UCI to introduce 3 tier league system

ad_snow

Just seen this on the BBC:

Professional road racing is set to feature promotion and relegation as part of a new three-tier league system proposed by the sport's world governing body the UCI.

Under proposals to be considered for approval in January, the current WorldTour would be scrapped in favour of a 16-team first division and eight-team second division, followed by regional divisions in Europe, America, Asia, Africa and Oceania.

The first division would race across 120 days and the second 50 days, with sporting, ethical, financial and administrative criteria to determine the teams' divisions.

If approved, reforms would be introduced from 2015 and be fully in place by 2020.

Anyone know anything more about this? Is it Cookson's doing?

Edit: More can be read here http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/uci-release-outline-for-future-of-worldtour
and Inrng's take here:
http://inrng.com/2013/10/ucis-2020-vision/

Paul 8v

Not sure what to think of this. Does it mean world tour teams won't be able to race in the smaller tours like the tour of Britain?

I need to read in to it a bit more but it's all looking a bit "football" for me.

Paul 8v

Also, would this put the end to invites in Grand tours for the pro tour teams?

Edit:

having looked at in more detail it looks like they can still race them but it wouldn't help them with their ranking, for example Movistar could ride the tour of Britain and it wouldn't count towards their points and vice versa with a pro tour team

gpreeves

Paul 8v wrote:

Also, would this put the end to invites in Grand tours for the pro tour teams?

Edit:

having looked at in more detail it looks like they can still race them but it wouldn't help them with their ranking, for example Movistar could ride the tour of Britain and it wouldn't count towards their points and vice versa with a pro tour team

I think you must be right there, otherwise the "Division 2" races would only have 8 teams riding in them! So Div 3 and Div 1 teams must be allowed to race if they wish.

Either way, 8 teams in Division 2 doesn't seem like many. Can anyone hazard a guess why this will be the case? Ensure that "talent" isn't too spread out over Division 2 teams?

RichN95.

It's hard to tell exactly what will be what from just one graphic, but the cycling calendar is long overdue a big overhaul and this looks like a move in the right direction.

gpreeves

RichN95 wrote:

It's hard to tell exactly what will be what from just one graphic, but the cycling calendar is long overdue a big overhaul and this looks like a move in the right direction.

Agreed. Any proposed calendar that doesn't involve overlap between the top tier races (e.g T-A and P-N) is to be commended.

Paul 8v

Strange, I would have thought there would have been the least in the top tier, then more in the second etc.

Paul 8v

As Rich said, hard to tell from the info so far.

rick_chasey

What gets squeezed if there is no overlap?

That isn't clear to me.

Would be good to get rid of the overlap. I very rarely watch two races on one day

No_Ta_Doctor

A few off the top of my head comments:

1) No overlap in WT races is probably designed to make TV rights more saleable, increasing revenue. Knock on effect is better investment for sponsors. The win you got in a WT race won't be relegated to 5 minutes of highlights because the race was competing with another WT race for bidding/scheduling. This is a good idea.

2) Smaller WT teams as they don't need to cover two races at the same time? Probably not that much smaller, the riders cant race all year, but there needs to be some protection for domestiques in this, or some poor bastard will open his Gmail calendar and BOOM.

3) Reduced costs through a more efficient calendar? Teams might be able to trim budgets quite a bit by not having to race in two events on the same day, which makes sponsorship a little cheaper - again a good idea.

4) If I owned a 2nd level race I'd be worried. If the WT spreads itself out then whenever you race you'll be in competition with a higher level race. Can't see much in it for second level races, other than guarantee of the 8 second level teams, which would include a few of what are now WT teams. They might possibly gain a few WT teams by invite, for riders nor scheduled to ride a WT race for a while. But that would depend on how much the WT teams pared back their operations.

5) Relegation/promotion of teams - OK, gives a reason to stick with and invest in a 2nd level team, though failing WT teams may haemorrhage sponsors. But what about races? Can they move up and down categories, and if so, how?

6) Small amount of teams and low number of race days at 2nd level signals this is a "transition zone" - it's there to blur the boundaries. Races will be made up of a mix of WT, 2nd and pro-conti teams. 2nd level teams will be guaranteed quite a few invites to WT events.

In general, I think I'm positive, but the devil will be in the details, and as others have mentioned this is ripe to fall foul of the law of unintended consequences. If it works, it could stabilise cycling through the various levels of races and teams, if it goes pear shaped, then we see an elite top level leave everything else to wither and die.

RichN95.

Rick Chasey wrote:

What gets squeezed if there is no overlap?

That isn't clear to me.

Would be good to get rid of the overlap. I very rarely watch two races on one day

I think Catalunya will get chopped (or relegated). Pais Vasco moved. One of Poland or Eneco to go? Plouay gone? Paris-Nice slightly earlier? A two week Vuelta? Possibly even a shortened Giro. Wevelgem back to a Wednesday?

Mikey23

Interesting ...