Forum home Road cycling forum Pro race

Pro Tour

off the backoff the back Posts: 168
edited October 2007 in Pro race
Can anyone explain why we need a pro tour winner ..?

I have no problem with a select set of races for the top teams. Let the UCI and Grand Tours work out the finner points. My issue is that it makes no sense to have one winner. Imagine Hamilton Lewis being expected to drive the World Rally Championship and Nascar to be world no.1. Look at swiming/boxing/athletics/sking where differences are embraced. In cycling we have 1 day races, week long races and grand tours. U could even argue that the nature of the races could be sub divided - flat/sprinter, hilly etc.

So a pro tour to bring together the best riders Yes. But why we need to have one winner overall.This is a great injustice to the diversity of the sport which should be celebrated. In a world where people talk of pressure on riders to ride all year round and on so many events shouldn't the UCI be making life easier not adding pressure. By all means have teams ride for a year long award but not individual riders.

Posts

  • LangerDanLangerDan Posts: 6,132
    The concept of a year-long league pre-dates the ProTour by a long time. There used to be competitions such as the SuperPrestige Pernod as well as the World Cup. The big difference between the ProTour winner and say Lewis Hamilton is that the same riders DO compete in many of the events. (In fact it would be a better measure of the who is the worlds best driver if there was more cross-competition)
    I think the concept of a competition for riders showing year-long consistency and performance over a variety of terrains and distances is a great idea. I'm just not sure that the ProTour was ever going to be it.
    'This week I 'ave been mostly been climbing like Basso - Shirley Basso.'
  • top_bhoytop_bhoy Posts: 1,424
    Is this going to turn into yet another thread which can be used as a big stick to beat the nasty UCI with?

    All sports are setup differently, simply accept and enjoy. There are several other sports setup in a similar fashion to cycling due to the diversity of the sport or due to TV pressure.
  • I just think that it tries to create a competition between Grand Tour Riders and Classics riders. That to me is like comparing Apples and Oranges.The reality is that the top riders from these groups may never even compete head to head with any degree of reality. What races do Boonen and Contador even compete head to head to win ..?

    To create a league table based on competition that never happens is pointless. It would be like mixing the Premership League table up with the Rugby league table based on match wins. Unless there is REAL direct ongoing competition it is a false competition.

    Ultimatley I believe that does the sport no good. It is a gross simplification and tries to create a winner takes all.

    As goes UCI bashing - I think they are right to create an elite division but as goes a Pro Tour champion - No I do not agree.The old world cup was on 1 day races and that makes sense! Was Presitege 1 day or all races ..?
  • NoodleyNoodley Posts: 1,725
    was the ProTour not set up so we could have the Pro Tour Pundit competition?
  • KléberKléber Posts: 6,842
    To be fair, the idea was to create a series of races for team sponsors. In order to market the sport to corporate sponsors, being able to promise the team entry into a broad calendar of events, all of which have TV broadcasts, is attractive.

    That was the vision. The execution's been appalling, with the sale of Pro Tour licences seemingly bordering fraudulent practice, for payment made for a licence gave no certainty of entry into the races.
  • LangerDanLangerDan Posts: 6,132
    I just think that it tries to create a competition between Grand Tour Riders and Classics riders. That to me is like comparing Apples and Oranges.The reality is that the top riders from these groups may never even compete head to head with any degree of reality. What races do Boonen and Contador even compete head to head to win ..?

    To create a league table based on competition that never happens is pointless. It would be like mixing the Premership League table up with the Rugby league table based on match wins. Unless there is REAL direct ongoing competition it is a false competition.

    Ultimatley I believe that does the sport no good. It is a gross simplification and tries to create a winner takes all.

    As goes UCI bashing - I think they are right to create an elite division but as goes a Pro Tour champion - No I do not agree.The old world cup was on 1 day races and that makes sense! Was Presitege 1 day or all races ..?

    The SuperPrestige was based on a mixture of stage and one-day races. As with the ProTour, the weighting of scores between tours and one-day races was never satisfactorily sorted but ,unlike a single event, the winner could never be said to be be just lucky.

    You make reference to "competition that never happens" but in cycling it does - frequently. One-day riders like Boonen or Zabel can pick up stage wins and points jerseys in the grand tours. Similarly, GT riders start coming to the fore in some of the one-days races such as Amstel, Liege or Lombardy. Plus there are riders who would perform well over a variety of events, such as Hinault, Lemond or even Cadel Evans.

    Certainly, the trend over the past decade for riders to concentrate solely on a Tour at the expense of not riding single-day races has meant that there is less "common ground " but even Lance was a one-day rider before he was reinvented as a GT champion.

    Breaking things down into sub-classifications only serves to turn the whole thing into an Oscars - "the Best Rider in events between 240 and 250km with less tham 3000m of Climbing"
    'This week I 'ave been mostly been climbing like Basso - Shirley Basso.'
  • Noodley wrote:
    was the ProTour not set up so we could have the Pro Tour Pundit competition?

    Exactly!

    Now, thanks to the ASO, wtf are we going to do next year?

    Answers on a postcard.

    Cheers, Andy
  • drenkromdrenkrom Posts: 1,062
    What? isn't the new UCI race ranking system clear enough? :roll:
  • LangerDanLangerDan Posts: 6,132
    Noodley wrote:
    was the ProTour not set up so we could have the Pro Tour Pundit competition?

    Exactly!

    Now, thanks to the ASO, wtf are we going to do next year?

    Answers on a postcard.

    Cheers, Andy

    I was thinking of something along the lines of Celebrity Deathmatch

    UCI vs. ASO
    UCI vs. Bettini
    UCI vs. Stuttgart (big cash prize)
    UCI vs.Val.Piti
    UCI vs. Vino & Kash (tag wrestling)

    The actual racing will be the light entertainment between the bouts.
    'This week I 'ave been mostly been climbing like Basso - Shirley Basso.'
  • drenkromdrenkrom Posts: 1,062
    You're gonna have trouble finding people to bet on the UCI.
  • iainf72iainf72 Posts: 15,784
    drenkrom wrote:
    You're gonna have trouble finding people to bet on the UCI.

    I'm not so sure. When I was a kid, the thicker end of the spectrum seemed to be better at fighting.
    Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.
Sign In or Register to comment.