Forum home Road cycling forum Pro race

UCI Reform

AnonymousAnonymous Posts: 79,678
edited December 2015 in Pro race
Saw this on twitter. Inner Ring have a summary.
Fewer teams (16 vs 18) with fewer riders (22 vs 30) in an 'A' group with a further 8 teams in a 'B' Group.

http://inrng.com/2014/03/uci-world-tour-reforms/

Haven't had a chance to read it in full yet
«1

Posts

  • RichN95.RichN95. Posts: 25,479
    While it's clear as mud at the moment, I support moves to slimming down cycling. This seems like a move in the right direction.
    Teams in races should be one man smaller too.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • AnonymousAnonymous Posts: 79,678
    This from inrng is the part which seems the most concerning:


    "It’s not in the small PDF but currently a rider’s sporting value is the sum of their points for the last two years, so a bad injury in one year need not ruin their/the team’s sporting value. But your point’s still very valid as risk concentrates in a few riders.

    I suppose with the new system a dropped team could hope to rise back up… then again a rider on a relegated team invokes a break clause and moves."
  • The_BoyThe_Boy Posts: 3,099
    RichN95 wrote:
    Teams in races should be one man smaller too.

    Two, IMO, but one would be a step in the right direction.
    Team My Man 2018: David gaudu, Pierre Latour, Romain Bardet, Thibaut pinot, Alexandre Geniez, Florian Senechal, Warren Barguil, Benoit Cosnefroy
  • RichN95.RichN95. Posts: 25,479
    The_Boy wrote:
    RichN95 wrote:
    Teams in races should be one man smaller too.

    Two, IMO, but one would be a step in the right direction.
    Long term, I'd probably agree. But it needs to be done gradually.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • CrankbrotherCrankbrother Posts: 1,695
    Not in favour of fewer WT teams ... Seems like the usual UCI idea of reducing the influence of teams/riders ...
  • RichN95.RichN95. Posts: 25,479
    Not in favour of fewer WT teams ... Seems like the usual UCI idea of reducing the influence of teams/riders ...
    Less WT teams opens up more wildcard spots. At the moment the lower WT teams are really stretched to be competitive in enough races to justify them being WT and are often doing races they care little about. By taking away their obligation to be in all races and instead having a wider selection of teams looking to target fewer of them the quality should rise.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • CrankbrotherCrankbrother Posts: 1,695
    I agree about it being good for wildcard teams, but with fewer spots at the top table it makes it less certain for riders and sponsors that they'll get to the races they want to and that drives down sponsor investment and riders salaries ... Especially as it often comes down to politics and/or nationality for who gets the wildcard spots ...
  • RichN95.RichN95. Posts: 25,479
    I agree about it being good for wildcard teams, but with fewer spots at the top table it makes it less certain for riders and sponsors that they'll get to the races they want to and that drives down sponsor investment and riders salaries ... Especially as it often comes down to politics and/or nationality for who gets the wildcard spots ...
    There will still be the same number of riders and teams in each of the races. But now a couple of the ones who don't want to be there and are too weak to compete are replaced by two that are ready to contribute.

    Wildcards do come down to things like nationality and politics, but with more wildcard slots more are available on merit.

    As for sponsor investments and salaries - it's not sustainable financially. The World Tour teams alone support over 500 riders at a minimum wage of 40K. That's too much. Golf and tennis attract far more money and can't support that. Sorry to sound like a heartless capitalist, but the sport's wage bill needs to be downsized.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • Teams being one man smaller would be good in general, but would be nice to mix it up a bit and have the odd race with, say, five man teams. Could make things nicely chaotic.
  • CrankbrotherCrankbrother Posts: 1,695
    That's only £20m guaranteed salary ... Over 18 teams that's £1.1m per team, hardly a huge sum when you look at the money ASO and the UCI bring in on the back of the WT teams ...

    I'm happy to manage the volume by reducing the number of riders racing in each team but that should be balanced by more guaranteed spots for teams/riders ...
  • RichN95.RichN95. Posts: 25,479
    That's only £20m guaranteed salary ... Over 18 teams that's £1.1m per team, hardly a huge sum when you look at the money ASO and the UCI bring in on the back of the WT teams ...
    But in reality £20m doesn't cover the top ten riders.

    Very few are on 40k. My point was more that world no.300 in golf & tennis is barely breaking even, yet cycling is trying to support even more than that.
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • CrankbrotherCrankbrother Posts: 1,695
    RichN95 wrote:
    That's only £20m guaranteed salary ... Over 18 teams that's £1.1m per team, hardly a huge sum when you look at the money ASO and the UCI bring in on the back of the WT teams ...
    But in reality £20m doesn't cover the top ten riders.

    Of course ... But after that it just becomes a matter of your ambition vs investment ...
  • mrolimroli Posts: 3,622
    http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2014/m ... mpic-games

    This as well. Really not sure how this would work. Would we not end up with a load of velodromes and badminton courts half way up mountains? (Might be good for the sprints, not so good for distance events!)
  • Daz555Daz555 Posts: 4,040
    Track cycling losing its spot in the Summer games would hurt its profile.

    Winter games are niche and have always been a shadow of the main event.
    You only need two tools: WD40 and Duck Tape.
    If it doesn't move and should, use the WD40.
    If it shouldn't move and does, use the tape.
  • RideOnTimeRideOnTime Posts: 4,712
    Daz555 wrote:
    Track cycling losing its spot in the Summer games would hurt its profile.

    Winter games are niche and have always been a shadow of the main event.

    with you...
  • shrub1shrub1 Posts: 21
    But we would have to ask permission off Coca-Cola and MacDonalds though - the healthy eating sponsors. If they don't like the idea, then that's that.
  • dish_dashdish_dash Posts: 5,254
    So we expected big changes in 2017 - three year licenses, new races etc. Now the association of cycling race organisers has come out against several of the changes and it all may just get ground into quagmire again. INRNG sums it up nicely as ever.

    Within that context this reviewof the Economics of Professional Road Cycling is worth a read (I'm aware that the author is not everyone's cup of tea). The book itself is a classic academic publication and costs £114. But the bottom line is that it appears to debunk much of the Velon and other calls for cycling reform.

    There isn't nearly the money available for redistribution that Velon and others might claim. The big sponsors aren't really interested and the smaller regional sponsors aren't really motivated by the globalisation effort. So an argument could be made that actually pro-cycling's best future is in just muddling along as it is... rather than franchises, new races, and all that other malarkey...
  • FJSFJS Posts: 4,820
    Track cycling losing its spot in the Summer games would hurt its profile.

    Winter games are niche and have always been a shadow of the main event.
    In general, yes, but particularly in the UK (which is particularly rubbish at winter sports)
  • rick_chaseyrick_chasey Posts: 57,289 Lives Here
    Track cycling losing its spot in the Summer games would hurt its profile.

    Winter games are niche and have always been a shadow of the main event.
    In general, yes, but particularly in the UK (which is particularly rubbish at winter sports)

    Surely a pre-requisite for winter games is that snow or ice are involved in some way or other?
  • FJSFJS Posts: 4,820
    Track cycling losing its spot in the Summer games would hurt its profile.

    Winter games are niche and have always been a shadow of the main event.
    In general, yes, but particularly in the UK (which is particularly rubbish at winter sports)

    Surely a pre-requisite for winter games is that snow or ice are involved in some way or other?
    Yes, it's a specific requirement. Cyclo cross has been pushed for the winter Olympics, but the snow and ice requirement has always stopped it.
  • ddraverddraver Posts: 23,197
    I like watching cross, and even ocasionally "racing" it, but come on, its nowhere near big enough to be an Olympic sport. Whoever was picked for Belgoumn or Netherlands (±a few others maybe - remember that countries would be limited in numbers) would just run rings around everyone else.

    It would tempt a few over from XCO between the summer games I suppose,
    We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
    - @ddraver
  • FJSFJS Posts: 4,820
    I like watching cross, and even ocasionally "racing" it, but come on, its nowhere near big enough to be an Olympic sport. Whoever was picked for Belgoumn or Netherlands (±a few others maybe - remember that countries would be limited in numbers) would just run rings around everyone else.

    It would tempt a few over from XCO between the summer games I suppose,
    You're right of course; I should've said the snow and ice reuirement was 'one of the reasons' that stopped it. :)
    Although, on the other hand, a number of winter Olympics sports are fairly marginal or dominated by a few countries anyway compared witht he Summer games.
  • rick_chaseyrick_chasey Posts: 57,289 Lives Here
    Track cycling losing its spot in the Summer games would hurt its profile.

    Winter games are niche and have always been a shadow of the main event.
    In general, yes, but particularly in the UK (which is particularly rubbish at winter sports)

    Surely a pre-requisite for winter games is that snow or ice are involved in some way or other?
    Yes, it's a specific requirement. Cyclo cross has been pushed for the winter Olympics, but the snow and ice requirement has always stopped it.


    There's about as much logic having cyclocross in the winter games as there is with rugby or football being included.
  • Can somebody explain why track cycling gets squeezed in the summer Olympics (I'm thinking of the loss of the kilo, IP and Madison in recent years) the Velodrome is a purpose built venue and not capable of being used for anything else (unless the infield is supporting other sports which I can't remember happening)
    @JaunePeril

    Winner of the Bike Radar Pro Race Wiggins Hour Prediction Competition
  • dish_dashdish_dash Posts: 5,254
    Can somebody explain why track cycling gets squeezed in the summer Olympics (I'm thinking of the loss of the kilo, IP and Madison in recent years) the Velodrome is a purpose built venue and not capable of being used for anything else (unless the infield is supporting other sports which I can't remember happening)

    Wasn't the squeeze to balance the number of events for men and women?

    BTW this thread is so OT UCI reforms but hey ho...
  • FJSFJS Posts: 4,820
    Track cycling losing its spot in the Summer games would hurt its profile.

    Winter games are niche and have always been a shadow of the main event.
    In general, yes, but particularly in the UK (which is particularly rubbish at winter sports)

    Surely a pre-requisite for winter games is that snow or ice are involved in some way or other?
    Yes, it's a specific requirement. Cyclo cross has been pushed for the winter Olympics, but the snow and ice requirement has always stopped it.


    There's about as much logic having cyclocross in the winter games as there is with rugby or football being included.
    I'm not sure I follow that argument. I'm not sure cyclocross needs to be included in the Winter Games, but surely it's more a winter sport (as in mostly practised in the winter months (say, November-February)) than rugby or football, which are played year round with a very brief summer stop?
  • deejaydeejay Posts: 3,138
    I like watching cross, and even ocasionally "racing" it, but come on, its nowhere near big enough to be an Olympic sport. Whoever was picked for Belgoumn or Netherlands (±a few others maybe - remember that countries would be limited in numbers) would just run rings around everyone else.
    Careful, there is a large calendar of Cyclo X events in the USA and they only have to produce one World Champion (a la Greg Lemond) for it to become an attraction to their general public.
    Then watch the pressure come to have Cyclo Cross in the Olympics at Winter Time.
    Organiser, National Championship 50 mile Time Trial 1972
  • deejaydeejay Posts: 3,138
    Track Cycling has brought it on themselves with their Indoor Air Conditioned velodromes being used in the main when the road season is over and now in competition with 6 day racing.

    I'm old fashioned to remember the Track Cycle Racing season in GB starting on Good Friday on proper one Kilometer tarmac tracks and in full flow with late evening daylight hours until it finished in September.
    Can somebody explain why track cycling gets squeezed in the summer Olympics (I'm thinking of the loss of the kilo, IP and Madison in recent years) the Velodrome is a purpose built venue and not capable of being used for anything else (unless the infield is supporting other sports which I can't remember happening)
    The only hold these days for, Track Cycle Racing in summer meetings is the Olympics.
    With all these small Indoor Velodromes then "IF" it were moved to the Winter Olympics then a full program of events could return instead of these constant Time Trials.
    I remember Chris Boardman against Jens Lehmann in the 1992 Olympic Pursuit Final and jumping out of my chair with excitement when Boardman caught the German.
    Within a few months I realised it was not such a great feat because he had only caught him in 250 meters and not the normal (at that time) 500 meters.
    Organiser, National Championship 50 mile Time Trial 1972
  • ddraverddraver Posts: 23,197
    I like watching cross, and even ocasionally "racing" it, but come on, its nowhere near big enough to be an Olympic sport. Whoever was picked for Belgoumn or Netherlands (±a few others maybe - remember that countries would be limited in numbers) would just run rings around everyone else.
    Careful, there is a large calendar of Cyclo X events in the USA and they only have to produce one World Champion (a la Greg Lemond) for it to become an attraction to their general public.
    Then watch the pressure come to have Cyclo Cross in the Olympics at Winter Time.

    What, you mean like "J-Pow" who goes to Belgium every year saying he's going to take it, like, super serious this year and finishes about 20th?
    We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
    - @ddraver
  • rick_chaseyrick_chasey Posts: 57,289 Lives Here
    Track cycling losing its spot in the Summer games would hurt its profile.

    Winter games are niche and have always been a shadow of the main event.
    In general, yes, but particularly in the UK (which is particularly rubbish at winter sports)

    Surely a pre-requisite for winter games is that snow or ice are involved in some way or other?
    Yes, it's a specific requirement. Cyclo cross has been pushed for the winter Olympics, but the snow and ice requirement has always stopped it.


    There's about as much logic having cyclocross in the winter games as there is with rugby or football being included.
    I'm not sure I follow that argument. I'm not sure cyclocross needs to be included in the Winter Games, but surely it's more a winter sport (as in mostly practised in the winter months (say, November-February)) than rugby or football, which are played year round with a very brief summer stop?

    They're all on grass - they all occur during winter.

    They could all, in theory, be played at the height of summer too.
Sign In or Register to comment.