Velorooms - Cycling Forum

Professional Cycling => Men's Road Cycling => Topic started by: just some guy on October 07, 2013, 17:32

Title: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: just some guy on October 07, 2013, 17:32
The UCI has now confirmed its plan for reshaping (And re-invigorating) the World Tour structure and teams. Originally planned for 2020 they now have brought this plan forward to 2018.

EVENT SELECTION PROCESS 22

1. Organisation of the calendar
• The season runs from February through October
• Over all weekends and in particular on all Sundays
• No overlap between events
• No competition amongst first and second division events
• 6 weeks of uninterrupted competition focused on the Spring classics
• Stage races cut to 5 or 6 days

~pdf Link (http://www.uci.ch/docs/calendar/UPDATE_6/PAGE3UCIWT_lien_PAGE22_ENG.pdf)



(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BV_MShtCQAAtxBy.png)
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: just some guy on October 07, 2013, 17:47
http://www.uci.ch/Modules/BUILTIN/getObject.asp?MenuId=MTk3OA&ObjTypeCode=FILE&type=FILE&id=ODk5Mjc&LangId=1 (http://www.uci.ch/Modules/BUILTIN/getObject.asp?MenuId=MTk3OA&ObjTypeCode=FILE&type=FILE&id=ODk5Mjc&LangId=1)

Orginal here

No mention of the 80 day rider limit that I can see.

how many days is the WT now ?
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: Dim on October 07, 2013, 18:28

how many days is the WT now ?

well the three grand tours is 63
One day races 15
tdu 6
paris nice 8
tirreno 7
catalunya 7
basque 6
romandie 6
dauphine 8
suisse 9
poland 7
eneco 7
beijing 5

total 154 days


Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: Dim on October 07, 2013, 18:31
its technically almost impossible to do.

Grand Tours have 22 teams.
16 of those will come from the first division teams.

That leaves a total of 18 Wild Card spots up for grabs.

The 8 second division teams would only be able to ride one Grand Tour a year using up 21 days of their allocation (if they did 2 grand tours they would only have 8 days racing left).

So that still leaves 10 wild card spots up for grabs.

These would have to go to the pro conti squads but they too would also only be able to do one grand tour each so it would require a minimum of 10 pro conti teams, forced to ride a gt to make it work

And 1st division teams wouldnt be able to race non WT (reduced WT) races..

It doesnt add up. at all.
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: DB-Coop on October 07, 2013, 18:33
well the three grand tours is 63
One day races 15
tdu 6
paris nice 8
tirreno 7
catalunya 7
basque 6
romandie 6
dauphine 8
suisse 9
poland 7
eneco 7
beijing 5

total 154 days
So no Poland, Eneco, Beijing and TDU and then include Paris-Tours again? That would be an upgrade to me, I know for sure though that won't be the races lost.
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: Dim on October 07, 2013, 18:39
its utter balls
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: Froome's Thoughts on October 07, 2013, 18:48
EVENT SELECTION PROCESS 22

1. Organisation of the calendar
• The season runs from February through October
• Over all weekends and in particular on all Sundays
• No overlap between events
• No competition amongst first and second division events
• 6 weeks of uninterrupted competition focused on the Spring classics
• Stage races cut to 5 or 6 days

http://www.uci.ch/docs/calendar/UPDATE_6/PAGE3UCIWT_lien_PAGE22_ENG.pdf
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: DB-Coop on October 07, 2013, 19:19
EVENT SELECTION PROCESS 22

1. Organisation of the calendar
• The season runs from February through October
• Over all weekends and in particular on all Sundays
• No overlap between events
• No competition amongst first and second division events
• 6 weeks of uninterrupted competition focused on the Spring classics
• Stage races cut to 5 or 6 days

http://www.uci.ch/docs/calendar/UPDATE_6/PAGE3UCIWT_lien_PAGE22_ENG.pdf

Honestly I hope a breakaway format will form if this holds, why they think fewer WT races is good I can't wrap my head around, they say it is because it will mean the best riders ar there, but most WT teams have 5 to 6 riders worthy of leading minor tours. Taking Saxo as an example, you have to have enough races so that Majka, Rohce, Rogers, Contador and Kreuziger will all lead some races, and all of those fit the same type of races. I personally like an extended WT with all the big races included better - for those that didn't read my topic about that - http://velorooms.com/index.php?topic=4119.0
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: Echoes on October 07, 2013, 19:23
My contemporaries won't like it because they are UCI supporters and globalists (notably OP who explained to us that the UCI never took measures to cut short classics) but I'm talking to further generations.

UCI needs be dissolved before it's too late and the different national federations should take back the executive power at every races held on their own soils, like in the good old days.

Of course there were injustices back in the days but nothing can be worse then this attempt to a New World Order that reminds us of Huxley's Brave New World or Orwell's 1984.

It's scary ...  :S
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: Froome's Thoughts on October 07, 2013, 19:32
2nd division teams only allowed to ride 50 days. Isn't that a really small amount? :S
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: DB-Coop on October 07, 2013, 19:40
2nd division teams only allowed to ride 50 days. Isn't that a really small amount? :S

I think it means that they will rde 50 days of the 120 total WT races, how those days will be distributed will be a mess, who wants to be the team that rides Vuelta, Beijing, Canada, Eneco, Poland and TDU only?
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: Froome's Thoughts on October 07, 2013, 19:42
Can't be...
• No competition amongst first and second division events
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: DB-Coop on October 07, 2013, 19:46
Can't be...

Who in the world would be a 2nd div team then, when PC teams can get wild-cards to better races? I assume 2nd div teams can apply for wild-cards else it is pointless, unless no more wildcards, in which case good luck getting the ASO to take that deal, when Europecar and FDJ might very well be the teams to move down to reduce WT to 16 teams.
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: Dim on October 07, 2013, 19:50
None of this makes any sense. I dont actually think the UCI know what they are doing. theyve just put a bunch of numbers on a page and not actually considered how they are going to do it.

I think a large number of teams, and race organisers will look at this and just say flip it.
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: Froome's Thoughts on October 07, 2013, 19:51
unless no more wildcards,

its technically almost impossible to do.

Grand Tours have 22 teams.
16 of those will come from the first division teams.

That leaves a total of 18 Wild Card spots up for grabs.
and make GT's only available to 16 teams?
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: DB-Coop on October 07, 2013, 19:55
and make GT's only available to 16 teams?

Well if Div 2 can't race with Div 1, wouldn't they have to? unless div 3 can get wild-cards, in which case how do you fill out div 2? lets see wild card at Dauphine and TdF or 50 days of Div 2 racing?

EDIT: May have misread, I think the Div 2 teams does all the 50 days and then wild-card on top of that.
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: just some guy on October 07, 2013, 20:02
My contemporaries won't like it because they are UCI supporters and globalists (notably OP who explained to us that the UCI never took measures to cut short classics) but I'm talking to further generations.

UCI needs be dissolved before it's too late and the different national federations should take back the executive power at every races held on their own soils, like in the good old days.

Of course there were injustices back in the days but nothing can be worse then this attempt to a New World Order that reminds us of Huxley's Brave New World or Orwell's 1984.

It's scary ...  :S

do not twist the truth .......................... basically do not lie it does not do you any good

I never said what you have claimed (notably OP who explained to us that the UCI never took measures to cut short classics)

What I said was in relation to one race and I said that having a maximum lenght was a good thing.

Echoces if you are going to lie choose another person

taken from this thread - http://velorooms.com/index.php?topic=4101.0 (http://velorooms.com/index.php?topic=4101.0)

Quote
Is the UCI the promoter of the event  ;)

If not the blame for the change in type of race can not be to Pat

As for the distance the is some positives for shorter races, but do think history to a point is good.

But as hitch points out new is great if done right ie *ca historic and new can be boring if done for the whole reasons in the wrong places

Quote
How old d'you think I am, Caruut?

No I am not mad because I did not expect anything but apologies of this globalizing madness (though here it went far indeed!) that will eventually lose us, anyway. In every aspect of life, actually. Pro cycling can't be any exception. Let us all be happy to see a Tour of Langkawi or of Qatar in order to raise funds for holy wars in Lybia and Syria ...

However I fail to see in what way a shortened distance (shortening imposed from above, yeah JSG, UCI is to blame for distance cut, ever since 1990 as I demonstrated) could ever be an adaptation to modern standards if any adaptation is ever required. Some riders can handle long distance better than others. Today we're only left with one long-distance race: Milan-Sanremo and after that some would of course be surprised to see all these races end up in a sprint. As if it had nothing to do with distance cut...

Quote
so they did one thing to reduce Darkside issues, which was a good thin imo

longer distance does not = better races in modern cycling

but you blaime the UCI for it all I quote
Quote
In 2013 Verbruggen's successor McQuaid decided it had no more excuse and will invent a kermess around Brussels with a distance of 201km. No more start in or near Paris. Avoiding the main climbs around Brussels. It'll be called Brussels Cycling Classics (in English, in order to promote the local languages ...  :embarrassed)

Quote
So once again out of all the above It was not the UCI , but the orgainsation - the race could be longer but the people orgainising the race decided against it

but carry on

where did I say
Quote
notably OP who explained to us that the UCI never took measures to cut short classics
when I said the UCI did make maximum length and it is a good thing  as I quoted

Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: Froome's Thoughts on October 07, 2013, 20:04
None of this makes any sense. I dont actually think the UCI know what they are doing. theyve just put a bunch of numbers on a page and not actually considered how they are going to do it.

I think a large number of teams, and race organisers will look at this and just say flip it.
UCI:
Quote
From the initial “Common Ground” meetings between November 2011 and March 2012, to this approval, passing through the consultation of cycling’s stakeholders conducted by Deloitte last spring and a whole host of meetings, each stage of the process has been worthwhile and constructive, signalling the interest of all parties in the proposals.

Seems like they have put some effort into it actually which makes it seem even more strange
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: Dim on October 07, 2013, 22:38
Ok, lets try do some maths on this.

First up. RACES

As it currently is
Race Days
Tour Down Under      6
Paris Nice      8
Tirreno      7
Milan San Remo      1
Volta Catalunya      7
E3 Prisj      1
Gent Wevelgem      1
Tour of Flanders      1
Basque Country      6
Paris Roubaix      1
Amstel Gold      1
Fleche Wallone      1
Liege Bastogne Liege      1
Romandie      6
Giro d'Italia      21
Dauphine      8
Suisse      9
Tour de France      21
San Sebastian      1
Tour of Poland      7
Eneco Tour      7
Vuelta Espana      21
Vattenfall      1
GP Ouest France      1
GP Quebec      1
GP Montreal      1
TTT Worlds      1
Giro di Lombardia      1
Tour of Beijing      5
total      154
So we need to shed 34 days from somewhere.

So lets take Paris Nice and Tirreno down to 6 days, along with Catalunya, Dauphine, Tour de Suisse. And lets reduce Poland, Eneco Tour, basque Country to five days. Net result, we are down to 140 days.  Bugger.

flip it, lets ditch Beijing, nobody cares about it anyway, and the stupid world championship  team time trial. 135 days, only 15 to go.

Grand Tours, lets reduce them all to 18 stages. Hmm, 125 days.

Vattenfall cyclassic and GP Ouest France. GONE. 123 days.

Hmmm, ok.. Lets reduce Basque Country, Poland and Eneco to four days. Hurrah. 120 days.

So we are down to 12 days by chucking Beijing, Vattenfall and Ouest France out of the world tour, reducing half the races to 4 or 5 days and reducing the Dauphine, Paris NIce and Suisse to 6 days, whilst also slashing 3 stages off each grand tour.

Race Days
Tour Down Under      6
Paris Nice      6
Tirreno      6
Milan San Remo      1
Volta Catalunya      6
E3 Prisj      1
Gent Wevelgem      1
Tour of Flanders      1
Basque Country      4
Paris Roubaix      1
Amstel Gold      1
Fleche Wallone      1
Liege Bastogne Liege      1
Romandie      6
Giro d'Italia      18
Dauphine      6
Suisse      6
Tour de France      18
San Sebastian      1
Tour of Poland      4
Eneco Tour      4
Vuelta Espana      18
Vattenfall      0
GP Ouest France      0
GP Quebec      1
GP Montreal      1
TTT Worlds      0
Giro di Lombardia      1
Tour of Beijing      0
total      120
120 days. :D

NOW WE NEED TEAMS TO FILL THOSE RACES.

 120 days racing x 22 teams invited to each race = 2640 days.

The 16 first division teams can each race 120 days, so thats 1920 days gone. Only 720 to go.

The eight second division teams can race 50 days so thats another 400 off, so only 320 days left. So we simply need about 8 or 9 Pro Continental teams to fill the void. Bingo.


Next up, TEAMS.

This season we had
World Tour - 19 teams
Pro Conti - 20 teams

Next year we will have
World Tour - 18 teams
Pro Conti - 16 maybe (Losing Europcar (wt), Crelan, Champion, Sojasun, Vini), gaining one, maybe two.
So thats a total of 34 teams, maybe 35.

Grand Tours.
Each Grand Tour has 22 spots up for grabs, 66 spots in total.
Division one teams will take up 48 of those 66 spots. Leaves 18 spots remaining.
Division two teams will take up a further 8 spots (they cant really take more as they will run out of race days).  That leaves 10 spots left to fill
So we will need at least 10 pro conti teams to fill the void assuming every single one of them rides a grand tour.

Based on 2014 teams.
First Division - 16
Second Division - 8
Pro Conti - 10

So it could be done, just, but would mean every single Pro Conti team, would HAVE to ride a Grand tour to make up the numbers, that means Rusvelo, UHC, Accent Jobs, would all need to ride a grand tour. flipping GENIUS.

Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: LukasCPH on October 08, 2013, 08:11
Ok, lets try do some maths on this.
Essentially, it's only possible if you rob most all WT races of their history (18-stage GTs? 4-day País Vasco? What the flip?).

So it could be done, just, but would mean every single Pro Conti team, would HAVE to ride a Grand tour to make up the numbers, that means Rusvelo, UHC, Accent Jobs, would all need to ride a grand tour. flipping GENIUS.
You know, it actually IS rather genius. The teams will like it (all ProContis get to ride a GT), the riders will like it (who doesn't want to ride a GT, and at the same time have some limit to how many races that serve him no purpose he has to line up in). The only ones who'll fight it are the race organizers who may break away from this scheme. And voilà, the UCI will introduce 4-day mickey mouse races (flat, mountain, ITT, flat) to replace them, as many of the previous races were cut down to 4/5 days anyway.
 :shh
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: pastronef on October 08, 2013, 08:17
UCI races new future

• The season will now run from February to October.
• Competition on every weekend, especially Sundays.
• No overlapping of events.• No competition amongst first and second division events.
• Six weeks of uninterrupted competition focused on the spring classics.
Stage races cut to five or six days.


Paris-Nice and Tirreno not overlap?

Giro and California not overlap?


Suisse cut to 5-6 stages


WILL the 3 GT keep their 3 weeks? (23 days) ? I HOPE SO
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: just some guy on October 08, 2013, 08:46
Inrng takes a look

http://inrng.com/2013/10/ucis-2020-vision/ (http://inrng.com/2013/10/ucis-2020-vision/)

I think if there was 135-145 race in the top division and no overlapping it will work

the 50 race days in the 2nd division is really small say we take the middle east Qatar, Oman and the new race forgotten it´s name 5 days each = 15 days and we have the hearld Sun tour in Oz so we have 20 days before a pedal has been turned in Europe

I am might be wrong but there will be still overlapping with 2nd division and 3rd division races with each other reduced overlapping is good though.

I also think the number of teams riding GT´s will be reduced from 22  as it is at the moment
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: Dim on October 08, 2013, 09:07
The fifty days refers purely to them being restricted to fifty days of world tour racing. Not fifty days in total
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: Leadbelly on October 08, 2013, 09:22
50 days of division one WT events? or 50 days of both division one+two events (with the rest made up of division three events)?
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: just some guy on October 08, 2013, 09:30
The fifty days refers purely to them being restricted to fifty days of world tour racing. Not fifty days in total

no it says 50 days of racing in the 2nd division

under the organisation of cycling
16 1st division teams
8 2nd division teams
120 days of racing in the 1st
50 days of racing in the 2nd division 

the results of the divisions will be from the 1st division teams ( 16 ) from the 120 1st division race days = winner division 1 etc

the 8 division 2 teams will have there results for the top of division 2 taken from the 50 division 2 race days

from this I assume the bottom 2 from division 1 will drop down and top 2 from division 2 will go up
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: DB-Coop on October 08, 2013, 09:51
no it says 50 days of racing in the 2nd division

under the organisation of cycling
16 1st division teams
8 2nd division teams
120 days of racing in the 1st
50 days of racing in the 2nd division 

the results of the divisions will be from the 1st division teams ( 16 ) from the 120 1st division race days = winner division 1 etc

the 8 division 2 teams will have there results for the top of division 2 taken from the 50 division 2 race days

from this I assume the bottom 2 from division 1 will drop down and top 2 from division 2 will go up

So fifty race days that rules out who moves up and free to race any other races apart from that? wild-cards etc.?
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: just some guy on October 08, 2013, 09:56
So fifty race days that rules out who moves up and free to race any other races apart from that? wild-cards etc.?

that is what I think, I made a post in inrng blog , see what he thinks , if the wording was 50 specific race days out of the division 2 calendar it would make some sense but as the 1st division will have 120 race days and then the next point it is 50 race days division 2 seems to me division 2 = 50 race days , the division 2 teasm will have to race those days with I assume wildcards from division 1 and then vice versa Division 1 teams would have to race the 120 days and wildcards coming from division 2 teams 

Quote
Sent a tweet may as well double up here.

120 race days division 1 with 16 division 1 teams fighting for the division 1 title

and here is what has been missed 50 race days in the division 2 with 8 teams fighting for the division 2 title

I assume there will be relegation, promotion due to these results

there is no way there can not only be 50 division 2 race days if we take qatar, Oman, Dubai and the hearld Sun tour in Australia as 2 division races at 5 days each that will be 2o days before a pedal has been turned in Europe add Utan , Pro cycling challenge and California at 5 days each and we are at 35 which would leave a grand total of 15 left for Europe division 2 and San Luis is expanding so 5 more days and we have 10 left for Europe . Plus the expense of being a division 2 team would be greater than division 1

As a side not I expect the will be less teams than the 22 riding GT´s , which may not be bad
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: LukasCPH on October 08, 2013, 10:42
A comparison of the situation before the introduction of the ProTour, the current situation and what's planned for 2020 is interesting.

In 2004, the last non-ProTour year with the old system of a world ranking and GS1-GS3, there were 30 GS1 teams, and 20 GS2 teams, for a total of 50 teams theoretically eligible for participation in what are now WT races.
In 2020, if I understand the proposal correctly, there will be 24, plus possibly an unknown number of ProContinental teams.

I've made a list of the various categories, starting in 1999 (the first year with the GS1, GS2, GS3 categories). Sources are CQranking (http://www.cqranking.com/men/asp/gen/searchTeams.asp) and memoire-du-cyclisme.eu (http://www.memoire-du-cyclisme.eu/):
yearGS1GS2GS3
1999224117
2000224824
2001224234
2002303243
2003302670
2004302085
PT/WTProContiConti
20052024115
20062026125
20072027137
20081825133
20091821134
20101821122
20111823131
20121822153
20131920158
Div 1Div 2Div 3 PC
2020168???
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: just some guy on October 08, 2013, 10:55
Ok so what do we have , bit of mess with some positives

we have a race calendar running from Feb to October start of month to end = 273 days

we have a total of 170 race days of no overlap, which is broken down to 120 1st division race days and 50 2nd division race days  so we will have 103 days during this time with no racing

we have 16 1st division teams and 8 2nd division teams 

the 16 1st division teams must race the 1st division events as this goes to the end of year total , I assume this will mean there will be some sort of relegation of bottom team or 2 bottom teams.

the 8 2nd division teams must race the 2nd division events as this goes to the end of year total , I assume this will mean there will be some sort of promotion of top team or 2 top teams.

Stage races will be 5-6 days long so some of the Historical stage races will be reduced in distance and only 1 race from either division 1 or 2 can be runing at the same time ( not a bad thing ) so T-A and P-N can not clash , but as inrng pointed out  when a 21 stage plus 2 rest days Grand tour is going on , that is right no other division 1 or 2 races .

So if a rider skips the Giro , not racing same for the TDF , and Vuelta So a few probable division 2 races will have to be moved .

We also have number of teams

next year we will have 22 WT and at this stage 16 Pro conti  ie 38 teams of riders, staff etc employed

This will be reduced  24 teams , which will require less riders and staff due to less race days and no clashes

another way to look at is

16 division 1 teams ie the old WT

8 division 2 teams ie the bottom 8 WT teams plus the top 2 Pro Conti teams make up a new class/division of cycling teams

pro-conti still exists but it now with the Conti teams which will be the European tour, African tour , Oceania Tour and American tour.

So back to Division 1 race 120 we will need to reduce the WT by 33 days - some through reduced days of stage races others will become division 2 races

all 16 division 1 teams will race division 1 race days with wild cards coming from division 2 teams . Only the points earned by division 1 teams at these races count towards to end of season division 1  ladder - similar to now and WT races and being a pro conti team. I also assume division 2 teams can race all 120 division 1 race days if they so choose and were given wild cards .

All 8 division 2 teams will race the 50 division 2 races and wild cards coming from division 1 and I assume pro conti , I also assume both division 1 and Pro conti could race all 50 division 2 race days if the so choose and were given wild cards. But only the points of these races have any meaning for the 8 division 2 teams - these will be important to go up to division 1 and possibly down to pro conti


# team must compete * race days in there division
16 division 1 teams 120
8 division 2 teams 50
? Pro Conti & Continental ?


say we look at what will be division 2 races , there is no way there can not only be 50 division 2 race days if we take Qatar, Oman, Dubai and the hearld Sun tour in Australia as 2 division races at 5 days each that will be 20 days before a pedal has been turned in Europe add Utan , Pro cycling challenge and California at 5 days each and we are at 35 which would leave a grand total of 15 left for Europe division 2 and San Luis is expanding so 5 more days and we have 10 left for Europe . Plus the expense of being a division 2 team would be greater than division 1 as they must ride division 2 races to get there points. To have a fair system the division teams must compete against each other, you can not have 1 team not riding a race and other scoring points.

Probably my longest no rant post ever

make an orderly line for those confused or wish to point out spelling mistakes

pps Fus has been typing when I have and we have made a similer point
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: Echoes on October 08, 2013, 11:05
where did I say 

You said it twice. So don't talk about lies, please because these comments were real errors of facts !

Quote
If not the blame for the change in type of race can not be to Pat

Quote
the race could be longer but the people orgainising the race decided against it

Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: just some guy on October 08, 2013, 11:05
so basically division 2 is like a small version of the WT is now but with 50 race days


for those that like short posts   ;)
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: mc_mountain on October 08, 2013, 11:06
isnt the 50 day allocation for DIV2, the days they can race in DIV1 races?
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: just some guy on October 08, 2013, 11:09
You said it twice. So don't talk about lies, please because these comments were real errors of facts !

quoting out of context now

to paraphrase I said the UCI made a maximum length of stages and 1 day race which is a good thing, That quote you have used it blaming the whole change of race on the UCI , but the organizers made the profile and length of the race up to a certain distance. do you see that ?

 
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: LukasCPH on October 08, 2013, 11:10
make an orderly line for those confused or wish to point out spelling mistakes
First in line for those confused! :win
Or maybe second behind mc_mountain.

As it is now, this is several times more confusing than the World Championships qualification criteria, and that's saying something.
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: just some guy on October 08, 2013, 11:11
isnt the 50 day allocation for DIV2, the days they can race in DIV1 races?

It can not be otherwise all division 2 teams would have to race at the same 50 days

You can not pick and choose which of your 50 days give you points , makes even less sense than this system and the WT put together
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: KeithJamesMc on October 08, 2013, 11:13
I just see it all as the start of an extremely long negotiation process.

Pretty stupid of the UCI to put half cooked plans out there like that.
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: Caruut on October 08, 2013, 11:16
In my mind this kind of behaviour is yet more evidence that those in charge of cycling are wilfully ignoring or fundamentally misunderstanding the nature of the sport. Many of the changes seem to me like they have gone "What will work? Well, football is pretty successful, let's take a leaf out of their book."

This will not work. In football, teams do not "specialise" as they drop down the divisions; they still have the same basic goals and objectives. Manchester United and Reading, despite vast differences in size, approach each game and each season in much the same way. In each game they must score more than the opposition, and in each season they want nothing more than to simply win as many games as they can.

In cycling, things are different. Lotto and Euskaltel are both teams that would likely fit into the second tier under a new system, but are just very different squads with very different goals. Lotto are famous for taking a lax approach to the GTs, while the high mountains of the three week races are bread and butter for the Basque climbers.

Forcing all these teams to compete within 50 race days simply means that they are forced to spread their resources much less efficiently. It would be a crying shame if Lotto were packing the autobus in Catalunya while a decent Belgian race were taking place, just as it would be tragic to see a Carrot injured on the cobbles with an important stage race coming up.

Ultimately races and teams seem to do an awfully good job of matching themselves to each other without the UCI sticking their over-intrusive noses into things. Why we cannot just let everyone get on with what they do best instead of constantly forcing them to race in situations that they really aren't built for is utterly beyond me.
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: AG on October 08, 2013, 11:17
ridiculous.   and I didnt think anything could be more confusing than the worlds qualification system
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: mc_mountain on October 08, 2013, 11:18
It can not be otherwise all division 2 teams would have to race at the same 50 days

You can not pick and choose which of your 50 days give you points , makes even less sense than this system and the WT put together

but if DIV2 team rides a DIV1 race as a wildcard how do they benefit from getting a good result (other than prestige/sponsor).  why would it have to be the same races?
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: just some guy on October 08, 2013, 11:33
but if DIV2 team rides a DIV1 race as a wildcard how do they benefit from getting a good result (other than prestige/sponsor).  why would it have to be the same races?

but if DIV2 team rides a DIV1 race as a wildcard how do they benefit from getting a good result (other than prestige/sponsor)  The same thing occurs now with the WT and pro conti

So i Rolland was to win the TDF it would not count towards WT points for Europcar  ( well it does but not is true ladder meaning ) so all the historical races would be important , but a smart division 2 manager will have their strongest teams in the division 2 races if they want to go up to division 1

why would it have to be the same races?

How else do you define the strongest team if they do not compete against each other ?

How do the UCI decide what are the 50 days ?  and is a stage the same as a 1 day race

the only way I can see this is thinking about 2 separate divisions

same as football ( I think as I do not watch it ) in England

you have a top division and 2nd division inter division games count as your teams position on the ladder which may mean promotion and relegation , I also assume there is an even amount of games played say 1 home 1 away for each team in the division against each other.

Then you have all the cups where teams from different divisions compete against each other

So in this case division 1 is decided on the 120 division 1 race days only for division 1 teams

and division 2 is  decided on the 50 division 2 race days only for division 2 teams

no where does it say that I can see division 2 is decided by race results of 50 days in division 1 races
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: just some guy on October 08, 2013, 11:39
In my mind this kind of behaviour is yet more evidence that those in charge of cycling are wilfully ignoring or fundamentally misunderstanding the nature of the sport. Many of the changes seem to me like they have gone "What will work? Well, football is pretty successful, let's take a leaf out of their book."

This will not work. In football, teams do not "specialise" as they drop down the divisions; they still have the same basic goals and objectives. Manchester United and Reading, despite vast differences in size, approach each game and each season in much the same way. In each game they must score more than the opposition, and in each season they want nothing more than to simply win as many games as they can.

In cycling, things are different. Lotto and Euskaltel are both teams that would likely fit into the second tier under a new system, but are just very different squads with very different goals. Lotto are famous for taking a lax approach to the GTs, while the high mountains of the three week races are bread and butter for the Basque climbers.

Forcing all these teams to compete within 50 race days simply means that they are forced to spread their resources much less efficiently. It would be a crying shame if Lotto were packing the autobus in Catalunya while a decent Belgian race were taking place, just as it would be tragic to see a Carrot injured on the cobbles with an important stage race coming up.

Ultimately races and teams seem to do an awfully good job of matching themselves to each other without the UCI sticking their over-intrusive noses into things. Why we cannot just let everyone get on with what they do best instead of constantly forcing them to race in situations that they really aren't built for is utterly beyond me.

One thing is though there will be no cross over days of racing.

so Lotto´s A team could be training for a div 1 race when the climbers are in Spain earning points in the div 2 race
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: mc_mountain on October 08, 2013, 11:56
but if DIV2 team rides a DIV1 race as a wildcard how do they benefit from getting a good result (other than prestige/sponsor)  The same thing occurs now with the WT and pro conti

So i Rolland was to win the TDF it would not count towards WT points for Europcar  ( well it does but not is true ladder meaning ) so all the historical races would be important , but a smart division 2 manager will have their strongest teams in the division 2 races if they want to go up to division 1

why would it have to be the same races?

How else do you define the strongest team if they do not compete against each other ?

How do the UCI decide what are the 50 days ?  and is a stage the same as a 1 day race

the only way I can see this is thinking about 2 separate divisions

same as football ( I think as I do not watch it ) in England

you have a top division and 2nd division inter division games count as your teams position on the ladder which may mean promotion and relegation , I also assume there is an even amount of games played say 1 home 1 away for each team in the division against each other.

Then you have all the cups where teams from different divisions compete against each other

So in this case division 1 is decided on the 120 division 1 race days only for division 1 teams

and division 2 is  decided on the 50 division 2 race days only for division 2 teams

no where does it say that I can see division 2 is decided by race results of 50 days in division 1 races

I am more and more convinced I disagree JSG.

Quote from: inrng

The reform proposes clearer promotion and relegation criteria with two divisions although it seems these will still race the top races but on a reduced basis, perhaps only getting a few invitations to fill their quota of 50 days per year.


I agree with your Rolland example but that's without a promotion opportunity built in.  As you say in your scenario DIV2 would put their strongest teams in the DIV2 races, so their weaker teams in the DIV1 races would dilute those races.  I dont think there will be DIV2 races though.

I dont think you have to judge the DIV2 teams on races together, just on the ability to perform against a set criteria, ie compete at WT/DIV1 level.

Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: just some guy on October 08, 2013, 12:05
we can agree to disagree

But I disagree with inrng also  :D   ;)

(http://i41.tinypic.com/2ng54lz.jpg)

looks very clearly to me 2 WT type systems with relegation , promotion

no where does it say the 50 days come out of the 120 it is very separate

Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: mc_mountain on October 08, 2013, 12:15
we can agree to disagree


of course.

Quote

no where does it say the 50 days come out of the 120 it is very separate

Indeed, but I think that is a reasonable possibility.  It also raises the possibility that 120 days is just the total for each team, ie DIV1 teams dont have to ride every WT race, as this isnt explicitly stated either. 

I might also anticipate that Division 3 teams arent necessarily excluded from WT races (even though this isnt represented in the diagram).
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: Dim on October 08, 2013, 13:24
The second division race days is NOT 50. This is purely how many days they will be ranked based on days raced in the top level.

The second division teams will not only race fifty days in total, that would be utterly ludicrous. Do you really think second division teams will be made up of ten riders, with one team car and a minibus????? Because thats all youd need for 50 days.

There will not be a seperate division 2 calendar. Just how can you put together a race calendar with only 8 teams?  Because of the maths on the WT race days, the Div 2 teams will have to ride AT LEAST 50 days of world tour racing just to make sure the races have full attendance.

Those fifty days of racing at WT level, will get WT ranking points, in exactly the same way as they do now.

Its pretty simple, Division 1 teams race at World Tour level for 120 days and get ranked
Division 2 teams race 50 days at World Tour level, and get ranked based on that, they then race europe, asia, africa tour etc.
Pro Conti Teams - race at euro, asia, africa tour level, and get wild cards for world tour events.

Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: just some guy on October 08, 2013, 13:30
The second division race days is NOT 50. This is purely how many days they will be ranked based on days raced in the top level.

The second division teams will not only race fifty days in total, that would be utterly ludicrous. Do you really think second division teams will be made up of ten riders, with one team car and a minibus????? Because thats all youd need for 50 days.

There will not be a seperate division 2 calendar. Just how can you put together a race calendar with only 8 teams?  Because of the maths on the WT race days, the Div 2 teams will have to ride AT LEAST 50 days of world tour racing just to make sure the races have full attendance.

Those fifty days of racing at WT level, will get WT ranking points, in exactly the same way as they do now.

Its pretty simple, Division 1 teams race at World Tour level for 120 days and get ranked
Division 2 teams race 50 days at World Tour level, and get ranked based on that, they then race europe, asia, africa tour etc.
Pro Conti Teams - race at euro, asia, africa tour level, and get wild cards for world tour events.

never said they would race 50 days look at what I wrote

They will race in Div 1 race as well and even Europe tour or Asia etc - If my reading is right the teams of Div 1 and 2 will be the base teams of each of those division of races the rest of the teams will be made up of wildcards

since you have decided that the 50 come out of the 120 how do you fairly decide on who wins div 2

it can not be done fairly imho , the only way is if all teams ride the same races hence the div of race days
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: Dim on October 08, 2013, 13:32
since you have decided that the 50 come out of the 120 how do you fairly decide on who wins div 2

it can not be done fairly imho , the only way is if all teams ride the same races hence the div of race days

exactly. it is completely and utterly flawed as an idea. Mathematically it doesnt add up, feasibly it doesnt add up, and the teams and race organisers will tell the uci to stick it. :)
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: sublimit on October 08, 2013, 14:03
So theoretically you could ace the Eneco, Tour Down Under or Tour of God knows where etc then bomb in a grand Tour but still win Div 2?              :S

The idea of Rusvelo riding a GT for points would be kind of amusing though for the laffs.
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: just some guy on October 09, 2013, 12:58
UCI, SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES by Fabrizio Viani    (http://thecloudsfactory.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/uci-substantial-changes.html)

First division: 16 teams (120 days of racing).
Second division: 8 teams (50 days of racing). These teams will be able to be invited to participate in division 1 races, however only the results from the 50 days of 2nd division racing will be taken in consideration for promotion/relegation.
Third division: will comprise of and Pro Continental and Continental teams. Pro Conti teams could access to HC or 1.1 and 2.1 races, while Conti teams will only be able to race 1.2 and 2.2 races. All third division points will be taken from races in Europe, America, Asia, Africa and Oceania Tours.

All the three divisions will have relegations and promotions (no number of teams given as yet)

 :D

Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: DB-Coop on October 09, 2013, 13:39
UCI, SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES by Fabrizio Viani    (http://thecloudsfactory.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/uci-substantial-changes.html)

First division: 16 teams (120 days of racing).
Second division: 8 teams (50 days of racing). These teams will be able to be invited to participate in division 1 races, however only the results from the 50 days of 2nd division racing will be taken in consideration for promotion/relegation.
Third division: will comprise of and Pro Continental and Continental teams. Pro Conti teams could access to HC or 1.1 and 2.1 races, while Conti teams will only be able to race 1.2 and 2.2 races. All third division points will be taken from races in Europe, America, Asia, Africa and Oceania Tours.

All the three divisions will have relegations and promotions (no number of teams given as yet)

 :D

Sounds like pro conti can't get wildcards to div 1 and 2 events, ASO is going to be upset if they can't invite more freely than that I think. So next years WT and the 6 best pro conti teams, this would really hurt cycling. Cost of a div 2 team compared to a pro conti team would be high and pro conti would be useless without invites to big races, meaning every year some crap team would be moved up and a div 2 team move down. Hence one of the div 2 spots would be wasted on an uncompetitive team always. Also if 2 teams is relegated the chance of moving down from div 1 to 2 would be huge, honestly why do the UCI think they need to use the same NOT working aproach that soccer and f1 is using, their ranking system where season long success is the goal makes certain games and races pointless to even watch, if this happens I hope someody sets up a pirate league. I really want to see what ranking they would give different races, is Omloop Het Niewsblad HC or 2nd div?
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: just some guy on October 09, 2013, 13:47
Sounds like pro conti can't get wildcards to div 1 and 2 events, ASO is going to be upset if they can't invite more freely than that I think. So next years WT and the 6 best pro conti teams, this would really hurt cycling. Cost of a div 2 team compared to a pro conti team would be high and pro conti would be useless without invites to big races, meaning every year some crap team would be moved up and a div 2 team move down. Hence one of the div 2 spots would be wasted on an uncompetitive team always. Also if 2 teams is relegated the chance of moving down from div 1 to 2 would be huge, honestly why do the UCI think they need to use the same NOT working aproach that soccer and f1 is using, their ranking system where season long success is the goal makes certain games and races pointless to even watch, if this happens I hope someody sets up a pirate league. I really want to see what ranking they would give different races, is Omloop Het Niewsblad HC or 2nd div?

agreed on all points,

really hurts cycling in many ways , but it gives more power and money to RCS and ASO so not sure they care

it hurts the smaller promotors and if I am half right div 2 will be very expensive as they will be doing a lot of travel

Omloop Het Niewsblad My guess would be div 2 ,
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: DB-Coop on October 09, 2013, 13:53
agreed on all points,

really hurts cycling in many ways , but it gives more power and money to RCS and ASO so not sure they care

it hurts the smaller promotors and if I am half right div 2 will be very expensive as they will be doing a lot of travel

Omloop Het Niewsblad My guess would be div 2 ,

I am thinking the stage races are actually like the ones Lefevre talked about, new races around the globe, both for Div 1 and 2, I don't think all the current races will remain. And classics was to be cut down to just the monuments. Honestly I can not imagine a worse suggestion. What I imagine is a whole season of Beijing-ish races that no one care about because they have no prestige and races at HC level that are much more important to win like the Paris-Tours is compared to Montreal. It is a really big same.
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: just some guy on October 09, 2013, 13:56
I am thinking the stage races are actually like the ones Lefevre talked about, new races around the globe, both for Div 1 and 2, I don't think all the current races will remain. And classics was to be cut down to just the monuments. Honestly I can not imagine a worse suggestion. What I imagine is a whole season of Beijing-ish races that no one care about because they have no prestige and races at HC level that are much more important to win like the Paris-Tours is compared to Montreal. It is a really big same.

Not sure it will be that bad

I think many of the older races ie T-A P-N etc will remain , spring will be as it is just better orgainsed the GT will be the same but less teams , which is good - I think Div 1 races will be good worse than now but okish , T-A and P-N and the Tour lead up races not on at the same time is good but at 6 days ??

Div 2 will be you 5 day every race is the same stuff for stage racing , spring will be ok

Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: DB-Coop on October 09, 2013, 14:09
T-A and P-N and the Tour lead up races not on at the same time is good but at 6 days ??

Honestly they should just schedule one to end earlier than the other, then having them overlap wouldn't be bad. It would be like a double header, they would show the last 70-60 km of both races instead of now where they show those Km's overlapping, would make for so much more good bike racing on TV.
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: Francois the Postman on October 09, 2013, 14:41
Sometimes you get a bit of paper on the table with some many 'that doesn't make sense' and 'surely they don't mean... because...' lines, that the Tea Party part of my brain throws such a wobbler in one part of one half of my brain that it triggers a shutdown of of the entire grey mass up there.

I tried to read it several times, and I think instead I will wait to see what comes on the table when they have actually thought through what makes sense and talked to the people who this will affect properly.

Last time I checked, we are partly down this 'global development' route, and instead of the brisk spectacle that we would get as a result of the WT points competition, with growing numbers of teams and sponsors slugging it out for much sought after guaranteed WT spots, we can't even get enough teams on the road willing to acquire such a license, and for once, having earned WT points also means nada in the musical chair transfer circus that it unleashes on all of us each year. And it gaves us Beijing. Stop laughing please.

Yes, the sport is growing outside it's heartland. But the mens RR circus has become more profitable, not healthier. WT license, anyone? Pretty please? And it's not like we now have five Hinault's competing. It's still mostly one, with two or three others if there is a sudden weak knee.

It will be a bit, but we have been promised a new future in which riders and race organisers, and sponsors, are being put back around the UCI table and can actually say stuff that affects the lunacy that Pat was trying to shoehorn cycling into.

Rather than plough on with this plan, I hope some sanity returns, and someone at the UCI will realise that road cycling isn't a "one thing", so trying to create the "one easy story" monstrosity  that someone thinks we need so the networks and media can embrace it easily, as it can be sold easier to "the audience" out there, makes as much sense as trying to create a single global competition out of Rugby, Football (Soccer), American Football, and One Day Ping Pong, as hey, they all use balls and audiences find it hard to get enthusiastic across the board for these.

Anyone who even dares to utter the phrase "all the best riders will be there throughout" should be flogged in public as knowing sod all about the reality of road racing where maybe one to five riders are 'the best' for a given race on a given day, if they want to be in form and actually compete for it for starters. And the same brainiac obviously hasn't realised that reducing the amount of actual race days for in effect the same amount, or even less riders is as far from 'growing the sport globally' as you can possibly get. It is spreading the same sport thinner, just more profitable for some.  And hope good things will happen as a result, whilst the reality is "WT license anyone?..... anyone?".

If they come up with a 2020 plan that doesn't lead to more races than we have calendar days for, for more riders than we have places for, in more division one leagues than we currently have places for, with even more overcrowding problems further down the division lines, than we are in real trouble. I want to see the bold initiative that takes dealing with race-day calendar conflicts as the reality to aim for, not avoid.

Creating a male RR reality that only ever has place for 22-ish teams at the current level is a doom-scenario that should have been flushed down the same Florence sewer that Pat & Co were sent into.

Wake me up when someone puts something on the table that actually starts to think about how to grow our sport properly, as opposed to replacing like for fake 'made in china' like.
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: Carlo Algatrensig on October 09, 2013, 20:51
UCI, SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES by Fabrizio Viani    (http://thecloudsfactory.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/uci-substantial-changes.html)

First division: 16 teams (120 days of racing).
Second division: 8 teams (50 days of racing). These teams will be able to be invited to participate in division 1 races, however only the results from the 50 days of 2nd division racing will be taken in consideration for promotion/relegation.
Third division: will comprise of and Pro Continental and Continental teams. Pro Conti teams could access to HC or 1.1 and 2.1 races, while Conti teams will only be able to race 1.2 and 2.2 races. All third division points will be taken from races in Europe, America, Asia, Africa and Oceania Tours.

All the three divisions will have relegations and promotions (no number of teams given as yet)

 :D

Would any exceptions be made to which teams can ride which races. For example would exemptions be made so team could ride their national tour if they aren't of a high enough ranking to normally ride in it. Looking at it from a British perspective none of the smaller British teams would be able to ride the Tour of Britain as it is a 2.1 race as most of them are only Continental teams not Pro Continental so would only be allowed to ride 2.2 stage races if I'm reading things correctly.
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: Carlo Algatrensig on October 09, 2013, 22:58
Last time I checked, we are partly down this 'global development' route, and instead of the brisk spectacle that we would get as a result of the WT points competition, with growing numbers of teams and sponsors slugging it out for much sought after guaranteed WT spots, we can't even get enough teams on the road willing to acquire such a license, and for once, having earned WT points also means nada in the musical chair transfer circus that it unleashes on all of us each year. And it gaves us Beijing. Stop laughing please.

The problem with the global development of the sport is that it would need teams with truly global sponsors for it to make any sense. Unless the WT races like Beijing and the Canadian Races get proper coverage in their home markets why would team really want to race them. What is the point of compelling a team like FDJ to ride in beijing when no one gives a crap about the race as it gets little or no coverage back in france when it is ridden at the same time as Paris-Tours which would be a far more important race to the sponsor but considered of less importance to the UCi and the globalization agenda.
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: just some guy on October 10, 2013, 05:36
Would any exceptions be made to which teams can ride which races. For example would exemptions be made so team could ride their national tour if they aren't of a high enough ranking to normally ride in it. Looking at it from a British perspective none of the smaller British teams would be able to ride the Tour of Britain as it is a 2.1 race as most of them are only Continental teams not Pro Continental so would only be allowed to ride 2.2 stage races if I'm reading things correctly.

No idea tbh, and being div 2 (if it is in the new system) means that there are a lot of wildcards to fill. Say 8 div 2 plus sky , 9 teams which would mean 13 wildcards , I guess 1 UK team so 12 that's a lot , maybe conti teams fill spots if no one wants to ride. The other thing to consider is up to 22 of the teams will have been at the vuelta,and somewhere in this time the 2 Canadian races, so the tob might not be so popular and need conti to fill spots ???

I do think the only 1 div or 2 race at one time will not work during GT's
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: just some guy on October 18, 2013, 15:31
Fits here I guess

The Ranking of Wonders (and IV) - Spainish  (http://zonamatxin.matxin.es/2013/10/el-ranking-de-las-maravillas-y-iv.html?spref=tw)
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: just some guy on October 30, 2013, 15:45


seems to be basically what I said here

Ok so what do we have , bit of mess with some positives

we have a race calendar running from Feb to October start of month to end = 273 days

we have a total of 170 race days of no overlap, which is broken down to 120 1st division race days and 50 2nd division race days  so we will have 103 days during this time with no racing

we have 16 1st division teams and 8 2nd division teams 

the 16 1st division teams must race the 1st division events as this goes to the end of year total , I assume this will mean there will be some sort of relegation of bottom team or 2 bottom teams.

the 8 2nd division teams must race the 2nd division events as this goes to the end of year total , I assume this will mean there will be some sort of promotion of top team or 2 top teams.

Stage races will be 5-6 days long so some of the Historical stage races will be reduced in distance and only 1 race from either division 1 or 2 can be runing at the same time ( not a bad thing ) so T-A and P-N can not clash , but as inrng pointed out  when a 21 stage plus 2 rest days Grand tour is going on , that is right no other division 1 or 2 races .

So if a rider skips the Giro , not racing same for the TDF , and Vuelta So a few probable division 2 races will have to be moved .

We also have number of teams

next year we will have 22 WT and at this stage 16 Pro conti  ie 38 teams of riders, staff etc employed

This will be reduced  24 teams , which will require less riders and staff due to less race days and no clashes

another way to look at is

16 division 1 teams ie the old WT

8 division 2 teams ie the bottom 8 WT teams plus the top 2 Pro Conti teams make up a new class/division of cycling teams

pro-conti still exists but it now with the Conti teams which will be the European tour, African tour , Oceania Tour and American tour.

So back to Division 1 race 120 we will need to reduce the WT by 33 days - some through reduced days of stage races others will become division 2 races

all 16 division 1 teams will race division 1 race days with wild cards coming from division 2 teams . Only the points earned by division 1 teams at these races count towards to end of season division 1  ladder - similar to now and WT races and being a pro conti team. I also assume division 2 teams can race all 120 division 1 race days if they so choose and were given wild cards .

All 8 division 2 teams will race the 50 division 2 races and wild cards coming from division 1 and I assume pro conti , I also assume both division 1 and Pro conti could race all 50 division 2 race days if the so choose and were given wild cards. But only the points of these races have any meaning for the 8 division 2 teams - these will be important to go up to division 1 and possibly down to pro conti


# team must compete * race days in there division
16 division 1 teams 120
8 division 2 teams 50
? Pro Conti & Continental ?


say we look at what will be division 2 races , there is no way there can not only be 50 division 2 race days if we take Qatar, Oman, Dubai and the hearld Sun tour in Australia as 2 division races at 5 days each that will be 20 days before a pedal has been turned in Europe add Utan , Pro cycling challenge and California at 5 days each and we are at 35 which would leave a grand total of 15 left for Europe division 2 and San Luis is expanding so 5 more days and we have 10 left for Europe . Plus the expense of being a division 2 team would be greater than division 1 as they must ride division 2 races to get there points. To have a fair system the division teams must compete against each other, you can not have 1 team not riding a race and other scoring points.

Probably my longest no rant post ever

make an orderly line for those confused or wish to point out spelling mistakes

pps Fus has been typing when I have and we have made a similer point
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: just some guy on October 30, 2013, 20:16



(http://inrng.com/medias/images/procyclingcalendar2017uci.jpg)

Races like the Eneco Tour and Tour de Pologne get downgranded. Paris-Nice, Tirren0-Adriatic, the Dauphiné and Tour de Suisse all shrink. Other races vanish.
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: just some guy on October 30, 2013, 20:31
Not so sure the above is correct One of the main points was not to have races clash or overlap

They do quiet a lot
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: pastronef on October 30, 2013, 20:38
i don't see Volta Catalunya in the scheme!  :(
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: DB-Coop on October 30, 2013, 20:50
(http://inrng.com/medias/images/procyclingcalendar2017uci.jpg)

Well the UCI certainly managed to make the WT relevant, with the 2nd div consisting primarily of uninteresting events. Dubai and Qatar are/will be horrible races, Oman is okay as a warm up race, but really has no buzz to it. Omloop is a nice race along with Brabantse Pijl, E3 and Paris Tours they should be the most interesting D2 races, Dwars Door Vlaanderen is okay but not would rather have seen Strade Bianche really, especially considering E3 and Omloop are already in. The tours included will suffer, at least the ones dropping down from WT status, no racing in Catalonia? no Suisse? Honestly if this happens it will be terrible for cycling. Even the D1 calendar is a mess, they have included more race days in China then in Belgium WTF??? And the same in Canada and Belgium. And as much as I understands the UCI wants to race in big money places, no USA race in D1 or D2?

Not so sure the above is correct One of the main points was not to have races clash or overlap

They do quiet a lot

No they don't only Vuelta overlaps with Canada and Paris Tours with Beijing, but they are in very different time zones so won't matter much.

Edit: And Ouest France, don't know what happened there.
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: Flo on October 30, 2013, 21:03
i don't see Volta Catalunya in the scheme!  :(

!!!!!!!! :o :angry
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: pastronef on October 30, 2013, 21:08
Vuelta overlaps with Canada and Paris Tours with Beijing, but they are in very different time zones so won't matter much.



Edit: And Ouest France, don't know what happened there.

same thing with Giro and Tour California
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: DB-Coop on October 30, 2013, 21:10
same thing with Giro and Tour California

Yes, but the Tour of California seems to have been excluded, Tour de Suisse is not on the Tweet, but is on the schedule image, which is right?
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: pastronef on October 30, 2013, 21:13
Yes, but the Tour of California seems to have been excluded, Tour de Suisse is not on the Tweet, but is on the schedule image, which is right?

exclude from the scheme of 1st and 2nd division races

all the other Catalunya, Haut Var, Tour Med, Strade Bianche, Scheldeprijs, Emilia, California and so on, will be in a 3rd division kind of races?
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: DB-Coop on October 30, 2013, 21:17
exclude from the scheme of 1st and 2nd division races

all the other Catalunya, Haut Var, Tour Med, Strade Bianche, Scheldeprijs, Emilia, California and so on, will be in a 3rd division kind of races?

They will be in the continental circuit as some of them are today, however their value will diminish because of the new 2nd div.
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: Leadbelly on October 30, 2013, 21:19
First time I looked at the calendar I thought "Two Tour of Romandies ?!?!? "   :D

Is there really that much difference outside of the missing Catalunya (which still could be part of the season as one of the non-WT races)? All of the "good" stage races are six days, it's the "poor" ones which are only four/five days long which seems fair enough to me.

It's maybe not a view held by all, but I'm excited by seeing what will happen (maybe that's just the October Blues talking though). Once you add in all the other non-WT races there'll still be plenty of racing going on.
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: pastronef on October 30, 2013, 21:39
They will be in the continental circuit as some of them are today, however their value will diminish because of the new 2nd div.

ah ok thank you, I did not remember about the continental circuit. laughable anyway. Catalunya, strade bianche and many others will be lower than the 3 middle east races and beijing. meh

their value will also diminish because they will loose tv time
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: DB-Coop on October 30, 2013, 22:39
First time I looked at the calendar I thought "Two Tour of Romandies ?!?!? "   :D

Is there really that much difference outside of the missing Catalunya (which still could be part of the season as one of the non-WT races)? All of the "good" stage races are six days, it's the "poor" ones which are only four/five days long which seems fair enough to me.

It's maybe not a view held by all, but I'm excited by seeing what will happen (maybe that's just the October Blues talking though). Once you add in all the other non-WT races there'll still be plenty of racing going on.

Problem is with not being Div 1 or Div 2 will follow that they may not be TV covered, if so then the best teams won't line up, killing many races.
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: Leadbelly on October 30, 2013, 23:26
But why would they stop showing these non-WT races on TV?

The broadcasters show plenty of races now that are just .1, or .2 or .hc and these are the level of races that will encompass division 3. I'm presuming also that they'll have similar sorts of rules entailing what % of WT teams you can invite to these races etc etc. So unless I'm reading it completely wrongly, I can't see much difference going on in these division three races - Tour of California for example should still have BMC, Garmin and Trek with a few other WT teams, UHC and some American continental teams.
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: just some guy on October 31, 2013, 05:41
Was sent this document last night, thought it might be exclusive  :'(   :D

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/15742/Leaked-UCI-document-shows-plans-of-five-year-reform-for-professional-cycling.aspx

Full doco can be downloaded end of article , not great so far in total some good ideas other not well thought out, there is some wrong interpretation going on as well.
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: LukasCPH on October 31, 2013, 07:53
That calendar doesn't look as bad as I thought it would. I could actually get on board with that.
However, the UCI seems not to have understood their own concept: If >50% of all 2nd Division races (Dubai, Qatar, Oman, Het Volk) are in February, and only those count for promotion to 1st Division, a team could secure promotion with one good month - preparing specifically for February and taking the points when other teams are still building up. :?
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: just some guy on October 31, 2013, 08:03
That calendar doesn't look as bad as I thought it would. I could actually get on board with that.
However, the UCI seems not to have understood their own concept: If >50% of all 2nd Division races (Dubai, Qatar, Oman, Het Volk) are in February, and only those count for promotion to 1st Division, a team could secure promotion with one good month - preparing specifically for February and taking the points when other teams are still building up. :?

And sign classic riders to do it or sprinters , no needs for climbers
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: DB-Coop on October 31, 2013, 15:42
But why would they stop showing these non-WT races on TV?

The broadcasters show plenty of races now that are just .1, or .2 or .hc and these are the level of races that will encompass division 3. I'm presuming also that they'll have similar sorts of rules entailing what % of WT teams you can invite to these races etc etc. So unless I'm reading it completely wrongly, I can't see much difference going on in these division three races - Tour of California for example should still have BMC, Garmin and Trek with a few other WT teams, UHC and some American continental teams.

Yes American races will fare as good as now, but Catalonia might well lose its TV coverage with Movistar the only div 1 team to lineup most likely. The big European races in D3 will be hurt, as only the D1 teams with a significant interest will line up, hence for some races not many.
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: Leadbelly on October 31, 2013, 19:42
Of course Catalunya will be effected - as I said in my first post that seems the biggest change, but who knows even without these potential changes it may have been heading toward the exit/downgrading anyway.

Difficult to know how it will all work out in practice - we need more details. The Inner Ring article seems to suggest that January 15th is the next date to look forward to.

Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: lancasterke on November 01, 2013, 08:54
probably the biggest thing that cycling has in it's favour is the frequent references to history. any move away from this, or move away from the historical heartlands is unlikely to be popular.

this could go horribly wrong leaving many disaffected
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: just some guy on November 09, 2013, 07:53
This just weird

where the hell are they going to get the race days from Belgium ? Do people not read the info we do.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/welcome2yorkshire-plan-for-three-day-worldtour-race-in-2015 (http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/welcome2yorkshire-plan-for-three-day-worldtour-race-in-2015)

The more I look the less likely cycling can go down the path it is set on ( ie the info we have been discussing in this thread ) It is too set , new teams will find it hard to get into the divisions new races with money is needed, etc etc

seems to closed for new money which is needed and has killed off some great races , one of those it gets worse the more that you look.

In saying that the WT at the moment is bad, so something needs to happen
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: Arb on November 09, 2013, 08:28
Doesn't actually say WT in the body. Can't have half stages in WT either, and a three day stage race would need to be approved (no problem there I guess).

WT is fine as it is, if you accept it for what it is (a calendar which binds certain teams to certain races).
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: just some guy on January 22, 2014, 06:11
https://twitter.com/rupertguinness/status/425828326440054784
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: just some guy on March 25, 2014, 10:02
https://twitter.com/inrng/status/448394183225929728)
Title: Re: 2018 the road map for cycling
Post by: just some guy on March 25, 2014, 11:13
1st note the title change.

2020 is now 2018

Inring looks at the whole thing .http://inrng.com/2014/03/uci-world-tour-reforms/ full pdf attached if I can get it to work via my tablet



(http://inrng.com/medias/images/ucireform3.jpg)
Title: Re: 2018 the road map for cycling
Post by: Leadbelly on March 25, 2014, 11:28
Is inrng not getting confused again about the 50 days thing for the eight 1B teams? The fifty days (all the 1B events) is just the races their ranking is calculated off - they're then free to race some of the 1A events on top of that. I'm sure that's the conclusion we came to when the news first surfaced.
Title: Re: 2018 the road map for cycling
Post by: Arb on March 25, 2014, 11:28
How the flip does this work without reducing riders per team in races.
Title: Re: 2018 the road map for cycling
Post by: Leadbelly on March 25, 2014, 12:04
I think it could work for 8 men teams in Division 1 races, and 6 men teams below that.

A 1A team will have 120 1A races days and say 30 out of the 50 1B days.

(120+30) x 8 = 1200 rider days to be filled

Don't know how many days the 22 riders (and maybe there'll be extra room for neo-pros like now) will race, but maybe in the 70-80 range.

22 x 70 = 1540 rider days
22 x 80 = 1760 rider days

1540 - 1200 = 340 free days
1760 - 1200 = 560 free days

So they'll have between 340-560 rider days to fill in the lower division races (6 man teams).

340/6 = ~57
560/6 = ~93

So that gives 120 1A race days, 30 1B races days and anywhere between 57 and 93 race days in the lower division.
 
Title: Re: 2018 the road map for cycling
Post by: just some guy on March 25, 2014, 12:31
Yes thats rights as far as I can tell, but the conclusion inrng makes as to way a team would want to be 1B is something I can not work out as well.

Is inrng not getting confused again about the 50 days thing for the eight 1B teams? The fifty days (all the 1B events) is just the races their ranking is calculated off - they're then free to race some of the 1A events on top of that. I'm sure that's the conclusion we came to when the news first surfaced.
Title: Re: 2018 the road map for cycling
Post by: Slow Rider on March 25, 2014, 12:41
This doesn't even sound that bad at first sight, but a lot depend on how exactly they're going to fill it in. Which races disappear, which change, etc. No overlap between races is fine, although in some cases it will be difficult to realise. PN-TA double has to change, which is fine, but what to do with the GC riders who do stage races during the cobbled classics? The problem is, I can't help the feeling that the UCI is going to screw up bigtime regarding which races to put into which categories. Beijing as a 7 day major race while TA becomes a 4 day Cat 1B race, stuff like that. Reducing the amount of race days in non-GT stage races is a tough one too.

The team structure I have no issues with. Smaller teams, less guaranteed invites to big events and mandatory development teams are all fine. Only 5 riders scoring points is just plain dumb though, not a clue what they're hoping to achieve with that. Going to see cases of a stronger domestique with a valid chance of winning a race forced to wait to drag his leader to a 5th place, just because only that leader can score points. Especially in late season.. Not to mention the consequences for the negotiating position of big riders compared to smaller ones; the Valverdes and Boonens of this world are going to get a big pay-raise, while the Amadors and Trentins will scramble to get a top-category spot.

One huge oversight: not even a mention of womens cycling. This should be the perfect opportunity to give that a big boost by demanding womens teams and requiring at least a significant investment in womens cycling from race organisers.
Title: Re: 2018 the road map for cycling
Post by: Leadbelly on March 25, 2014, 13:17
Yes thats rights as far as I can tell, but the conclusion inrng makes as to way a team would want to be 1B is something I can not work out as well.

Presumably if you're a 1B team you'll get invited to a larger % (say 80 days out of the 120 available) of the 1A races than if you are a 2nd division team (say 30 days out of 120).
Title: Re: 2018 the road map for cycling
Post by: cj2002 on March 25, 2014, 14:06
How will they compare the points garnered by the 8 1B teams in their 50 days to the 16 1A teams in their 120 days? Presumably some sort of weighted average? Unless you have teams riding the same races, how do you make a fair comparison of their performance over the season?
Title: Re: 2018 the road map for cycling
Post by: just some guy on March 25, 2014, 14:12
How will they compare the points garnered by the 8 1B teams in their 50 days to the 16 1A teams in their 120 days? Presumably some sort of weighted average? Unless you have teams riding the same races, how do you make a fair comparison of their performance over the season?
Only 1A teams score points in the 1A races and only 1 B teams score points in the 1B races .

if you win 1B then you go upto 1A the next season or maybe even the top 2 and bottom 2 not sure have not read yet, you maybe able to say no thanks to moving up and there will be some complicated darkside related system involved I assume.

There is a similar thing now only WT teams score points in WT races, pro conti can win the lot, but still not score a single WT point for the official ranking and yes 1A teams will have to ride all 120 1A races days and same for 1B with there 50
Title: Re: 2018 the road map for cycling
Post by: cj2002 on March 25, 2014, 14:24
Only 1A teams score points in the 1A races and only 1 B teams score points in the 1B races .

Oh I see - that makes sense. Sort of.

Imagine this hypothetical situation...

Team A - let's call them TinkoSaxoff to protect their identity - have an uncharacteristically poor season in 1A races (injuries, bad luck, Spanish steak), and thus finish bottom of those rankings, but are hugely successful in the 1B and Div.2 races they are invited to. Meanwhile, Team B - let's call them Bofidis - win the most valuable1B race but get almost no other results at any level.

Under JSG's interpretation of the system, Tinko would be relegated and Bofidis promoted, despite their overall performances making this utterly undeserved for either side.

That doesn't seem quite fair to me...
Title: Re: 2018 the road map for cycling
Post by: just some guy on March 25, 2014, 14:29
Fair no but that's the way the system works now as well.

I do not follow football but think champions league and premier league if a team is in the champions league,  they could win that but be delegated from premier league in 1 season right.

ie do very well when playing in Europe but badly when playing jn England, same idea. Fair no but separate competitions but you use results of 1 the year before to qualify
Title: Re: 2018 the road map for cycling
Post by: Leadbelly on March 25, 2014, 14:34
Oh I see - that makes sense. Sort of.

Imagine this hypothetical situation...

Team A - let's call them TinkoSaxoff to protect their identity - have an uncharacteristically poor season in 1A races (injuries, bad luck, Spanish steak), and thus finish bottom of those rankings, but are hugely successful in the 1B and Div.2 races they are invited to. Meanwhile, Team B - let's call them Bofidis - win the most valuable1B race but get almost no other results at any level.

Under JSG's interpretation of the system, Tinko would be relegated and Bofidis promoted, despite their overall performances making this utterly undeserved for either side.

That doesn't seem quite fair to me...

Maybe Bofidis used their noggins and only did badly in the other races though because they were targetting the 1B races specifically and made sure their top men were in shape specifically for those races, since they knew those races were the most important. Once in the top division they'd make sure to target the 1A races instead.

Maybe Stinkytaxoff only did well in the 1B and Div 2 races because they were against lower level competiton and thus easier to do well in.

Seems to me to be all about targeting the right races. You just send younger guys/folk coming back from injury etc to races that don't count.
Title: Re: 2018 the road map for cycling
Post by: just some guy on March 25, 2014, 14:39
Yep LB we will see the return of 2 speed racing  :D.

1A teams for 1A races and 1B teams for 1B races, I wonder if there will be more DNF etc as riders will use races out of their division for training,  probably less so for the 1A races but more so for 1B I think
Title: Re: 2018 the road map for cycling
Post by: cj2002 on March 25, 2014, 14:44
Seems to me to be all about targeting the right races. You just send younger guys/folk coming back from injury etc to races that don't count.

Yep LB we will see the return of 2 speed racing  :D.

1A teams for 1A races and 1B teams for 1B races, I wonder if there will be more DNF etc as riders will use races out of their division for training,  probably less so for the 1A races but more so for 1B I think

Both of which are horrendous scenarios that will do nothing for the long-term health of the sport we all love...
Title: Re: 2018 the road map for cycling
Post by: Leadbelly on March 25, 2014, 14:59
Maybe, but it's not that different from now. Plenty of races now which don't mean anything points wise and have weaker teams, but it's racing - sponsors want you to win, maybe it's a local race to where your team come from and young guys always want to do well.

Maybe it would only be in 1B races were we would see a cagier style of racing from the 1B teams - only 50 days that count so every day's racing would have to count.
Title: Re: 2018 the road map for cycling
Post by: Dim on March 25, 2014, 15:29
It also doesnt appear to mention the fact in the new pdf that the WT teams will be allowed a development roster of 8-9 riders that can ride Euro tour races and similar.

unless i missed that.
Title: Re: 2018 the road map for cycling
Post by: DB-Coop on March 25, 2014, 21:04
Maybe, but it's not that different from now. Plenty of races now which don't mean anything points wise and have weaker teams, but it's racing - sponsors want you to win, maybe it's a local race to where your team come from and young guys always want to do well.

Maybe it would only be in 1B races were we would see a cagier style of racing from the 1B teams - only 50 days that count so every day's racing would have to count.

The 1B races would be silly, if it is the races that JSG presented earlier in his schedule. You would have 1A teams getting beaten badly because they would only race for start money at half the races. And at many others they would not show up. Who would ride Tour of Poland in this system from the 1A a few teams maybe but not a lot, if I had to bet on it I would say Tinkoff, that is it.

This idea to a calendar is horrible, the calendar showcase that JSG presented earlier is a calender where at least 1/3 of the race days in 1A and 1B are things not worth watching
Title: Re: 2018 the road map for cycling
Post by: KeithJamesMc on March 25, 2014, 21:33
It also doesnt appear to mention the fact in the new pdf that the WT teams will be allowed a development roster of 8-9 riders that can ride Euro tour races and similar.

unless i missed that.

you did.

page 2 - right hand column - 8 to 10 riders.
Title: Re: 2018 the road map for cycling
Post by: Flo on March 25, 2014, 22:38
I am worried about the maximum of 22 riders, imagine how many riders will lose their jobs :(
Title: Re: 2018 the road map for cycling
Post by: DB-Coop on March 26, 2014, 07:16
I am worried about the maximum of 22 riders, imagine how many riders will lose their jobs :(

True, they will likely just be split down though. But I really see the concern there. IMO all the elite riders ought to be in the WT, I mean nobody would want some of the best players in Football to play for some 2nd division team. 16x22=352. I believe that with the different parcours over the year there is more elite riders than that. Surely there is enough stage racers for 16 teams to have 3 or 4 each. There is more than enough sprinters that each team could have 3 if they wanted. There is cobble specialist that take up another 3 or 4 spots. Punchers would then take up about 4 more spots. TT specialist could take up the next 2 spots. Probably 4 or 5 spots alone on elite climbers. And then you have the flat speed riders where every team could likely also have 5 and all be a high quality. Clearly that will be over 352. 
Title: Re: 2018 the road map for cycling
Post by: Arb on March 26, 2014, 08:11
I think it could work for 8 men teams in Division 1 races, and 6 men teams below that.

A 1A team will have 120 1A races days and say 30 out of the 50 1B days.

(120+30) x 8 = 1200 rider days to be filled

Don't know how many days the 22 riders (and maybe there'll be extra room for neo-pros like now) will race, but maybe in the 70-80 range.

22 x 70 = 1540 rider days
22 x 80 = 1760 rider days

1540 - 1200 = 340 free days
1760 - 1200 = 560 free days

So they'll have between 340-560 rider days to fill in the lower division races (6 man teams).

340/6 = ~57
560/6 = ~93

So that gives 120 1A race days, 30 1B races days and anywhere between 57 and 93 race days in the lower division.
 


If you have 8 per GT it means an average of 1.09 GTs/rider, if it stayed at 9 it would be 1.23 At the moment it's 0.9. There are plenty of riders who do zero as they are young/crap. Yes the crap ones will be cut but some are pure classics riders and the top teams aren't going to not sign the best u23s so either they are thrown in the deep end or others who don't want to do 2-3 GTs are going to end up starting in them.

My point behind all this is that there is this ludicrous idea lurking in the background of the best riders showing up to the best races and everyone making more money. If teams become more limited in how they can use race days the best (in reality the next-best as you're not going to compromise the schedules of your leaders) riders on a team may find themselves in places they really don't want to be which would be worse for everyone.

I don't actually know why there is a squad limit to begin with, bring back the days of the Mapei 50 man squad for all I care. There are enough trade-offs inherent to stop any unacceptable outcomes.
Title: Re: 2018 the road map for cycling
Post by: just some guy on March 26, 2014, 09:04
Yep smaller teams will not mean more racing days for the stars we will see more of what is going on a Dwars today with 5 , 6 , man teams

unless it is in the division of the team they will be there is full force
Title: Re: 2018 the road map for cycling
Post by: just some guy on March 27, 2014, 17:07
http://www.uci.ch/Modules/ENews/ENewsDetails2011.asp?id=OTg3MQ (http://www.uci.ch/Modules/ENews/ENewsDetails2011.asp?id=OTg3MQ)
Quote
27.03.2014

 The Professional Cycling Council (PCC) met in Montreux (Switzerland) on March 26th and 27th.   It was the first time that the PCC, presided by David Lappartient, has met since it was newly composed.

In opening, UCI President Brian Cookson and Mr Lappartient reminded members of the reform’s objectives: to reinforce the credibility, clarity, and ethics of professional road cycling.

The PCC members decided that the new terms of reference that the UCI ProTeams and organisers of UCI WorldTour events will eventually have to adhere to, shall go through a test phase before being adopted permanently. This is an important step in the reform of professional road cycling.

The teams’ terms of reference contain a certain number of rules that aim to change the culture of professional cycling in order to guarantee it is ethical. In particular, it is a question of obligations concerning the organisation of teams (composition and distribution of tasks), the preparation of riders (workload and care provided) as well as the employment and the certification of team personnel.

As for the terms of reference for the organisers, it covers the following areas: logistics, accommodation, organisation standards, security, television production and broadcast, public attendance and budget. It is the first time that such a document exists for organisers.

From the end of the 2016 season, the teams will be evaluated according to the new terms of reference in view of their registration for 2017. The terms of reference will be the object of a test phase during the two years beforehand: by some 10 voluntary UCI ProTeams at the end of 2014 in the perspective of registration for 2015, and by all UCI ProTeams at the end of 2015 for registration in 2016. These two seasons of experience will enable the final content of the terms of reference to be established. The teams will be able to use this period to adapt to the new rules before they become an obligation.

The organisers will have to respect their terms of reference from the end of the 2016 season with a view to registration for 2017. All of them will have tested the terms of reference the year before, before they become an obligation.

Moreover, the PCC imposed a moratorium on the subject of new UCI WorldTour events. Event organisers wishing their race to join this series will have to wait until 2017 to have the possibility to join the first division.

The PCC also validated a selection process for UCI ProTeams according to sporting criteria for the next two years: In 2015, the 16 best teams of the 2014 UCI WorldTour ranking will be given UCI ProTeam status (providing that they satisfy other necessary criteria). The two remaining places will be awarded to the two teams (UCI ProTeams, UCI Professional Continental Teams or new teams) with the highest accumulated points total from their best five riders on the UCI WorldTour individual ranking. The same system will be used in 2016.

From 2015, the name UCI ProTeam will be replaced by UCI WorldTeam while awaiting a permanent name from 2017.

Finally, the PCC affirmed its agreement with the philosophy and objectives of the MPCC (Mouvement Pour un Cyclisme Crédible), presided over by Roger Legeay and which comprises 11 UCI ProTeams and 16 UCI Professional Continental Teams determined to fight against doping. There will be reinforced consultation with the MPCC concerning regulations.
Title: Re: 2018 the road map for cycling
Post by: DB-Coop on March 30, 2014, 11:13
Yep smaller teams will not mean more racing days for the stars we will see more of what is going on a Dwars today with 5 , 6 , man teams

unless it is in the division of the team they will be there is full force

Even if forced to add days to a riders schedule it will be the doms that get the extra work load, they won't reduce Nibali's chances at the Tour by riding more races with him, however they may be forced to have some doms ride crazy 150-160 race days to make sure the ones they really need are fresh.
Title: Re: 2018 the road map for cycling
Post by: Echoes on March 30, 2014, 16:38
22 riders per team is the good news. Thereby you'll have less "co-leadership".

Also if this Tour of Catalunya can get away from its current awful place in the calendar. That could force some all-rounders to race Milan-Sanremo.


However as long as we are stuck in the PT paradigm, we won't get out of it. You'll have to remember what was there before !!!

We do not need this world governing body that is UCI. More freedom for race promoters and for national federations, is the way to go.
Title: Re: 2018 - The [UCI] Road Map For Cycling
Post by: just some guy on April 02, 2014, 08:17
There is some doping talk in this but if we do not discuss that here

Hein makes some interesting points

there is the Velonews article - here (http://velonews.competitor.com/2014/04/news/former-cycling-boss-verbruggen-offers-suggestions-growth_322332)

and the full text  - Changing Pro Cycling: The Perspective of Hein Verbruggen (http://theouterline.com/?p=527)
Title: Re: 2018 - The [UCI] Road Map For Cycling
Post by: just some guy on April 02, 2014, 08:28
Going to be a really hard time for cycling unless the ASO plays ball
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Armchair Cyclist on April 04, 2014, 14:35
For the second division teams, 50 days is a very limited season to prove them selves in.  The balance of these between different styles of racedays will be vital, and the demands of those few races will become the determinants of the make up of squads, rather than the local identity of those teams.  With only 50 point scoring days open to them, none of these races can be ignored as point scoring opportunities for these teams.


If Caja Rural, for example, harbour ambitions of promotion, their natural and national priorities for this time of the year, Tours of Catalunya and Basque Country (guessing they will be Div 1 Calendar), will be usurped by the points need to get the best results they can out of Samyn and Driedaagse.  But pedalling around the rainy cobbles of Belgium instead of foggy Pyrenean mountain will not stir the hearts of potential bank customers in Spain, and nor will the Flemish names that will have to replace Spanish ones in order to chase such points. 

Equally, a team like Bretagne Seche Environnement will have nothing to gain from exposure to the market in Italian autumnal races, or the Tour of Poland.

So teams lose not only local identity, and local riders, but also local sponsorship.  If the sport were awash with major international sponsors, that might not be a problem, but at the level that this applies to most sponsorship is fairly parochial, and squads at least mainly regional. 

Worst case scenario: races like the Canadian WT races and the Tour of Beijing are dropped onto this calendar because of pressure from Division 1 teams, and then the teams with the more limited budgets get forced to do the races with the worst cost-benefit analysis for their sponsors.

Who do the UCI expect to be the sponsors of teams at this level?
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: just some guy on June 27, 2014, 15:26
https://twitter.com/inrng/status/482515727237533696

so it begins max of 8 riders per team, chance for more wild cards, maybe , might not be.

this will allow the teams or force the teams to have less riders in their A squad.

Some time in September, October races and teams will finally workout what is going on and say no I think, and jt will be all too late
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: just some guy on June 27, 2014, 15:54
And here is the pdf the info comes from
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Leadbelly on June 27, 2014, 16:11

Some time in September, October races and teams will finally workout what is going on and say no I think, and jt will be all too late

There's something wrong with teams going to eight riders (even if it only affect GTs)? or what's the problem?
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: just some guy on June 27, 2014, 16:16
There's something wrong with teams going to eight riders (even if it only affect GTs)? or what's the problem?
Not really 8 riders for me is ok, but these type of changes are part of a massive change to cycling, that tbh no one seems to know about or really care,  and that's what I was referring to
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Leadbelly on June 27, 2014, 16:23
Sounds like there's a question for Oleg there.
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Flo on June 27, 2014, 16:24
I reckon the team size for 1 week stage races will decrease too then, and for one day races, in other words less riders needed = loads of riders without a team.

Post Merge: June 27, 2014, 16:27
I don't really see what is wrong with teams of 9 in GTs, also 8 instead of 9 means injuries, illness, and especially riders that drop out will have a bigger impact.
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: just some guy on June 27, 2014, 19:09
Sounds like there's a question for Oleg there.

Good idea
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: DB-Coop on June 27, 2014, 21:01
I reckon the team size for 1 week stage races will decrease too then, and for one day races, in other words less riders needed = loads of riders without a team.

Post Merge: June 27, 2014, 16:27
I don't really see what is wrong with teams of 9 in GTs, also 8 instead of 9 means injuries, illness, and especially riders that drop out will have a bigger impact.

Agree the 9 for GT is less of a problem than 8 for week long races. Basically 5-6 is ideal to create fun racing I think, but you have to allow some room for injury and much different parcours in a GC, I like 9 there, but 6 would be fine at Romandie imo.
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: DB-Coop on June 27, 2014, 21:14
Classics would be good with 5 riders, this would force skilled riders to be used early meaning bigger chance of an outside attack winning.
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Flo on June 27, 2014, 21:20
Classics would be good with 5 riders, this would force skilled riders to be used early meaning bigger chance of an outside attack winning.

5 seems a bit on the extreme side. 6-7 would be good. 7. Let's say 7 :P
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: DB-Coop on June 27, 2014, 21:25
5 seems a bit on the extreme side. 6-7 would be good. 7. Let's say 7 :P

Honestly I think 5 would work, teams would be forced to work together from the start, no OPQS just taking charge, then later on you could actually see riders being isolated, meaning that they would have to evaluate all attacks, go or stay, I think it would be great. Might need six for the long ones Paris-Tours etc. but for Arrow and the likes I think 5 is perfect. Think about Wattenfall, the sprinters would be far less sure of a sprint, because they can not use up any riders if they want a good lead out. Meaning the break could just happen. Dare I say it GP Ouest France may even be good  :o
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Flo on June 27, 2014, 21:32
Honestly I think 5 would work, teams would be forced to work together from the start, no OPQS just taking charge, then later on you could actually see riders being isolated, meaning that they would have to evaluate all attacks, go or stay, I think it would be great. Might need six for the long ones Paris-Tours etc. but for Arrow and the likes I think 5 is perfect. Think about Wattenfall, the sprinters would be far less sure of a sprint, because they can not use up any riders if they want a good lead out. Meaning the break could just happen. Dare I say it GP Ouest France may even be good  :o

Maybe.

Don't like small teams, lots of riders lose their jobs.
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: DB-Coop on June 27, 2014, 21:37
Maybe.

Don't like small teams, lots of riders lose their jobs.

I would like to see an expanded WT program as well, which would mean team size would be close to what it is now. Meaning more chances for second tier riders in the teams to win races.
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: LukasCPH on July 01, 2014, 11:52
Not really 8 riders for me is ok, but these type of changes are part of a massive change to cycling, that tbh no one seems to know about or really care,  and that's what I was referring to
It's all like the introduction of the ProTour in 2004/2005. That was rushed to have it ready and implemented in 2005, and cycling still suffers from the after-effects to this day.

This is done not quite as rushed (there's been talk of it for over a year; only nobody but a few nerds - read us - has noticed).

But the sensible, proactive decision for the guy in charge, and that is Cookson, would be to say: "Guys, let's do this right, not fast", and wait for a good concept to be agreed upon by all (or most) parties affected.
Instead, he takes a backseat and lets things run their course. I'm not impressed. :(
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: just some guy on July 01, 2014, 11:57
It's all like the introduction of the ProTour in 2004/2005. That was rushed to have it ready and implemented in 2005, and cycling still suffers from the after-effects to this day.

This is done not quite as rushed (there's been talk of it for over a year; only nobody but a few nerds - read us - has noticed).

But the sensible, proactive decision for the guy in charge, and that is Cookson, would be to say: "Guys, let's do this right, not fast", and wait for a good concept to be agreed upon by all (or most) parties affected.
Instead, he takes a backseat and lets things run their course. I'm not impressed. :(
Worse fus

Many of these ideas came froma working group, they were ideas, many Pat has said himself were sh*te.

since Pat left these ideas are becoming facts .

so a bad idea from Pats time is becoming new cycling in Cooksons
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: LukasCPH on July 01, 2014, 11:59
5 seems a bit on the extreme side. 6-7 would be good. 7. Let's say 7 :P
Honestly I think 5 would work, teams would be forced to work together from the start, no OPQS just taking charge, then later on you could actually see riders being isolated, meaning that they would have to evaluate all attacks, go or stay, I think it would be great. Might need six for the long ones Paris-Tours etc. but for Arrow and the likes I think 5 is perfect. Think about Wattenfall, the sprinters would be far less sure of a sprint, because they can not use up any riders if they want a good lead out. Meaning the break could just happen. Dare I say it GP Ouest France may even be good  :o
Loads of .2 races have 5-rider teams. On the other side they have more than 25 teams participating, in some Italian races there are 30-40 teams!
And these races with small teams are generally great. None of that calculating "let's reel in the break with 10 to go and see how we fare in the sprint" stuff, you have to race much more actively to get a result.

Smaller squad sizes at races would lead to smaller team sizes.
However, that would also mean that a sponsor would need to invest less money than now for a team that has a chance of racing the biggest events, if the number of teams at a race is increased similarly - 5-rider teams at the Classics would mean that even with 30-35 participating teams, you'd have a smaller peloton than now (although you'd have a bigger and longer caravan of team cars).
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: DB-Coop on July 01, 2014, 12:45
Smaller squad sizes at races would lead to smaller team sizes.
However, that would also mean that a sponsor would need to invest less money than now for a team that has a chance of racing the biggest events, if the number of teams at a race is increased similarly - 5-rider teams at the Classics would mean that even with 30-35 participating teams, you'd have a smaller peloton than now (although you'd have a bigger and longer caravan of team cars).

I don't know if that many teams is good though, could easially come in a situation where you have all the best riders on OPQS and Lotto plus a few more so 20 teams send one in the break and they can't pull them back, that would be bad too imo. Also I think the cost of teams is sky high because of technology, you can't compete with Sky, Astana, Tinkoff etc. unless you pay up big.
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: just some guy on September 17, 2014, 11:36
CPA has released some thoughts re 2015-18 cycling reforms

gives lots of green lights , salary cap, hot or cold rules etc

I will have a detailed read soon, but 2 week Vuelta mentioned  :S

Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: just some guy on September 17, 2014, 11:44
Ok some stuff

we will have 18 WT teams 2015 and 2016 ( new info 2016)

The vuelta to be 2 weeks long ?

set regulations onmrace set up and safely (mental this is being talked about in 2014)

Salary cap to help even out teams

They have issues with the point scoring system of 1st 3 only, a negative against sprinters

But major issue  is the 2nd division they don't like any of it  :D
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Tuart on September 17, 2014, 13:15
Eh, don't need to read a UCI document of all things to know how they'll change Women's Cycling. It'll look something like this:

(http://www.everglow.us/pic/content/everglow-exit-sign-2.jpg)
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: DB-Coop on September 17, 2014, 15:28
Ok some stuff

we will have 18 WT teams 2015 and 2016 ( new info 2016)

The vuelta to be 2 weeks long ?

set regulations onmrace set up and safely (mental this is being talked about in 2014)

Salary cap to help even out teams

They have issues with the point scoring system of 1st 3 only, a negative against sprinters

But major issue  is the 2nd division they don't like any of it  :D

If the riders accept a salary cap they are less capable of working together than I thought, (Also I am not sure if a salary cap is even legal in all places)

Regulation is silly talk, it is super easy to do, and I bet they will overreact.

2nd division will be garbage, when someone is relegated they will in 100% of the cases fold unless ASO gives them a wild card to the TdF. A two week Vuelta is just bullsh*t. Generally when you know that anybody could do better if they cared it is hard to like the UCI, either way they should give me a call or something, bet I could do better than what they currently do.
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Armchair Cyclist on September 17, 2014, 15:40
No apparent immediate entry to division 1A for new teams, only by promotion.  No brand new teams straight into the top division? Or just another rule for the UCI to disregard when it seems expedient?
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: just some guy on September 23, 2014, 20:10
This thread is going to get a workout over the next 2 years

Giro looking to be shortened by the UCI

http://velonews.competitor.com/2014/09/news/uci-ends-beijing-tour-sets-groundwork-major-changes_347001
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: just some guy on September 23, 2014, 20:43
Via fmk on twitter

Professional Cycling Council

President

Mr David LAPPARTIENT (FRA)

Members appointed by the UCI Management Committee
Gilles Delion (FRA)
Marco Pinotti (ITA)
Mike Plant (USA)
Kristy Scrymgeour (AUS)
Tom Van Damme (BEL)

Riders' representative, member of the UCI Athletes' Commission
Bernhard Eisel (AUT)

Members appointed by the associations
Gianni Bugno (ITA) - Member appointed by the CPA
Luuc Eisenga (NED) - AIGCP Member appointed by a UCI ProTeam
Alfonso Galilea (ESP) - AIGCP Member appointed by a UCI ProTeam
Charly Mottet (FRA) - Member appointed by the holders of a UCI WorldTour license
Christian Prudhomme (FRA) - Member appointed by the other race organisers of the UCI WorldTour, a member of the AIOCC

Honorary President
Vittorio Adorni (ITA)

Observer status
Roger Legeay (FRA)

These are the bfolks making the suggestions
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Leadbelly on September 24, 2014, 18:13

http://velonews.competitor.com/2014/09/news/uci-ends-beijing-tour-sets-groundwork-major-changes_347001

Quote
It’s unclear how much race organizers or teams are in agreement with the proposals. Last week, Vuelta a España director Javier Guillén said the Spanish tour, which is owned by Tour de France owners ASO, was opposed to reducing the Vuelta to less than three weeks.

However if we go back to last year Guillen was saying something different (http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/length-of-the-vuelta-a-espana-up-for-discussion).

Quote
...A cut from a three-week race must be done for the right reasons and would be accepted if a new calendar was brought in and other races were in agreement. But we would have to get something back in return. If this meant that we could count on Froome, Contador or Purito [Rodríguez] always riding, it would be welcome.

So a two week Vuelta (and Giro) probably ties in with the Oleg Challenge of the big guns at every GT.
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: cj2002 on October 15, 2014, 14:52
Cookson insists... I'll be honest, I stopped reading properly after that  :shh

Quote
The Cyclistes Professionnels Associés - the riders' union - is against a reduction in the number of riders in WorldTour teams, fearing this will leave some riders without a contract in the future. Vuelta director Javier Guillén hit back at the idea of cutting the Spanish Grand Tour, while the AIGCP - the teams' association - also have doubts about the current structure of the reforms.

So the teams, the riders and the races are unhappy. Which leaves who, exactly?

Oh, and JSG - It looks like Brian has a message for you...

Quote
“At the end of the day, the UCI is a representational body and is owned by the federations. Perhaps it's a little archaic in the way its democratic structure operates but if you're a member of a national federation, you have a voice. I urge people to join their national federations around the world rather than send angry tweets.

That media BS reasoned comment piece in full: http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/cookson-insists-worldtour-reforms-will-be-in-place-for-2017
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: just some guy on October 15, 2014, 15:15
Angry tweets, well I never   :-x


ok once or twice  ;)
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: just some guy on October 15, 2014, 15:20
Haha deluded fool

We have the final word because we are the international governing body for the sport. We're trying to bring everyone together in a way that works for everyone and gives everyone a sustainable future.”

 

The ASO says hello
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Mellow Velo on October 15, 2014, 16:30
However if we go back to last year Guillen was saying something different (http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/length-of-the-vuelta-a-espana-up-for-discussion).

So a two week Vuelta (and Giro) probably ties in with the Oleg Challenge of the big guns at every GT.

Just a word on this "idea" of making two of the Grand Tours distinctly less grand.
Happened to be looking at some race day stats the other day, for the historical countries providing the bulk of the European calendars.

Spain:
2014 - 66*
2013 - 76
2012 - 82
2011 - 105
2010 - 113
2009 - 117
2008 - 158
2007 - 153
2006 - 157
2005 - 170

Italy:
2014 - 90
2013 - 104*
2012 - 135
2011 - 156
2010 - 152
2009 - 155
2008 - 158*
2007 - 153

* Excluding Worlds.

That's a 61% reduction in Spanish race days within the past 10 years. (42% within 4 years in Italy)

My point being that if these countries keep hemorrhaging race days at anything like the recent rate, a two week Vuelta could itself become vulnerable to extraction, without some serious under-pining from the ASO.
The rot has already set in. It doesn't need a helping hand from an experiment.
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Leadbelly on October 28, 2014, 14:14
https://twitter.com/stevebeckett/status/527043263384268800

Some alternative views on what should be done.

1. Get rid of the World Championships and give the rainbow stripes to whoever is leading the WT
2. Collaboration between ASO, UCI and Avignon
3. Completely independent drug blah blah blah
4. No mandatory devo squads for the WT teams. Introduce transfer system
5. Consistent tv coverage

He obviously though doesn't read Velorooms (and this thread in particular), as he's still confused and wrong about Division 1a and 1b and the race days.

Quote
1b division .... consisting of 8 teams who are permitted to race c50 days of the WorldTour
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: LukasCPH on October 28, 2014, 14:53
https://twitter.com/stevebeckett/status/527043263384268800

Some alternative views on what should be done.

1. Get rid of the World Championships and give the rainbow stripes to whoever is leading the WT
2. Collaboration between ASO, UCI and Avignon
3. Completely independent drug blah blah blah
4. No mandatory devo squads for the WT teams. Introduce transfer system
5. Consistent tv coverage

He obviously though doesn't read Velorooms (and this thread in particular), as he's still confused and wrong about Division 1a and 1b and the race days.
My first thought was "Who the flip is Steve Beckett?"
Looked at his LinkedIn - some dude working in marketing and sponsor relations.

Haven't read the article, will do so later, only replying to LB's bullet points:
1. Yeah, let's get rid of the single one event that trespasses decades and centuries in this sport, and defines it like no other. :fp
2. That should be a given, and is necessary. Completely in favour.
3. See 2.
4a. No mandatory devo squads? On the contrary! What would you think if a top football team had no youth teams at all?
4b. Transfer system? I quite like the part of cycling that contracts are contracts, and honoured as such, instead of being torn apart if only there's enough money involved. Again comparing to football - I wouldn't like every Tom, Dick and Harry to get a 5-year contract just because his team hopes he'll develop and can be sold on for cash. That would mean more job security for riders, though (provided teams have the cash, which sometimes is a problem even with 1-year contracts).
5. See 3.
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Leadbelly on October 28, 2014, 15:37
Well I was paraphrasing a bit, so maybe I didn't get the full gist of what he was trying to say in each case.

I think in the transfer system point, he's just wanting to see more money trickle down from the top in the cycling pyramid. How it would work in practice I don't know. A few thousand (2?5?10?) even as just a solidarity payment wouldn't be noticed by a top WT team, but could be useful for a small continental team or amateur outfit.
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: cj2002 on October 28, 2014, 15:52
OK, I've read it.

It would be all too easy to dismiss Beckett as a marketing hack, full of clichés about blue-sky thinking. But, he has a point. The World Tour brand is meaningless, and he is sticking his head above the parapet to propose some ways of improving it.

I get the impression he understands cycling - perhaps he even considers himself a fan - his suggestions re: the rainbow jersey aren't made flippantly, for example. Many of his proposals are nothing more than pipe dreams - several are completely unworkable. But if a debate on the future of cycling - a progressive and sustainable future - isn't started soon, we will lose more top-level sponsors, more top-level teams and more historic events.

Good on Steve Beckett for saying something - anything - that might get some sort of ball rolling in any direction at all!
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: just some guy on November 07, 2014, 11:41
 https://twitter.com/SadhbhOS/status/530677871304798208

putting this here as well, as Marc makes a point we had missed, in the new plan WT would not be abke to compete in races like the Coupe de France series

and also shows this is not going to be smooth for the UCI to start 
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Leadbelly on November 07, 2014, 12:20

in the new plan WT would not be abke to compete in races like the Coupe de France series


Does he say that? All he seems to be saying is that other WT teams (beside the French ones obviously) don't treat the races with respect. Either they send weak teams or “For example, a few years ago, Skil-Shimano, who weren’t in the WorldTour, wanted to get an invitation to the Tour so they did all of the races in France. Once they were well ensconced, we didn’t see them again."

I don't see anything about WT not being able to do Coupe de France races.

(http://inrng.com/medias/images/ucireform3.jpg)

This graphic from earlier in the thread shows that WT teams can continue to do .HC and .1 races, but obviously it's their choice which ones they do.
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: just some guy on November 07, 2014, 12:59
Does he say that? All he seems to be saying is that other WT teams (beside the French ones obviously) don't treat the races with respect. Either they send weak teams or “For example, a few years ago, Skil-Shimano, who weren’t in the WorldTour, wanted to get an invitation to the Tour so they did all of the races in France. Once they were well ensconced, we didn’t see them again."

I don't see anything about WT not being able to do Coupe de France races.

(http://inrng.com/medias/images/ucireform3.jpg)

This graphic from earlier in the thread shows that WT teams can continue to do .HC and .1 races, but obviously it's their choice which ones they do.
Heres the quote I am think of not direct Coupe but lower level races which Coupe is I guess

Madiot pointed to the example of Spain, where the gradual devastation of the local racing calendar has led to a drain of sponsors – Movistar is the only remaining WorldTour team – and he expressed concern that a similar process might take place in France. He also gave short shrift to the proposed changes to the UCI calendar that are slated for 2017, which would prevent WorldTour teams from participating in lower-level races.


“That project should be forgotten. From what I know about it, everything will be reviewed,” Madiot said. “National protectionism should be enacted. We can find an arrangement that would allow greater participation from foreign teams in French races.”



I guess the other thing to consider is the 80 race day cap for riders (which no one really agress with except the UCI it seems) and less WT riders per team, it maight make hard to even ride a 1.1 race

Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Leadbelly on November 07, 2014, 13:28
Just out of interest, does anybody know how many race days FDJ had this year? Just want to see how it would compare with what I calculated a WT team under the 2017 rules might race.
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: just some guy on November 08, 2014, 07:00
All work done via twitter and might take sone work LB

but race days

PCS Season Ranking Race Days (http://www.procyclingstats.com/rankings/PCS_Season_Ranking_2014_11_08_RaceDays)
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Leadbelly on November 08, 2014, 10:05
Thanks for that, but it's the team's race days (not the riders) I'm after really. There doesn't seem to be an option to view that particular stat on either PCS, CQ or Cycling Archives. I guess I'll have to do it manually and go through the list of races (ugh  :P).

FDJ

154 WT days (149 presumably next year with no Beijing)
12 Asian Tour days (Oman and Qatar)
105 European Tour days (could be +/- a few days, but around this figure)

Think that's them all, with none in Africa/America/Oceania. Won't count the Worlds.

So that's ~271 race days in 2014.

Using my earlier calculations (with assumptions of 22 men teams, every rider races close to the max number of days, reduced teams of 8 or 6 depending on the race etc etc).

I think it could work for 8 men teams in Division 1 races, and 6 men teams below that.

A 1A team will have 120 1A races days and say 30 out of the 50 1B days.

(120+30) x 8 = 1200 rider days to be filled

Don't know how many days the 22 riders (and maybe there'll be extra room for neo-pros like now) will race, but maybe in the 70-80 range.

22 x 70 = 1540 rider days
22 x 80 = 1760 rider days

1540 - 1200 = 340 free days
1760 - 1200 = 560 free days

So they'll have between 340-560 rider days to fill in the lower division races (6 man teams).

340/6 = ~57
560/6 = ~93

So that gives 120 1A race days, 30 1B races days and anywhere between 57 and 93 race days in the lower division.

Using a maximum of 80 race days per rider could mean losing twenty eight race days [271 - (120+30+93) = 28].

If you discount Beijing that's 23 days and if you factor in stagiaires then it could be reduced a bit more, but you'd still be looking at losing a few days races if the maximum number was capped at 80.
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Leadbelly on November 10, 2014, 21:36
It's almost as if Velofacts had been reading the last few posts.  :P

http://www.velofacts.com/2014/11/10/number-of-races-of-the-cycling-teams-2014/

275 race days for FDJ according to them.

Some other interesting stats in there (Sky with nearly sixty less race days than AG2R), but that's going off topic a bit.
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: just some guy on November 13, 2014, 05:20
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/uci-stakeholders-to-meet-in-paris-for-decisive-worldtour-reform-meeting

a little new news

team maybe 24 riders now, up from 22 , which brings them quiet a bit closer to what some WT are at now anyway, minus the neo-pros , who would in thus system be Devo riders.

meeting Thursday to iron out the plan, but it seems the ASO ( as we all could have said before this started) are not playing nice when it doesn't suit them, ie$ .

This we might see some battle grounds rather than healthy discussion fwiw
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: just some guy on November 15, 2014, 06:44
In this case I think no news is not good news

If the Stakeholders had said nope we are not playing ball, then I think we would have heard already
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Leadbelly on November 22, 2014, 09:43
http://www.nieuwsblad.be/sportwereld/cnt/dmf20141121_01389427

Quote
To get out of the current impasse, Cookson introduced yesterday the Challenge Tour, a completely new competition that has to relate to the World Tour as the Europa League to the Champions League. The Challenge Tour will like the World Tour 120 race days count and also consist of sixteen teams. The World Tour degrades every year one team, whose place is taken by the best team in the Challenge Tour. Ethical criteria - too many doping - would lead to degradation.

Doesn't sound like that new an idea. Just seems to be a doubled in size Div 1B, but with it being bigger does that mean you have to be in this new Challenge Tour to get a GT invite? Would it force the Italian PCT to join this new grouping just to get their Giro invite? Need more info (as always).
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Flo on November 22, 2014, 10:11
 :S

Let's just keep it as it is now okay Crookson?
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: Flo on November 22, 2014, 10:24


(http://inrng.com/medias/images/procyclingcalendar2017uci.jpg)


Just read this again. No Catalunya. Pais Vasco second division. All races shortened. Maybe Giro and Vuelta 2 weeks. Do they want to kill Spanish cycling? Do they want to kill cycling? Pais Vasco will lose it's status as one of the Big 5 1 week stage races
Giro and Vuelta will become even less relevant compared to the tour :barf
Catalunya 3rd division?
This means riders like Piti, Alberto,Jrod won't ride Pais Vasco or Catalunya or Cali.

Fecking hell. Why? I don't understand. Why? Why? Why the need for such retarded changes when things work just fine right now. Feck off Crookson. Crawl back into the hole you came from. Bring back Pat.
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Flo on November 22, 2014, 10:27
This just makes me so angry and sad and frustrated because I can't do anything about it and the teams and riders just seem to let it happen :angry
Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: Leadbelly on November 22, 2014, 11:42

Why the need for such retarded changes when things work just fine right now.

Are things really working fine at the moment? I'm not so sure, but whether these changes are the solution I don't know.

I'm just glad I'm not the one who has to satisfy all these disparate groups and find an answer.  :P

Title: Re: 2020 the road map for cycling
Post by: LukasCPH on November 22, 2014, 13:22
Do they want to kill Spanish cycling?
Not necessarily. But Spain is in a deep economical crisis. This project (whether you like it or not) attempts to put cycling on a stable financial basis. Keeping loads of races in a country that's in recession isn't going to help in that regard.

Fecking hell. Why? I don't understand. Why? Why?
Money, money, money ... ;)

Feck off Crookson. Crawl back into the hole you came from. Bring back Pat.
To be fair, this concept was drawn up during Pat's reign.

Why the need for such retarded changes when things work just fine right now.
Why indeed?
Money is an issue, obviously: Cycling isn't a stable sport right now - ProConti riders not receiving their wages for months (even if it's only one team per year), races not happening for financial reasons etc.
I see the need to reform the sport from what it is now to something that can be successful and viable in the future, and attractive to sponsors (because cycling isn't ever going to work as a professional sport without them).


What I disagree on are the details of the plan: Why shorten the traditional 1-week stage races? I can see why P-N and T-A shouldn't overlap, but you could easily run P-N Sunday-Sunday and T-A Tuesday/Wednesday-Tuesday/Wednesday (with a break of only 3-4 days until M-SR). A similar solution could be found for Dauphiné/Suisse.
Bringing races into line like this without considering their traditional dates & routes, and not least the races around them, isn't going to work. At the moment, T-A is preceded by Roma Maxima & Strade Bianche, both relatively high-prestige races and often contested by the same riders as T-A. Where are they going to be in the new calendar? The plan is top-heavy, but doesn't think about trickle-down effects much.

Or do it like the Swiss and Poles and have the races coordinate their timetables so that one race (the one with the more interesting stage that day) starts early, the other race (with the less interesting stage) starts late - when race 1 is finished, broadcasters could switch to coverage from race 2 without any break. The next day, positions are changed around, so that race 2 has an interesting stage that starts early and race 1 has a late-starting sprint stage.

Another issue is the lack of transparency: The introduction of the ProTour 10 years ago was done almost in secret, and very rushed. This one isn't going to start next year, at least - but our public discussions are largely based on guesswork and leaks from one year ago.


Put the plans on the table!
Let stakeholders (federations, teams, riders, race organisers, sponsors, fans) discuss them, discover flaws, come up with improvements, and get the sport going forward for the benefit of everybody involved.
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Mellow Velo on November 22, 2014, 15:31
 Less we forget, Flo, it was McQuaid who started this ball rolling, quite a few seasons ago.
 I think we can all share the sentiment that this omlette is breaking an awful lot of eggs though.
I also don't like it one bit, either. I don't follow the logic that says less race days will increase revenue.
The chase for global money inevitable means that the poor men of Europe will suffer the most.
Only two years ago, Pais Vasco was dead in the water. Catalunya much the same.
So, in their eyes, up with affluent Arabian races and down with the traditional Spanish stagers, makes economic sense.

However, wtf is the Tour of Beijing doing on that calendar?
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: LukasCPH on November 22, 2014, 17:03
However, wtf is the Tour of Beijing doing on that calendar?
This prospective calendar was drawn up in 2013, when the Tour of Beijing was still well and alive.
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Mellow Velo on November 22, 2014, 18:12
This prospective calendar was drawn up in 2013, when the Tour of Beijing was still well and alive.

Well, I suppose that means a glimmer of hope for one of the Spanish races, perhaps.
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Flo on November 22, 2014, 19:24
Well, I suppose that means a glimmer of hope for one of the Spanish races, perhaps.

 :=B
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Leadbelly on November 22, 2014, 21:41
http://www.tuttobiciweb.it/?page=news&cod=74203&tp=n

Some more (possible) details and some views from interested parties.

Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: just some guy on November 23, 2014, 07:57
1st it was drawn up in Pat's time as one idea, he is on recond as saying it will be the death of cycling.

the 16 team div 2, super smart move, 120 race days up from 50 in old plan , twice as many teams.

so many euro race days will be saved, also will mean 8 more teams paying large licence fees to the UCI, these teams will all need the same set up as Div 1 teams

24 riders 8 devo, so more riders with better contracts.

The div 2 teams will be the wildcard teams for div 1 races so all major what is now PCT will need to step up or basically be what we know as conti teams.

So basically

there will be 2 16 team WT running during the year,  win div 2 you go up to div1, lose and you drop down, many of the races which were not part of Div1 or 2 and people getting up set, but had euro historical value may become div 2 races

such as Pais Vasco or Catalunya

will add some more later

 
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: just some guy on November 23, 2014, 07:59
Ps not read LB post will GT it later
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Flo on November 23, 2014, 08:16
Quote
24 riders 8 devo, so more riders with better contracts.

Nope, name me 1 WT team that has 8 u23 riders at the moment. And we'd see riders like Valgren be downgraded to what is it the devo teams operate on, continental level? Simply because teams don't have room. So every team will be made up of the most talented 25-35y riders. Riders like Tosatto would likely end up on the street. 18x roughly 4 = 72 riders that would lose their job. And I don't think you can force a team to have a devo team. Money problems and all that.

What is the point of lowering team sizes by 25%? To force more riders out of the sport or into the continental circuit?
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: just some guy on November 23, 2014, 09:10
Nope, name me 1 WT team that has 8 u23 riders at the moment. And we'd see riders like Valgren be downgraded to what is it the devo teams operate on, continental level? Simply because teams don't have room. So every team will be made up of the most talented 25-35y riders. Riders like Tosatto would likely end up on the street. 18x roughly 4 = 72 riders that would lose their job. And I don't think you can force a team to have a devo team. Money problems and all that.

What is the point of lowering team sizes by 25%? To force more riders out of the sport or into the continental circuit?

nope florry.

many what we think of PCT have only 18 or so riders, rules are 16.

so they woukd need more riders.

So say Drapac want to ride the challenge tour, they would need 8 more rider to come up to 24 and 8 more devo riders, the riders would have the same min wage and other requirements,  so in fact more riders would be at a better level,  Valgren might drop to a Div 2 team sure, but he would be a leader with higher pay.

At the moment 18 × 30 riders 540 WT riders plus 2*neo 36 = 576 riders, but we know that is not full and if we add 18 riders average to PCT to bring the teams tomthe same amount , som14 ×18 = 252 , 288 + 576 =828 and many of the PCT riders would be devo riders and be better for it

new system 32 teams 24 riders = 768 full paid riders plus 256 devo riders 1024 riders and at least the 24 riders are a must otherwise teams will not survive.

another point is the Div 3 would have the devo teams and some other young devo teams, plus some old racers, the racing could be bonkers fun to watch

somthe new system for full time senor riders 0+/-0 basically



Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Flo on November 23, 2014, 09:32
nope florry.

many what we think of PCT have only 18 or so riders, rules are 16.

so they woukd need more riders.

So say Drapac want to ride the challenge tour, they would need 8 more rider to come up to 24 and 8 more devo riders, the riders would have the same min wage and other requirements,  so in fact more riders would be at a better level,  Valgren might drop to a Div 2 team sure, but he would be a leader with higher pay.

At the moment 18 × 30 riders 540 WT riders plus 2*neo 36 = 576 riders, but we know that is not full and if we add 18 riders average to PCT to bring the teams tomthe same amount , som14 ×18 = 252 , 288 + 576 =828 and many of the PCT riders would be devo riders and be better for it

new system 32 teams 24 riders = 768 full paid riders plus 256 devo riders 1024 riders and at least the 24 riders are a must otherwise teams will not survive.

another point is the Div 3 would have the devo teams and some other young devo teams, plus some old racers, the racing could be bonkers fun to watch

somthe new system for full time senor riders 0+/-0 basically





So div 2 = div 1? It's the same level? Challenge tour is WT level? I don't understand anything.

PS 30 riders per team includes 2 neo

Quote
another point is the Div 3 would have the devo teams and some other young devo teams, plus some old racers, the racing could be bonkers fun to watch

just makes me sad... old loyal workhorses forced to ride div 3 because teams only have room for the best riders

and teams would never gamble on promising young riders

like I said riders like Valgren and CJJ or Formolo, Dillier, WEllens for that matter down to conti level

blegh
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: just some guy on November 23, 2014, 09:41
Nope Diller Vakgren would ride Devo then probably div 1 maybe div2

I will try and write everything I understand in a long post soon
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Flo on November 23, 2014, 09:44
Nope Diller Vakgren would ride Devo then probably div 1 maybe div2

I will try and write everything I understand in a long post soon

yes so they would ride devo until 23yrs then up to div 1/2 then they have to get used to that level. So rider development is much slower. They would get to the level they're at right now at around 25 years old

devo = conti level

right?
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: just some guy on November 23, 2014, 09:58
Not quite
yes so they would ride devo until 23yrs then up to div 1/2 then they have to get used to that level. So rider development is much slower. They would get to the level they're at right now at around 25 years old

devo = conti level

right?
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: DB-Coop on November 23, 2014, 10:01
Somebody really needs to call the UCI and tell them about that major hole there is in their plan being that the cost of being a D2 team vs what you get doesn't add up.

At the moment the pro-conti teams are barely surviving (most of them at least) what do these teams get after being D2. Higher fees to UCI, A lot of expensive travels to races that their sponsors could care less about, and of cause they lose the ability to get any starting money from said races, as that money goes to the UCI instead. The expenses basically mean that the pro-conti teams will only survive if they get the invites they want from D2. Note: it will have to be the really big ones ie: Tour, not sure even Giro would be enough for a team to survive.

This whole scheme will not be good for cycling, and cycling will lose money rather than gain it (although UCI might gain money short term)
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Flo on November 23, 2014, 10:01
 :S :o :beaten
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Flo on November 23, 2014, 10:03
Quote
(although UCI might gain money short term)

Mellow Velo posted on CN :

Quote
Ripping the guts out of the old calendar and selling seats and popcorn on enclosed circuits is the reform Cookson is proposing.
Some people see this as a good thing; the way forward.
Others, like me, will see it as the (another) sport being dumbed down to sell to the masses.
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: DB-Coop on November 23, 2014, 10:16
Mellow Velo posted on CN :

As far as it being the way forward we have to look at what the result is for a race, lets take Dubai for an example:

Dubai:

2014: 16 Teams, 5 conti, 11 WT. Apart from a few of these conti teams (those sponsors by the race organizers anyways) they all collected huge start money. Start money makes up a huge part of a WT teams budget. Many of the conti teams are only in as fillers to allow the invite of that many WT teams, clearly Dubai did not want to spend a lot of money on inviting more conti teams.

2016: 16 Teams will be forced to ride from div 2 this means that the teams will get no start money, but will have to pay for travel to Dubai instead. At 8 rider per team, it is hard to see the race inviting more than 6 more WT teams getting them to 22, these teams will have to recieve starting money still however when the number of teams receiving starting money is reduced, so is the money that they will get. The other 5 teams get no starting money. The UCI collects money from the race from it being div 2.

How anybody can see this as a step forward I can't see.
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: just some guy on November 23, 2014, 10:47
Mellow Velo posted on CN :

With adding 70 race days to div2 that is simply not true, WT 2.1 1.1 etc etc just different names

the old 50 day idea yes,

if the remove the 3rd week of GTs sure, but adding the 70 changes things a lot, people need to be a little less knee jerk reaction

]
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Flo on November 23, 2014, 10:50
With adding 70 race days to div2 that is simply not true, WT 2.1 1.1 etc etc just different names

the old 50 day idea yes,

if the remove the 3rd week of GTs sure, but adding the 70 changes things a lot, people need to be a little less knee jerk reaction

]

how can it not be a knee jerk reaction when the UCI won't give us any information while they want to turn the entire system upside down?

and you can't make me believe it's the same system just different names, why would they want to change it otherwise.

and they still want to make 24 rider teams, obligatory development teams for each of the 32 (?) teams, salary cap, race day cap, etc
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: DB-Coop on November 23, 2014, 10:55
With adding 70 race days to div2 that is simply not true, WT 2.1 1.1 etc etc just different names

the old 50 day idea yes,

if the remove the 3rd week of GTs sure, but adding the 70 changes things a lot, people need to be a little less knee jerk reaction

]

But this just increase the problem, even with the WT today you have loads of races that teams are forced to do that they would not do other wise. Euskatel at Roubaix being the prime example of cause. The div2 is basically a whole collection of such races. With 120 days it is very likely that a team will only see 20 days of racing in an area that interests them. This is a huge problem. Basically the cost of racing races that the team could not care less about vs the gain from a few days in an area of interest plus any div1 invites a team secures. Lack of start money is also a problem of cause.
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: LukasCPH on November 23, 2014, 12:48
UCI might gain money short term
And that's all the Aigle paper-pushers care about.

I can understand them, the Fendant du Valais doesn't come cheap. ;)
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: LukasCPH on November 23, 2014, 12:52
the UCI won't give us any information while they want to turn the entire system upside down?
This is the biggest problem in my opinion.
Wanting to change the system - OK, I can see the need for that. But doing it in secret and then presenting the plans once there's no turning back - that's not how I want this sport (or any sport, or anything else for that matter) to be governed.
Transparency! Is that not what Cookson was elected on? Put your words to action, Brian.

My opinions:
obligatory development teams for each of the 32 (?) teams
This is a very good idea. :cool :cool :cool

salary cap
This is necessary if you don't want to see the big teams get ever more ahead of the smaller teams. :cool

race day cap
This is stupid. Let a rider race as much (or as little) as he - well, his team - wants. :( :( :(
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: LukasCPH on November 23, 2014, 12:59
Changes to UCI regulations, in force from 2015 (http://uci.ch/mm/Document/News/Rulesandregulation/16/69/09/Colonnededroite-20150101-ModificationsPart2-ENG_English.pdf)

Main changes:
- Continental Tours run January 1st-December 31st*
- GTs have 9 riders per team, other races are now limited to 8 per team (was 10 before)
- Penalties for littering outside 'waste zones'
- Penalties for not observing order set by race organiser at team presentation/stage sign-in
- Introduction of 'waste zones' (should, not must, so not mandatory?)
- Continental races can be shortened - race organiser has right to be heard in that case
- Continental Tours leader's jersey abolished

*This year's races held in October-December were very quietly included on the 2014 via a letter sent by the UCI to the national federations back in February: UCI Continental circuits to be aligned with calendar year (CyclingQuotes) (http://www.cyclingquotes.com/news/uci_continental_circuits_to_be_aligned_with_calendar_year/)
I only noticed because Cycling South Africa tweeted about the letter. Nothing official from the UCI at all, on something as important as extending a season by 25% (time-wise). :fp
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Flo on November 23, 2014, 13:06

This is necessary if you don't want to see the big teams get ever more ahead of the smaller teams. :cool


but how would it work? 500,000 max so every rider who now makes more than that goes down to 500,000? Don't we need to reward better qualities with more money? Would riders with a low salary get an ever lower salary? Instead of rider A making 100,000 a year, rider B 500,000 and rider C 3,000,000, would we go to rider A 30,000, rider B 200,000 and rider C 500,000? Do we want the differences between cycling and other sports to become even bigger?
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Flo on November 23, 2014, 13:07

My opinions:This is a very good idea. :cool :cool :cool


Teams would need a bigger budget ??? how is that a good idea

why not just add those 8 rider spots to the normal team like it is now. what is the issue with that. that way youngsters can immediately ride the big races and the teams could fill those spots with riders they want, instead of mediocre talents simply because they need 8 u23 riders.

Besides, apparently the devo squads will be able to ride the same races the normal squads race. How is that going to work? If Sky devo races Trentino, normal SKy can't ride trentino? wtf
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: just some guy on November 23, 2014, 19:12
But this just increase the problem, even with the WT today you have loads of races that teams are forced to do that they would not do other wise. Euskatel at Roubaix being the prime example of cause. The div2 is basically a whole collection of such races. With 120 days it is very likely that a team will only see 20 days of racing in an area that interests them. This is a huge problem. Basically the cost of racing races that the team could not care less about vs the gain from a few days in an area of interest plus any div1 invites a team secures. Lack of start money is also a problem of cause.

all of these problems are the same as now.

I see this as going the same way as football, winning the Div2 title is very important, But here is the but there needs to be TV of the 120 Div 2 race days or the system is bust.

So the UCI needs 240 live TV days on Eurosport or whatever it is doing the cycling coverage.

But I will with the help of another poster try and get the new system down in writing as I see it
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: just some guy on November 23, 2014, 19:14
Teams would need a bigger budget ??? how is that a good idea

why not just add those 8 rider spots to the normal team like it is now. what is the issue with that. that way youngsters can immediately ride the big races and the teams could fill those spots with riders they want, instead of mediocre talents simply because they need 8 u23 riders.

Besides, apparently the devo squads will be able to ride the same races the normal squads race. How is that going to work? If Sky devo races Trentino, normal SKy can't ride trentino? wtf

And will never happen, and most likely will be a rule.

But T-A a Div 1 race will have 16 teams and then say 6 wildcards, all of these wildcards will come from Div 2 , Devo teams will be riding in the Div 3 or what will be the Pro-conti level
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: just some guy on November 23, 2014, 19:16
As far as it being the way forward we have to look at what the result is for a race, lets take Dubai for an example:

Dubai:

2014: 16 Teams, 5 conti, 11 WT. Apart from a few of these conti teams (those sponsors by the race organizers anyways) they all collected huge start money. Start money makes up a huge part of a WT teams budget. Many of the conti teams are only in as fillers to allow the invite of that many WT teams, clearly Dubai did not want to spend a lot of money on inviting more conti teams.

2016: 16 Teams will be forced to ride from div 2 this means that the teams will get no start money, but will have to pay for travel to Dubai instead. At 8 rider per team, it is hard to see the race inviting more than 6 more WT teams getting them to 22, these teams will have to recieve starting money still however when the number of teams receiving starting money is reduced, so is the money that they will get. The other 5 teams get no starting money. The UCI collects money from the race from it being div 2.

How anybody can see this as a step forward I can't see.

yes they will, this is being built into the system, Teams get a share of the money from race orgainisations
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: just some guy on November 23, 2014, 19:19
http://www.tuttobiciweb.it/?page=news&cod=74203&tp=n

Some more (possible) details and some views from interested parties.

GT

UCI | Spotlight on Reform of Cycling  in Salsomaggiore today at the conference organized by ' ACCPI . To moderate the meeting Sergio Meda that after the greeting of the President of LCP Vincenzo Scotti, kicked off interventions. Vegni Mauro , director of the Tour of Italy, has reconstructed the reasons that led to the idea of reform, then the president of the federation Belgian Tom Van Damme has updated the present (sports directors, organizers and runners) on the current state of the reform: "We are working on criteria ensuring more transparency, visibility, credibility and stability , what I present is a document Work still not final. There will be a first division consists of 16 teams , will be called the UCI World Tour : the question of mandatory participation, there may be only a selection of teams in order to develop cycling worldwide. A second division called UCI Challenge Tour consists of 18/22 teams that will have to find space in the national races along with WorldTeam , but also to Continental . A third division composed of UCI Continental Team and Development Team of WT Team (big news: race riders of these teams will have the biological passport). This is not a cycling compartmentalized , but there will be no possibility of movement between the different categories for both teams for racing (with the races that should have a proper marketing plan / finanziaro). At the start of the 1.1 races. Also, there may be foreign teams . And I can anticipate that in Belgium we will create a national cup, like the one that exists in France, reserved for Team Challenge. " "I understand the concern - continued Van Damme - of those who think that in 2017 there will be the risk of losing many places Work : I assure you that we will fight hard because it does not happen . We are aware that the reform should respect the tradition and history and many points are still under discussion : the number of athletes per team, racing days , farm team alongside WT or increase the number of riders per team with a number mandatory the Under-24 , this option that could limit the costs for the teams. There is still so much to do and discuss. " After that, the intervention of Stefano Feltrin (sports teams) , adviser to the League and member commission UCI road and sports groups: "There was a letter for sports groups Cookson and Lappartient in which it was shown that the conclusions reached not be shared , despite many consultations and debates. Once again, the project is being imposed from above , as a kind of taxation. The rules are not yet clear, the teams that recede - for example - should have a bearing on which to fall, otherwise the sponsors run away. " Federico Scaglia, Secretary dellACCPI , adds: "With rappresnetanti of the CPA and the French and Spanish we Assocorridori Chevalier met and reported four points that were not going to like the reform was set up in September: 1 - 850 runners with biological passport was passed in nearly half 2 - imbalance of earnings among the top 10 riders at the expense of fellow / rest of the Group 3 - shutdown, search the growth spettacolorità more than the movement (we did understand that we agree in valuing professionals, but pointed out that if we do not invest in young people, tomorrow we will not have professionals) 4 - Information objectively deficient to the runners. We should all participate in the change: the end of November there will be the meeting of the CPA and ask more insights. " Word then Luca Guercilena , team manager of the Trek and representative of sports directors : "The stability criterion for the teams seem latent The volume of jobs for technicians is high but there is a great risk of deprofessionalisation for lack of money. In this case they lose technicians, staff and athletes that will decrease in number. We need new rules for the internal core belonging to different categories. " Finally a word Franco Constantine , representative of the organizers : "In these 3 years we were never consulted , there are obvious problems of communication: pending reform nothing has changed, The situation continues to be difficult, the calendar is always detrimental to the minor races , the economic situation leading to the  cancellation of several races . At present urgent concrete action and we organizers must have the courage to face the reform and be proactive. " Salsomaggiore, Giulia De Maio
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Flo on November 24, 2014, 06:39
And will never happen, and most likely will be a rule.

But T-A a Div 1 race will have 16 teams and then say 6 wildcards, all of these wildcards will come from Div 2 , Devo teams will be riding in the Div 3 or what will be the Pro-conti level

Yes but div 1 teams can be invited to div 3 races.

I can see this becoming messy. Like Astana together with Vino4ever and the Kazakhy national team at the Tour of Almaty
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: just some guy on November 24, 2014, 07:26
Not if there is a simple rule

Devo and WT teams can not race in the same race.......
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Flo on November 24, 2014, 07:41
Not if there is a simple rule

Devo and WT teams can not race in the same race.......

Exactly my point, devo teams will get the scraps ;)
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: just some guy on November 24, 2014, 07:43
No they won't,  they will get a higher standard of racing than they get now.

Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Flo on November 24, 2014, 08:34
No they won't,  they will get a higher standard of racing than they get now.

the current devo teams yes, but the new devo teams will be made up of riders who would in the current system race WT races
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Leadbelly on November 24, 2014, 09:25
But this just increase the problem, even with the WT today you have loads of races that teams are forced to do that they would not do other wise. Euskatel at Roubaix being the prime example of cause. The div2 is basically a whole collection of such races. With 120 days it is very likely that a team will only see 20 days of racing in an area that interests them. This is a huge problem. Basically the cost of racing races that the team could not care less about vs the gain from a few days in an area of interest plus any div1 invites a team secures. Lack of start money is also a problem of cause.

I wonder what the current stats are for % (and number) of days raced in "an area that interests them" for the various teams. If Velofacts is reading this, this could be another chance to do us a favour and work it all out.  :P

I had a look at Colbrelli at Bardiani and ~50% (forty) of his race days were outside Italy (and half of the days in Italy were made up by the Giro). Fedi at Neri had a similar set of percentages. TVA at Topsport only had ~33% (thirty) of his race days inside Belgium. It would be interesting to see what the percentages are for the actual teams (from various countries).
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Leadbelly on November 24, 2014, 13:55
The div2 is basically a whole collection of such races. With 120 days it is very likely that a team will only see 20 days of racing in an area that interests them. This is a huge problem.

Had a quick look at Bardiani.

According to Velofacts (http://www.velofacts.com/2014/11/10/number-of-races-of-the-cycling-teams-2014/) they had 135 race days this year (maybe 180-85 under the new rules?). I think of those, ~57 were in Italy. So that leaves ~78 race days outside Italy (outside their area of interest?).

An increase of ~22 then to get to 100, but isn't the big carrot that all these races in the Challenger Tour have to be on live TV. Of those 78 days outside Italy for Bardiani this year there were quite a few non-TV events (Slovénie, Post Danmark Rundt, Poitou-Charentes, Etoile de Bessèges, Limousin, Österreich-Rundfahrt).

Wouldn't Bardiani (or whoever the sponsors are) be more interested due to the live coverage of races on Rai (or whatever station it was shown in Italy)? The Challenger Tour could include some of the races listed above (Denmark and Austria I guess), and they'd be up against the Pickles, Androni, Nippo-Vini Fantini in all the races (local rivalry?).

I'm not going to check every PCT team, but I'd imagine it isn't too dissimilar for most of them with lots of racing already outside their area of interest. Very few races in Spain for Caja. Only the French teams might find the situation a bit different.
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: DB-Coop on November 24, 2014, 17:04
Had a quick look at Bardiani.

According to Velofacts (http://www.velofacts.com/2014/11/10/number-of-races-of-the-cycling-teams-2014/) they had 135 race days this year (maybe 180-85 under the new rules?). I think of those, ~57 were in Italy. So that leaves ~78 race days outside Italy (outside their area of interest?).

An increase of ~22 then to get to 100, but isn't the big carrot that all these races in the Challenger Tour have to be on live TV. Of those 78 days outside Italy for Bardiani this year there were quite a few non-TV events (Slovénie, Post Danmark Rundt, Poitou-Charentes, Etoile de Bessèges, Limousin, Österreich-Rundfahrt).

Wouldn't Bardiani (or whoever the sponsors are) be more interested due to the live coverage of races on Rai (or whatever station it was shown in Italy)? The Challenger Tour could include some of the races listed above (Denmark and Austria I guess), and they'd be up against the Pickles, Androni, Nippo-Vini Fantini in all the races (local rivalry?).

I'm not going to check every PCT team, but I'd imagine it isn't too dissimilar for most of them with lots of racing already outside their area of interest. Very few races in Spain for Caja. Only the French teams might find the situation a bit different.

The problem about the coverage is that their is two types of viewers, cycling nuts and broad general viewers, it is the second category that for the sponsors are gold, if you sponsor a cycling team chances is that both of us would know your name regardless of watching a race. The problem then is that even if it is on TV who would care about Dubai Tour, nobody short of heavy cycling fanatics, there is no history, and nothing for Italian viewers to identify. While at Strade, this is something different entirely.
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Leadbelly on November 24, 2014, 19:11
Dubai is just four days though (it can't be blamed for everything). Okay, if the wind doesn't blow, you could add Qatar to that, but a lot of these new(er) races are fun and exciting to watch. Isn't that the most important thing for all viewers, whether a cycling nerd or a new casual fan? In fact if you want new viewers I'd say that's by far the biggest thing. History's all very well and good, but it's not going to attract these broad general viewers who sponsors love, without an exciting race to match it.

It's not as if the Challenger Tour wouldn't have more historic races too. The (possible) calendar from earlier in the thread had Pais Vasco, Romandie, Pologne, GP Plouay and Omloop. When you expand that to 120 days it would no doubt include some very good races (Italian .HC one day races? maybe SB too).

Also, as said above, you can't get away from the fact that there were only ~57 race days (of .1 or higher quality) in Italy this year (56 next year with no GP Camaiore?). Under the new system Bardiani would probably still race them all (~30 WT, 10-15 Challenger, 12-17 Continental), but whatever happens they're going to need a lot of race days outside Italy.

Btw if Velofacts is reading this. Number of televised race days for each team during the year please.  :P
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: just some guy on December 04, 2014, 07:40
https://twitter.com/PatLefevere/status/540409882202349568
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Leadbelly on December 06, 2014, 09:30
http://www.tuttobiciweb.it/index.php?page=news&cod=74551&tp=n

Quote
Reformation, new episode. tuttobiciweb is in possession of the new document presented to Aigle to the team manager of the formations of WorldTour. The state of the art, which we present in a schematic way, to try to be as clear as possible, is as follows:

GENERAL ORGANIZATION

1 - UCI WorldTour 16 teams of 22-25 runners 120 days of the race (to be defined)

2 - UCI CHALLENGETOUR 18-22 teams of 16-22 runners 120 days of the race (to be defined)

3 - CONTINENTAL CIRCUITS All formations Continental 16 Development Team, associated with the WorldTour teams

TOWARDS 2017 In 2015 and 2016 remain 18 WorldTeam that dievntano 16 in 2017 , with two teams that conflusicono in the Challenge category . And from 2018 applies the criterion of promotion and relegation.

RULES FOR PARTICIPATION

WorldTeam - participate in all the races of the WorldTour (25 events) - can participate in the events of the Challenge Tour ( with a maximum of 50% of WorldTour teams at the start), at the invitation and / or a draft system, everything is still to be defined - can participate at the races is one class with a maximum of 6 per event Wolrdteam

CHALLENGE TEAM - can participate to socrse WorlTour invitation - can participate in races ChallengeTour invitation - can participate in racing class 1 at the invitation - may participate in racing class 2 of the nation of belonging, at the invitation

CONTINENTAL TEAM - can participate in races is class 1 and 2 invitation - can participate in races ChallengeTour their country's membership invitation

PARTICIPATION NUMBERS

WorldTour - Grand Tours : 20 teams of 9 riders for a total of 180 athletes (now 198) - Great Classics : 20-24 teams 7 runners for a total of 140-168 athletes (now 200) - Corse stage WT (from 2 to 6 days): 20-22 teams of runners 7 for a total of 140-154 athletes (now 176)

CHALLENGETOUR - Racing Online: 20-24 teams of seven runners for a total of 140-168 athletes - Corse in stages CT (2 to 6 days): 20-22 teams of seven runners for a total of 140-154 athletes LAUNCH : up to 50% of WorldTeam, ChallengeTeam, Continental Team and Development Team of the host country, the national team for the races outside Europe

RACING CLASS 1 - Racing in stages (up to 5 days): number of teams at the discretion of the organizers, teams of 4 10 runners, maximum number of participants: 200 - Racing Online : numeo of teams at the discretion of the organizers, teams of 4 to 10 riders, maximum number of participants: 200 LAUNCH: maximum 6 WorldTeam, ChallengeTeam, Continental Team and Development Team, Team National

CORSE CLASS 2 - Racing in stages (maximum 3 days): number of teams at the discretion of the organizers, teams of 4 to 10 riders, maximum number of participants: 200 - Racing Online : numeo of teams at the discretion of the organizers, teams composed of 4 to 10 riders, maximum number of participants: 200 LAUNCH: ChallengeTeam host, Continental Team and Development Team of the host country, Team National, regional and club teams, mixed teams

STANDINGS

WorldTour:  expected a team standings

CHALLENGETOUR : will be a team classification which takes into account a number of races WT X and a Y number of races CT

CONTINENTAL CIRCUITS: Ranked teams that will take account of all the races and will be reserved only for Continental Team. Rating individual comprising runners of all categories, based on the results of the races of class 1 and 2

INDIVIDUAL CLASSIFICATION Expected a ranking that takes account of all the races of calebdario Elites.


NOTES

As is normal, even in this proposal are positive notes and other less. Ben is the confirmation of the development team , but with that obligation? And then, if you will be invited to ride the "team mother", will run even the development team ?

Excellent introduction of the system of promotion and relegation , but the team WorldTour ask obviously guarantees, a kind of bearing that in this Currently there is: the risk that should not be underestimated is that a team demoted (which then loses all rights he had in terms of participation) simply closes .

Doubts important arouses a first reading of the draft CHALLENGETOUR : teams of this category does not have vested rights , so as you can think of any ranking if the teams do not have the confidence to participate in the same race? These teams will then have to make a huge job to compose their calendar: always depend from calls of the organizers , so plan ahead will be very difficult. 

Cala dramatically the number of runners who will start the most important races in the world . Remains the nvariato the number of wildcard to participate in the grand tours, decreases that for the classic monument .

The formations Continental who decide to ask even one invitation to a race ChallengeTour must submit their runners to the biological passport (and it is good) , all the other instead continue to have no obligations with respect . To illustrate, ask for an invitation to the Giro dell'Emilia MGKVis the beginning of the year will have to adhere to the biological passport, while the Brazilian Funvic - category - contnuerà not join duty.

A wall of text I'm afraid (but it's paragraphed at least  :P).

The Challenger Tour still looks confusing (google translate probably isn't helping).

Does it really say Challenger Teams will need an invite to Challenger Races? If so, presumably no Challleneger team will actually ride all 120 days of the available races? I guess with an increase from 16 to 18-22 teams that would make it virtually impossible anyway once you factor in wildcards of World Tour and Continental teams.

As pointed out in the notes, the ranking of the Challenger teams could then be difficult to calculate (combo of World Tour and Challenger Tour results) as they won't be participating in the same races.
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: just some guy on December 06, 2014, 09:47
1 step forward,  123 back, the challenge tour idea was looking good, now the mixed points idea not so much
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: LukasCPH on December 06, 2014, 10:08
What we knew about the plans before was at least concise, (sort of) logical and easy-ish to understand.

This is more complicated than the system we have now.

Morons. :fp
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Flo on December 06, 2014, 10:18
 :angry
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: DB-Coop on December 06, 2014, 10:30
http://www.tuttobiciweb.it/index.php?page=news&cod=74551&tp=n

A wall of text I'm afraid (but it's paragraphed at least  :P).

The Challenger Tour still looks confusing (google translate probably isn't helping).

Does it really say Challenger Teams will need an invite to Challenger Races? If so, presumably no Challleneger team will actually ride all 120 days of the available races? I guess with an increase from 16 to 18-22 teams that would make it virtually impossible anyway once you factor in wildcards of World Tour and Continental teams.

As pointed out in the notes, the ranking of the Challenger teams could then be difficult to calculate (combo of World Tour and Challenger Tour results) as they won't be participating in the same races.

Seems better than the first plan

Basically .HC becomes CT nothing much else change apart from percentages of different teams, they are lowered, I like that.
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: just some guy on December 06, 2014, 15:38
http://www.uci.ch/pressreleases/uci-worldtour-seminar-welcomes-the-return-credibility-the-sport-and-marks-the-beginning-the-implementation-the-reform-men-elite-road-cycling/


UCI WorldTour seminar welcomes the return of credibility to the sport, and marks the beginning of the implementation of the reform of men’s elite road cycling
06 December 2014
The reform of men’s elite road cycling was the focus of the 2014 UCI WorldTour seminar held on December 4th and 5th in Montreux, Switzerland. In an atmosphere of open discussion among the 80 participants, a number of important topics were addressed by the stakeholders.

The UCI President Brian Cookson opened the seminar with a focus on the important steps made by the Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI), in partnership with the entire cycling family, to restore the credibility of the sport, an essential element to ensure the economic and commercial stability and growth that is targeted.

The reform process seeks to assist in this in a number of ways, one of which is the implementation of a new standard of operational guidelines for teams (the “cahier des charges”) to ensure that all riders are properly supported and supervised. In 2014 already eight teams conducted a trial implementation of these standards.

Implementation of strict organizational standards for event organisers will begin in the 2015 season, and seeks to build upon the considerable investment made by organisers in assuring the highest quality of event, whether from TV to security to the fan experience.

The seminar also reflected on the increased momentum in the use of new technology in 2014. The UCI worked with a number of events over the season to agree case by case rule changes to facilitate on-board cameras, taking fans inside the peloton. An innovation made possible by close cooperation between teams and organisers. Tests were also done by the UCI at the Road World Championships in Ponferrada, not only for on-board cameras but also for geo-location, and the seminar participants shared plans to bring this further dimension of technology to races in the 2015 season. The UCI will be revising the applicable process and regulations to facilitate the integration of these technological innovations.

Under the leadership of UCI President Brian Cookson, the reform process of men’s elite road cycling has been structured as an ongoing system of discussion and improvement. Delegates reaffirmed their commitment to a reform that would enhance the appeal of the cycling season to fans, and put in place structures that can help the sustainability of the overall cycling pyramid. Continuing with the core reform principles, all participants agreed that there are still a number of elements that need further consultation and that no decision should be rushed.

Helping the business of cycling is a key objective of the reform process. Cycling’s popularity and global reach has never been higher, and the reform seeks to capitalise on this great position.

When closing the seminar, UCI President Brian Cookson said, “In the calm of the off season it has been a great opportunity to reflect on a fabulous season, and also to spend time with representatives of the UCI WorldTour teams and organisers to discuss the many important issues and opportunities ahead of us. Road cycling has a wonderful, rich and long heritage, and it is important not to lose sight of that as we embrace the future. I’m very pleased with the level of co-operation now happening across the sport, which promises well for the 2015 season and beyond.”

Alfonso Galilea, AIGCP President added, “Professional road teams are excited by the opportunities ahead. Of course, we take our responsibilities seriously to ensure a credible sport, and in combination with the organizational standards and the investments we are making, we intend to deliver on this commitment. Building from this base, we look forward to the coming season where we can deepen our partnerships in the sport to connect more closely with our many fans.”

Christian Prudhomme, AIOCC President commented, “As event owners and organisers, we understand the importance of working ceaselessly to ensure cycling’s reputation as a credible sport is fully restored, and we are delighted to be working in partnership to achieve great progress on this front. Looking back on the 2014 season, we saw early signs of the possibilities of a closer co-operation between the sport’s stakeholders in developing the appeal of our sport to a great audience, and capturing the deep and ever-growing love of cycling across the world.”

Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: LukasCPH on December 06, 2014, 16:27
To sum up: More PR :barf. It's sickening.
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: just some guy on December 09, 2014, 08:28
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/white-in-favour-of-proposed-uci-reforms
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: just some guy on December 09, 2014, 08:35
Makes littke sense the above idea

makes the TDF the bigger biggest race of the year, devalues the Giro and Vuelta

also I doubt we will see GT riders going for all 3 anyway, 2 and maybe the Giro-TDF is possible but will not be done that often

the best idea is the 3 16 day GTs with 1 rest day

ie 7 days racing 1 rest day then 8 days racing
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Mellow Velo on December 09, 2014, 08:56
Makes littke sense the above idea

makes the TDF the bigger biggest race of the year, devalues the Giro and Vuelta

also I doubt we will see GT riders going for all 3 anyway, 2 and maybe the Giro-TDF is possible but will not be done that often

the best idea is the 3 16 day GTs with 1 rest day

ie 7 days racing 1 rest day then 8 days racing

It'll all come down to the revenue, so don't expect the ASO to happily "donate" a third of it's cash cow to that cause.

You can see where he is coming from. All about marketing for the masses and screw the already converted, ardent fans.
Their rational is better to appeal to those who have short attention spans and aren't prepared to invest the time to watch and the effort to learn any of the intricate stuff involved in a Grand Tour.
So, better to turn the Giro into the Tour of Switzerland and maybe lose a fair proportion of those who have stuck with the sport through all it's highs and more importantly, lows, if overall it generates a bigger bottom line.

For us, the bottom line will be us..........................getting screwed.
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: just some guy on December 09, 2014, 09:23
http://www.velowire.com/article/877/en/the-reform-of-professional-cycling--the-latest-news.html

Some news but not really and this shows 120 challenge race days, but we discussed yesterday they would be mixed with the WT however the flip that would work.

(http://www.velowire.com/images/blog/reformecalendrier/november2014/equipes_circuits_reforme_novembre_2014.small.png)

(http://www.velowire.com/images/blog/reformecalendrier/november2014/equipes_circuits_reforme_novembre_2014_alt.small.png)

(http://www.velowire.com/images/blog/reformecalendrier/november2014/classements_novembre_2014.small.png)
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: just some guy on December 09, 2014, 09:25
It'll all come down to the revenue, so don't expect the ASO to happily "donate" a third of it's cash cow to that cause.

You can see where he is coming from. All about marketing for the masses and screw the already converted, ardent fans.
Their rational is better to appeal to those who have short attention spans and aren't prepared to invest the time to watch and the effort to learn any of the intricate stuff involved in a Grand Tour.
So, better to turn the Giro into the Tour of Switzerland and maybe lose a fair proportion of those who have stuck with the sport through all it's highs and more importantly, lows, if overall it generates a bigger bottom line.

For us, the bottom line will be us..........................getting screwed.

they way the keep just throwing idea out there seems to me Cycling will be screwed.

3 leaks ago was the best change, which makes the most sense, now who knows whats going on
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Mellow Velo on December 09, 2014, 11:18
they way the keep just throwing idea out there seems to me Cycling will be screwed.

3 leaks ago was the best change, which makes the most sense, now who knows whats going on

 It's all well and good to produce fancy diagrams, but if you a current WT race that UCI are looking at being downgraded to Div 3, such as we have seen in earlier models, (Pais Vasco, Catalunya etc) you aren't going to survive beyond one season. They won't be alone.
 Which leads to yet more reform and more of the same.
 Isn't anybody involved in drawing up these plans in touch with reality?
 The fact is that pro racing has often struggled to come to terms with even minor changes.
Enforcing such radical reforms in a giant leap is far more likely to result in disaster, rather than triumph.
Unless you are looking to create a closed shop monopoly, that is.....................
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: LukasCPH on December 09, 2014, 16:08
Isn't anybody involved in drawing up these plans in touch with reality?
This is surely a rhetorical question. ;)
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: just some guy on December 10, 2014, 15:40
Have not read this yet

https://twitter.com/velonews/status/542698559251177472
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: just some guy on December 25, 2014, 20:36
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/uci-announces-2017-teams-operational-guide
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Leadbelly on January 05, 2015, 22:26
http://cyclingtips.com.au/2015/01/aigcp-president-eisenga-believes-uci-worldtour-reforms-will-likely-be-delayed/

Could be 2020 now and not 2017, and the team managers unsurprisingly would prefer 25 and not 22 riders.
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: just some guy on February 17, 2015, 12:16
well worth the time imho

http://velonews.competitor.com/2015/02/news/racing-worldtour-points-creates-chaos-order_360744

(http://cdn.velonews.competitor.com/files/2015/02/TDUscenic-659x440.jpg)
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Flo on February 17, 2015, 12:22
http://cyclingtips.com.au/2015/01/aigcp-president-eisenga-believes-uci-worldtour-reforms-will-likely-be-delayed/

Could be 2020 now and not 2017, and the team managers unsurprisingly would prefer 25 and not 22 riders.

first step towards dropping the crap out of that idea altogether
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: LukasCPH on March 31, 2015, 00:03
http://www.nieuwsblad.be/sportwereld/cnt/dmf20150331_01607305 (http://www.nieuwsblad.be/sportwereld/cnt/dmf20150331_01607305)

Instead of shrinking the WT, it will apparently be expanded by the Dubai and/or Abu Dhabi races.


As always: 'Cui bono?'
UCI trying to get more of a balance between RCS[1] & ASO[2]?
And for what purpose - playing the race organisers off against each other?
 1. 4 WT races now, 6 with Dubai & Abu Dhabi
 2. 7 WT races
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Armchair Cyclist on June 20, 2015, 08:57
I was amazed to hear cycling mentioned, without the involvement of Wiggins, in the 2 minute hourly news headlines on BBC Radio yesterday evening, and then more amazed when I got to my computer that whatever had stirred that particular dinosaur had gained no reaction here.  (Not so amazed that it distracted me from spending most of the evening coming up with puns on film titles though).

It seems to amount to ASO fires a shot across the bows of UCI telling them not to sideline the calendar reform (http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/tour-de-france-organisers-threaten-to-pull-races-from-uci-calendar-over-reforms).  Some would not consider a fatal shot to the WT system to be a bad thing.  At least now we know where the whole momentum for the calendar reform comes from: ASO doesn't like Tirreno Adriatico and Tour de Suisse stealing the attention from final days of Paris Nice and the Dauphiné.

Serious threat, hot air, tail wagging the dog, or failure to accept they are in a competitive business?
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Mellow Velo on June 20, 2015, 12:23
 Here you go:

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/racing/tour-de-france/aso-threatens-to-pull-races-from-uci-2016-calendar-177867

The UCI: Quick to pass small, pointless laws on such things as camper vans, but oh so slow when dealing with major, crucial issues.
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: just some guy on June 22, 2015, 07:32
Was about to post it AC

Very funny really

But did any of us expect any different, it comes back to Cookson being the Puppet and not the puppet master.

At the  moment you have to look really really hard to see anything positive so far in the Cookson time ( there might still be, but everything takes too long and there is a trying to please everyone approach)

You have to break some eggs to cook an omelet, but the ASO bought ones are best left alone 
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: just some guy on June 22, 2015, 10:06
http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/cyclingnews-exclusive-the-fight-between-aso-uci-and-teams-for-the-future-of-pro-cycling

This threat came after an important presentation of the planned WorldTour reforms on June 10 in Geneva, where those appointed to draw up the reform for 2017-2020 revealed their updated vision for the future of men’s professional cycling. The PCC approved the reform document and its proposals in a vote during a meeting on June 16 but only with a majority. Cyclingnews understands that six members of the PCC voted in favour, two abstained and three voted against. Among those that apparently voted against the reforms were ASO’s Christian Prudhomme, and David Lappartient, the vice-president of the UCI. Cyclingnews reached out to ASO but have yet to receive an official response.
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: lancasterke on June 22, 2015, 14:11
in most realms, the commercial enterprise threatening to leave the sports federation should have everyone on side with the federation.

In cyclings case, everyone thinks the UCI are useless (and in many instances worse than useless (useless, + corrupt + dishonest + interfering))

everyone also seems to agree that the RCS and ASO races are great and form the epicentre of the sport.

I've long thought that RCS, ASO and the handful of other race organisers should club together and tell the UCI what was going to happen.
Would I follow cycling without the classics and the grand tours, but with the tour of bejing? not really a decision is it.
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: LukasCPH on June 23, 2015, 20:44
It appears that radical change is imminent at the UCI. :o
Tomorrow at 11 am, the UCI will reveal an all-new ...
... logo. :ohu
https://twitter.com/UCI_cycling/status/613330851963764736
https://twitter.com/UCI_cycling/status/613375995467440128
https://twitter.com/UCI_cycling/status/613421334664753152

Of course, I could let this opportunity pass: :D
https://twitter.com/lukascph/status/613428674025517056

This latest trend of faux 'make people become excited for something' hype is making me puke. :barf
If you have something to announce, just do it. Don't announce you will announce something very soon. Even worse if it is with 'teasers' that make the actual announcement practically meaningless.

If you must, announce that your new logo/jersey/whatever will be revealed tomorrow, and leave it at that.


Until you've learned that, I thoroughly enjoy ruining your 'surprises'. :P
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: just some guy on June 24, 2015, 05:55
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/uci-trying-to-avoid-a-war-with-aso-over-pro-cycling-reforms

for all the twitter stuff the other day I didn´t mind what he says tbh
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: LukasCPH on June 24, 2015, 10:22
https://twitter.com/lukascph/status/613633637154689024
Pretty much the same, isn't it?
OK, I missed the curve - the only actual design element in the whole thing.

Hardly an outstanding one though, just the classic 'let's give the letters a white border towards the rainbow stripes' move. They can praise themselves lucky their name's in French - if it were ICU (in English), there'd be no curve! :lol
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: LukasCPH on June 24, 2015, 15:33
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/uci-trying-to-avoid-a-war-with-aso-over-pro-cycling-reforms

for all the twitter stuff the other day I didn´t mind what he says tbh
Lappartient makes a lot of good points (and I didn't understand what the Twitter boo-ha was all about yesterday in the first place).

An open system where you can join and leave the WT sounds more reasonable than the mad rush for riders with points when there are more WT applicants than places (or the lack of interest in riders when there aren't): If you can't find a replacement sponsor for a WT-level team, you can step down - if you find more money, you can step up. And you're not penalised immediately if you lose your best riders to bigger teams or have a bad season.

But they'd have to be cautious - it shouldn't be possible for teams to simply buy their way into the WT, a build-up period as Conti and/or ProConti team should be mandatory in my opinion.
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: LukasCPH on June 24, 2015, 19:06
More UCI logo ranting:
https://twitter.com/cyclingweekly/status/613769358599397376
Looking at this, the UCI has not only lost the stylised wheel (something that you'd connect with cycling), but also the dot on the I. A dot that the wheel ends in ...
Is this symbolic? Does the UCI not connect the dots anymore? :D
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: just some guy on June 26, 2015, 08:25
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/aigcp-teams-association-defends-proposed-worldtour-reforms
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: just some guy on September 23, 2015, 10:02
The UCI approves key principles for the reform of men’s professional road cycling
22 September 2015
The Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI) is delighted to announce that its Management Committee has approved the key principles for the reform of men’s professional road cycling which have been discussed at the meeting of the Professional Cycling Council during this week’s UCI Road World Championships in Richmond, USA.

Following more than two years of dialogue and consultation with stakeholders, the reforms will be part of the key governance changes implemented at the UCI by President Brian Cookson since his election in 2013. The reform will provide additional support and a platform for sustainable growth for the teams and other stakeholders, building on the successes achieved so far in restoring credibility in the sport.

As part of the changes, three year UCI WorldTour licences will be granted to a maximum of 18 UCI WorldTeams for the 2017-2019 seasons. It is hoped that this will encourage investment leading to increased stability in team structures. Licences will be granted based on ethical, financial, sporting, administrative and organisational criteria.

To further strengthen team integrity and anti-doping measures, the UCI has also developed the team’s internal operational requirements (known as the “Cahier des Charges”) which will be mandatory for all UCI WorldTeams from 2017.

The Team’s Cahier des Charges centres on ten main rules designed to ensure that all riders are properly supported and supervised. Already trialled in 2014, further testing of the system is taking place this season and next in advance of its mandatory application as a licence condition. This knowledge and experience will be used also for implementation of an appropriate set of organisational criteria for teams in the next tier below UCI WorldTeams in 2018.

Building on the strengths of the existing UCI WorldTour calendar, a limited number of new races will also be added to the UCI WorldTour from 2017, with an application process opening later in 2015. It is hoped that the addition of new high quality events will help the UCI WorldTour re-inforce its global profile as the elite series of the sport.

New and existing UCI WordTour events and races which apply to join the series will be assessed against strict organisational standards by event organisers (the Organiser’s Cahier des Charges), ensuring the best events are included in the tour giving the calendar a more robust structure. These standards – which have begun to be implemented this season – seek to build on the considerable investment made by organisers in delivering the highest quality events.

The current participation rules will be maintained for existing UCI WorldTour events but new rules will be set for new events seeking to join the UCI WorldTour to encourage growth and globalisation.
A reform of the rankings for men’s professional road cycling has also been taken forward with the Individual Rankings becoming universal across all events from the top to the third tier. The Nations Rankings will also be universal based on the Individual Rankings of the top eight riders from each country. The UCI WorldTeams Rankings will be based on UCI WorldTour events only, while the second-tier team rankings will be based on UCI WorldTour and second-tier events. Details of the reformed system will be finalised in advance of the 2016 season.

It was also agreed that individual specialist rankings would be considered to reward the top climber, top sprinter, top one-day rider and top stage racer to further increase fan and media engagement.

UCI President Brian Cookson said: “These are important changes that will help to further enhance men’s professional road cycling and aide its global growth and development. I would like to thank all stakeholders for their positive and constructive approach to this reform process. I believe that the measures announced today will help to bring greater stability and growth to men’s professional road cycling while also opening the door to greater technological innovation and fan engagement.

“By implementing these key reforms, the UCI is sending a strong signal to cycling fans, broadcasters and commercial partners about the continued improvements in the governance and organisational structures of our sport. This is an important moment for professional cycling and another major step forward as we continue to restore trust and credibility.”


https://twitter.com/UCI_cycling/status/646420920689684480
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Joelsim on September 23, 2015, 11:25
Let's hope they haven't let the Spanish make the roadmap. It would likely be wrong.
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: DB-Coop on September 23, 2015, 16:44
So the plan is to add a few money grab races[1], and to add a couple of new classifications, as well as modifying national rankings, hopefully using new ranking for worlds.

Adding money grab races is great for the UCI collecting some oil money, however it is a small disaster for the teams, as following this they will likely not see the great start money of today from said races, but they will still be forced to participate in said race which has no interest to them other than the cash grab. Not a fan.
 1. I'd be shocked if the globalization talk was not code for this, should add WT race in Colombia, but will likely add some oil money race
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: M Gee on November 20, 2015, 20:41
New response from the race organizers:

http://velonews.competitor.com/2015/11/news/organizers-oppose-ucis-reforms-vote-for-fewer-racers_389681 (http://velonews.competitor.com/2015/11/news/organizers-oppose-ucis-reforms-vote-for-fewer-racers_389681)
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: just some guy on November 20, 2015, 21:46
The UCI is getting pushed aside the reforms are dead
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: just some guy on January 13, 2017, 08:09
https://twitter.com/Velorooms/status/819765962421469184

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C2CPkNXVQAEt0de.jpg)

Not 1 single reason why a new race would step up to being a WT race

Goal posts move again after deals are done on a few things

ie Team Licences

I like the Dr licence thing especially if public

I like the pro conti rider points counting idea

But the new WT races getting screwed for more money no return
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Joelsim on January 13, 2017, 10:20
https://twitter.com/Velorooms/status/819765962421469184

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C2CPkNXVQAEt0de.jpg)

Not 1 single reason why a new race would step up to being a WT race

Goal posts move again after deals are done on a few things

ie Team Licences

I like the Dr licence thing especially if public

I like the pro conti rider points counting idea

But the new WT races getting screwed for more money no return

I don't think that's the case about being screwed for more money for no return.

If the new WT races aren't compulsory then the teams who are expecting to be near the bottom of the rankings could simply do all the WT events and gain a benefit over another team who doesn't do them.

Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: just some guy on January 13, 2017, 10:22
I don't think that's the case about being screwed for more money for no return.

If the new WT races aren't compulsory then the teams who are expecting to be near the bottom of the rankings could simply do all the WT events and gain a benefit over another team who doesn't do them.

what is the point of being a new WT race ?

You pay alot more for the licence and get what?
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Joelsim on January 13, 2017, 10:28
what is the point of being a new WT race ?

You pay alot more for the licence and get what?

Time will dictate which stay as WT races over the coming years and I suspect those that are successful will gain parity with the existing ones. One of the teams' complaints was about being forced to participate in all the new races, I'm not sure how else you can make it fair on those teams that don't go to many of the new ones.
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: just some guy on January 13, 2017, 10:31
Time will dictate which stay as WT races over the coming years and I suspect those that are successful will gain parity with the existing ones. One of the teams' complaints was about being forced to participate in all the new races, I'm not sure how else you can make it fair on those teams that don't go to many of the new ones.

Why expand it then, all WT same points count or nothing, this middle road takes increased licence fee with no reward to the race, and in Australia and the USA probably does damage to the sport
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Joelsim on January 13, 2017, 11:11
Why expand it then, all WT same points count or nothing, this middle road takes increased licence fee with no reward to the race, and in Australia and the USA probably does damage to the sport

Why is there no reward? The TV companies will have to pay more, there'll be more interest and easier to promote, plus each race will attract more of the stars.
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: just some guy on January 13, 2017, 11:13
Why is there no reward? The TV companies will have to pay more, there'll be more interest and easier to promote, plus each race will attract more of the stars.

No the UCI have said that WT have to be invited and WT do not have to come, so no difference from being non WT race except for the fact you can say we are a WT in name only
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Joelsim on January 13, 2017, 11:34
No the UCI have said that WT have to be invited and WT do not have to come, so no difference from being non WT race except for the fact you can say we are a WT in name only

I think there'll be more WT teams going to each of the races than before, except perhaps Turkey. It also gives younger riders a chance to get a WT win, the likes of Buchmann etc who probably wouldn't be leader for the established WT races.

I'm happy to give the new schedule a chance.
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: just some guy on January 13, 2017, 11:39
Think we will have to agree to disagree Joel
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Joelsim on January 13, 2017, 11:43
Think we will have to agree to disagree Joel

Yes, probably.  :lol
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Mellow Velo on January 13, 2017, 12:43
 Can new WT races opt out of the UCI's grand scheme of things?
For instance, why would California want to be in the WT calendar?
Forced to boot out half of the home teams to comply with the UCI regulations.
The possibility of being left with an under strength field, if 10 WT teams don't fancy the long trip.
All for the incentive of being booted back to the regular calendar, the following season.

 The UCI need to learn how to govern, not issue decrees of a dictatorship.
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Joelsim on January 13, 2017, 13:24
Can new WT races opt out of the UCI's grand scheme of things?
For instance, why would California want to be in the WT calendar?
Forced to boot out half of the home teams to comply with the UCI regulations.
The possibility of being left with an under strength field, if 10 WT teams don't fancy the long trip.
All for the incentive of being booted back to the regular calendar, the following season.

 The UCI need to learn how to govern, not issue decrees of a dictatorship.

Is there any suggestion that these new races didn't want to be WT classified? I was under the impression is was a collaborative thing rather than a dictatorship.
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: LukasCPH on January 13, 2017, 15:55
The UCI need to learn how to govern, not issue decrees of a dictatorship.
So very much this.

Is there any suggestion that these new races didn't want to be WT classified? I was under the impression is was a collaborative thing rather than a dictatorship.
Oh, they did want to be classified as WT - on the same level as all the other WT races, with compulsory participation of all WT teams.
But then the UCI realised the teams just wouldn't accept that, and they need the WT teams 1-18 more than they need the WT races 28-37.

So they freed the teams from having to go, and put all the burden on the new races: "If you don't have at least 10 WT teams, you'll be demoted."

We don't know how the new races feel about that, and some of the fault is theirs too - they bought a cat in a bag from someone well known to actually put raccoons in bags and sell them as cats. But we may assume that this second-rate deal isn't what they signed up for.
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: mudplugger on January 13, 2017, 16:37
No the UCI have said that WT have to be invited and WT do not have to come, so no difference from being non WT race except for the fact you can say we are a WT in name only

A situation that strengthens the hand of Velon. It will be interesting to see how many organisers feel obliged to strike deals with Velon as London has.
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Joelsim on January 13, 2017, 16:40
So very much this.
Oh, they did want to be classified as WT - on the same level as all the other WT races, with compulsory participation of all WT teams.
But then the UCI realised the teams just wouldn't accept that, and they need the WT teams 1-18 more than they need the WT races 28-37.

So they freed the teams from having to go, and put all the burden on the new races: "If you don't have at least 10 WT teams, you'll be demoted."

We don't know how the new races feel about that, and some of the fault is theirs too - they bought a cat in a bag from someone well known to actually put raccoons in bags and sell them as cats. But we may assume that this second-rate deal isn't what they signed up for.

So they've been sold a pup? I'm pretty sure there aren't any raccoons in Lancashire.
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: just some guy on January 13, 2017, 17:29
This is a very important point

A situation that strengthens the hand of Velon. It will be interesting to see how many organisers feel obliged to strike deals with Velon as London has.
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Armchair Cyclist on January 13, 2017, 17:29
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C2CPkNXVQAEt0de.jpg)

I am fascinated to know who is the one and only Pro Continental signing who will be able to have his points count in WT rankings.
Or might it be that the UCI press office have a poorer grasp of how to use possessive apostrophes than most 9 year olds that I teach?

Edit: I now see that this is not from the UCI Press Office, but from Cycling News.  But they are only professional journalists, so why should they be expected to be able to use primary school level English grammar?
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: LukasCPH on January 13, 2017, 20:11
Or might it be that the UCI press office have a poorer grasp of how to use possessive apostrophes than most 9 year olds that I teach?

Edit: I now see that this is not from the UCI Press Office, but from Cycling News.  But they are only professional journalists, so why should they be expected to be able to use primary school level English grammar?
UCI's press office is staffed by Francophones, their English is consistently poor.

Cycling News ... that's a different issue. I think the problem isn't that they never learned proper grammar, but that it's not a high priority these days. :(
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: just some guy on January 19, 2017, 15:30
https://twitter.com/Velorooms/status/822102487373139970
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Leadbelly on August 31, 2018, 09:17
https://www.tuttobiciweb.it/article/2018/08/31/1535645056/la-riforma-che-verra-e-che-non-convince-paolo-broggi-tuttobiciweb

There have been some reforms the past couple of years with the new WT races, but the main dish has kept on being pushed back and with the details being very sketchy/changeable.

A (40+ page) report must have been published recently with these details:

Licences

At the end of 2019 fifteen WT licences will be given out based on the rankings over the previous three years. The length of licence (4,3 or 2 years) will vary depending on your ranking. Extra years (1 or 2) will added at the end of the season depending on how you ranked during that year.

Grand Tours

15 WT teams + 5 best ranked PCT teams (assuming they want to ride) + 2 wildcards

Teams

WT: 25-30 riders and minimum budget of 12 million euros
PCT:  20-30 riders

Both of these classes must contribute to the development of cycling in one way or another (5 proposals are given).

CT: 10-16 riders and on the biological passport

Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: LukasCPH on August 31, 2018, 14:26
*lots of stuff about how to 'reform' men's pro cycling
And women's cycling? :-x

I expect they simply didn't think of that.
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Carlo Algatrensig on September 01, 2018, 23:09

WT: 25-30 riders and minimum budget of 12 million euros
PCT:  20-30 riders

Both of these classes must contribute to the development of cycling in one way or another (5 proposals are given).

In this respect I've had a thought that one way you might be able to encourage WT/PCT team to have their own U23/CT team is to allow some fluidity between the 2 squads. You have the professional team and the U23/CT but at certain races you allow mixed teams where both squads would be eligible to race. So at 1.1, 1.HC, 2.1, 2.HC you could have teams made up from riders of both the WT/PCT team and the CT/U23 team. You would need to put limits on things such as riders contracted to the U23/CT must have raced the majority of their season in .2, .2u and .Ncup races so as they are still genuinely a devo team rather than allowing an extension to the Pro team but it's just a thought I've had on the issue and would need to be refined.
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Leadbelly on September 04, 2018, 15:34
I'm not sold on the compulsory development team idea. If you go through all the current WT and PCT teams which ones would you say need a devo team for whatever reason?

#astana #didata #academy - developing riders from their own non-traditional cycling nation/continent is part of their ethos and there isn't anyone else really to do it

#mitchelton - isolated geographically (but in the age of modern air travel even this isn't as much of an issue any more) and talented youngsters need racing further afield

#novonordisk - special diabetic case

Having a devo team can turn things into a bit of a closed shop as well. I'm thinking Caja here mainly (Direct Energie are a bit guilty too). When was the last time they signed a Spanish youngster that didn't ride for their amateur team. Maybe the PCT-ization of Burgos and Euskadi will change this, but in countries with one or two big teams I could see this having a detrimental effect on smaller CT teams or amateur ones who find themselves in competition with the devo team.

If we're talking helping out grassroots/low level cycling I prefer the idea of solidarity payments to a rider's previous clubs/teams if he signs for a WT/PCT team rather than a compulsory devo team.
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Leadbelly on September 04, 2018, 16:22
Licences

At the end of 2019 fifteen WT licences will be given out based on the rankings over the previous three years.

I'm guessing it wouldn't be a straight adding up of all the points over the course of the three year period, but would be weighted towards the more recent results. Even so, some teams should be a bit worried going by their points from '17 and '18 campaigns.

Bottom of the table by a country mile, no matter how you calculate the rankings, are Dimension Data. Awful year all round, but their transfers so far might give them a shot of performing that big comeback in 2019 that they need. If they can get a top-7 or so GT rider (Konrad?) to add to the one-day and certain stage race scoring potential of Valgren etc, they might just do it.

The other two teams in the drop zone by my reckoning are Groupama and Katusha.

Even if Kittel manages to get back to top form I still don't see his team getting the points. We saw when Cavendish won four stages at the Tour in 2016 that stage wins just don't give many points, you need GC results and one day performances. Some okay signings, but they don't scream points to me.

Groupama have made one of the best signings of the year in Kung, but is it enough? To use a footballing analogy, imo they have a strong first XI, but if somebody gets injured at the wrong time they could be in trouble.

Who else could get dragged in? EF-Drapac of course, Lotto Soudal or even UAE.

Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Leadbelly on September 18, 2018, 09:11
https://twitter.com/velonews/status/1040600835682709504

Turkeys aren't going to vote for Xmas are they.
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Leadbelly on September 25, 2018, 20:16
:fanfare :fanfare

https://cyclingpro.net/spaziociclismo/worldtour/uci-annunciata-la-riforma-2020-cambiamenti-a-calendario-squadre-licenze-e-wildcard/

As of 2020....

The race calendar will be divided into WT, Pro Series (HC and .1) and Continental (.2).

PCT teams will be renamed ProTeams.

There will be 18 WT teams (27-30 riders) and they'll be given 3-year licences.

There will be a new ranking system that will take into account all results across the globe and enable better comparison between teams of all three levels.

The top two ProTeams in this new ranking will get automatic invites to GTs (it doesn't say when the ranking will be taken into account - end of the previous year or two months before the race?) and for the other WT races it will be the top three. If they don't want to go for whatever reason, the wildcard goes back to the organizer and not to the 3rd or 4th ranked team.
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: LukasCPH on September 25, 2018, 22:02
:fanfare :fanfare
The more things change, the more they stay the same.

:x_x
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Leadbelly on September 26, 2018, 08:34
Renaming stuff is the equivalent of putting some fresh magnolia paint over the cracks in the walls, but the WT teams look to have come out of this with rather more than the version of a month ago.

No reduction in numbers down to 15. Fairly lengthy licences for all 18 teams. Ten riders scoring points favours them more over the PCT teams.

The new ranking system should be interesting.

The change in wildcards is a sop to the PCT teams and is at least something for them to aim for, but might not give too many changes. I guess Wanty might have ridden the Giro as well this year if it had been in force, but would probably have skipped the Vuelta.
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: rote_laterne on September 26, 2018, 22:27
The change in wildcards is a sop to the PCT teams and is at least something for them to aim for, but might not give too many changes. I guess Wanty might have ridden the Giro as well this year if it had been in force, but would probably have skipped the Vuelta.

I'm rather pessimistic about the new system. PCT usually don't have enough strong riders for two GTs a year. And while I think some teams now might get the chance to ride a GT because of their ranking more PCT teams will struggle to get invitations.
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Leadbelly on November 09, 2018, 05:45
In this respect I've had a thought that one way you might be able to encourage WT/PCT team to have their own U23/CT team is to allow some fluidity between the 2 squads. You have the professional team and the U23/CT but at certain races you allow mixed teams where both squads would be eligible to race. So at 1.1, 1.HC, 2.1, 2.HC you could have teams made up from riders of both the WT/PCT team and the CT/U23 team.

Your wish is the UCI's command.

https://www.directvelo.com/actualite/70557/des-coureurs-du-worldtour-en-classe-2

Quote
The creation of a reserve team (called "development" by the UCI) is one of the possibilities offered to the WorldTour and Continental Pro (1) teams to " contribute to the development of cycling " from 2020

One of the principles of these reserve teams will be to be able to mix the numbers of the two formations "mother-daughter".

For the future UCI ProSeries races, limited to 7 riders per team, the WorldTour or UCI ProTeam team can align two riders maximum of the development team.

In Class 1 races, the 1st or 2nd division team may enter three of its riders with up to four riders from its reserve. In the other direction, the development team can add up to two riders from the parent team.

Finally, in Class 2 events where only the reserve team can be invited by the organizers, a rider from the WorldTour team will be able to participate with the development team.
Title: Re: UCI Road Map For Cycling
Post by: Leadbelly on December 23, 2018, 07:36
https://cyclingpro.net/spaziociclismo/worldtour/uci-annunciata-la-riforma-2020-cambiamenti-a-calendario-squadre-licenze-e-wildcard/

Some graphics to explain the reforms, but very little new stuff to report other than the fact that the auto-wildcards will be granted on the rankings "at the end of the previous season".