10 - not a climbing stage, still expensive
Stage 10 was not a mountain stage it was more like a hard city crit style race with some uphill sections. It still deserves a data insert. It was the final day, mostly likely a sprint stage, with a loop and then eight laps in Pointe-a-Pitre. Still, my file came out at 143.23 km, 45.1 km/h, 268 W average and 327 W NP. After nine days of racing, that is not nothing. The funniest stat is that my 3.30min effort at 470W to bridge to a break only got my HR up to 176BPM, the maximum of that stage. Even though this is not a maximum effort, it is still telling how suppressed your HR becomes after many days of racing. You easily loose 15bpm to your max.

So, was it good?
Yes. 7th GC in Tour de la Guadeloupe is good. Three top tens are good. Being in the race for ten days, time trialling well, surviving the heat, a crash, sick roommates, mechanical stress, and still finishing inside the top ten overall is good. The data shows that my level was consistent and high. I came away with a GC result and could battle with the best continental riders in this race. I’m proud of that.

Are we doing WorldTour or ProTeam GC numbers at Guadeloupe? No, we are not. The climbing files make that fairly clear. But that’s also not really the point. This is a UCI 2.2 race raced in hard conditions, with continental teams, strong local riders and ten days where almost nothing comes for free.

For me, the more useful conclusion is where the gaps are. The TT level is competitive. The shorter climbs are competitive. I can race aggressively and survive ten days. On the longer climbs, there is still a pretty obvious W/kg problem to solve. At 74 kg, that probably isn’t going to disappear completely. So P7 GC feels about right.