http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/castilla-y-leon-to-lose-two-days

The Vuelta a Castilla y Leon gets two out of five days hacked off, and like the article stresses, it's happening to a race which I thought was one of the up-and-coming races in Spain. Shoot, they very nearly had TGBM as a winner last year. And while races are cutting back or being cancelled all across Europe, Spain is looking like the epicentre for the problem.

I guess it was to be expected.... Cycling is unusually reliant on government money (usually at a municipal or provincial level) to run races, and in Spain perhaps this is true to the greatest degree, since of the six active Spanish cycling teams (Movistar, Euskaltel, Andalucia, Caja Rural, Burgos 2016, and Orbea) only Movistar doesn’t get some of its money directly or indirectly from the taxpayer.

Given that Spain, and the decentralised governments in particular, are struggling terribly for money, one expects there to be more serious cutbacks in the coming years. So does cycling, despite the enormous wealth of Spanish cycling talent, have a bright future in the short- to- medium-term? Or will it just be the Vuelta, maybe one or two professional team, and the rest of Spanish cycling living in exile?

Shame about Castilla y Leon. Always a good race.

This is part of my big issue with the UCI's globalisating thing. Creating new races when so many other races need help. Tour of the Med for instance, a far better race than Qatar or Oman and positioned early in the year, but struggling every year financially when the likes of Oman and Qatar have no problems.

Countless other races under threat while the UCI and ASO are busy creating new ones.

Shame about Castilla y Leon. Always a good race.

This is part of my big issue with the UCI's globalisating thing. Creating new races when so many other races need help. Tour of the Med for instance, a far better race than Qatar or Oman and positioned early in the year, but struggling every year financially when the likes of Oman and Qatar have no problems.

Countless other races under threat while the UCI and ASO are busy creating new ones.

Well, I don't know what the UCI's pile of money looks like, but I doubt its large enough to go on a rescuing spree. They needs races like Qatar, Oman, Beijing, Quebec, to keep the UCI afloat. I mean, if Castilla y Leon were to disappear completely next year, that's lost revenue for the UCI as well, and they need to compensate that from somewhere else (like China or Canada).

Added to that I don't really know whether its the job of the UCI to make sure races like Castilla y Leon survive. And I certainly don't think that the UCI looking to create races in China comes at the expense of struggling European races.

the problem is complex and probably contains a number of factors.

I think a big reason is TV and the power it has to bring action into the living room has made a lot of people into couch potatoes.

Children are more interested in Xblox, wee, and plebstations than anything else and to get them to see outside the front door can be a struggle.

Cycling constantly shoots itself in the foot with its lack of ability to organise itself.

The biggest culprit the UCI, but the national feds must be mini versions of the UCI and from where i sit it has the feeling of a bunch of guys backslapping each other as they flip it all up and blaming others.

Cycling IMO is a sport to grow up with and into as a young teen after messing about on bmxs, mtbs, etc....

Part of the problem is that cycling also does not translate well with the kids that love games etc

too many of them need immediate gratification both when watching and playing sports.

put them in a football game, 5 aside, small pitch, they can score goals, they can play immediately and they feel they are part of it
with younger kids the long term value in cycling, training, working for someone else to win. does not appeal.
trying to convince my son to sit down and watch cycling, and he struggles to get interested. He cannot enjoy the battle of a race, the slow pace of a result. he wants to know immediately who is winning, and explaining about breaks, the chase, sprinters, climbers loses him.

This is where events like criteriums, cross etc can get the kids into it. You can go see them live.

I dont know about other countries but here in the Uk we have the Tour Series which is a set of city centre criteriums usually with loads of other events and activities for kids built around it. Being able to watch it live is a real impetus for the kids. Same with the tour of britain. The local councils work with the schools promoting it, getting the schools out on the roadside. Kids love waving at riders going past and if it gets a handful from each school wanting to ride its a start.

Maybe instead of handing out £1000 a week in benefits to families with 7 kids the government should give all kids over 5 a free bicycle. But then they would probably just sell them and buy drugs or playstations.

Cycling IMO is a sport to grow up with and into as a young teen after messing about on bmxs, mtbs, etc....

For me, growing up in country, cycling was about freedom. now living in cities cannot let my 8 year old out on the streets. So oging riding now means packing bikes in the car, driving to the local park and doing loops there.

Dim is right, crits can help. in fact thinking about it does not even need to be top riders (although that helps) should just take him down to Heffron park for the crit style racing they have there and see if that gets him excited.

if this economic crisis continues i could see spanish cycling going in the same way of portuguese cycling tho never getting as far as portuguese cycling went simply because spain has a bigger talent pool and tradition.

i hope it doesn't happen tho

It doesn't look too sunny in Spain for cycling's immediate future, does it?

Yes, people entertain themselves in different ways these days, and they certainly have more options than they had a few decades ago. And when money becomes as scarce as it is, a ticket-less event that has great logistical requirements each time it is staged, and drains local resources without having an immediate measurable effect on the local economy but needs to be instantly justified, will struggle even more.

But I think we alienate ourselves from our natural audiences (in those regions) more than we need to, and realize, by going global this way.

There seems to be a big difference between what is happening in the traditional heartlands for our sport, and the upcoming areas.

Cycling in Belgium, France, Spain, Italy, the Netherlands... it all was a smoothly oiled machine that made inner sense, as it was all built around things that made sense locally, and mostly happened locally. From grass-roots to top-teams, local sponsors, local authorities, local grudge-matches, local volunteers, local boys (and the occasional gal).

The top teams have slowly been forced out of that, and the whole thing is now trying to work locally, with a major cog, of not the most important cog, being transplanted to a different machine, forced to oil a different beast, the UCI's globalisation scheme. And locally, it all just doesn't add up any more. Slowly it is devastating the existing local (grass-root) infrastructures.

So its no wonder that Pat can claim that at top level it is looking healthier than ever (through his polarised sun-glasses, and in some way it does). And, in places where there was hardly a sport to speak of a few years back, no wonder "it" is doing better there too, after all that has been thrown at it.

But for the countries where it was all thriving on its own (at a level far beyond anything that will ever be matched by the new areas), and that ultimately enabled the creation of a UCI, for those countries it is the UCI's current policies which are wrecking the health of the sport as a sport.

A more creative UCI would have found a way to grow the sport elsewhere, but keep the sport healthy in the places that are (still) its longs. This one, not so much. But then the UCI is no longer in it for the sport, it exists to look after the UCI's interests more than those of its riders, teams, organisers, etc.

In general, I think there is a genuine conflict between what is good for the sport, globally, and what is good for the sport in the places where it is already well established, or thrived.

I didn't like the break-away league idea that was floated a while back, but the more I think about it, the more I suspect it might actually be a route to keep the two "competing" interests happier and healthier. Even if the price is more separate.

If the sport wants to become more viable again in places like Spain (at top, and sub-top level), there has to be a bigger incentive for local money to support local talent, and, ultimately, to make a more convincing case why additional local public money should be going in that direction too. That can only be the case if "local" becomes a focus again. The UCI's policies are heading the exact opposite way.

High-profile global sponsors? They measure returns differently, are far more likely to hop between sports, and are far more cut and run full stop (and "cut" includes buying talent rather than invest in a costly training program). They have zero interest in sticking with a sport or team when the going gets tough, as globally, that makes no sense. Local sponsors often have the exact opposite incentives.

If a competing league caters more for the new areas, with "their" top teams riding in more of their (sub-top) races, in formats and approach that appeal more to the new audiences, and if the existing top teams from the traditional countries (from Europe perspective, arguably Latin America too) appear more in front of its natural audiences, maybe it is an incentive for big national sponsors to return to their races and riders. Local organisers would have more local magnets on tap, making staging a race more viable by definition. And ultimately, it will make it more likely for local authorities to get local bang for their local buck too, increasing the likelihood of much fought-over money to be allocated to a race anyway. Plus, local sponsors are far more likely to stick with their local teams, as long as they can expect to see a return on investment, by getting plenty of local exposure.

And then the best of both worlds can meet, and entertain us in a handful of GTs and one-day arenas.

Dariovasco article
http://www.diariovasco.com/v/20120226/deportes/ciclismo/llevo-cuatro-anos-mendigando-20120226.html

700,000 euro for the world tour licence for Vuelta Pais Vasco

- What is the budget of the race?
- One million fifty thousand euros and 425,000 euros the Tour of the Classic, which is proportionally much more expensive than the Tour which is six days of racing. The test costs are very high one day.
- And where does the money go?
- For starters you have to pay 700,000 euros to the ICU for the UCI World Tour license and being in the calendar. We must also give 15% of the premiums for drug testing, which are another 30,000 euros. The Spanish Federation will pay € 24,000 in fees and doping controls, plus 10% of the awards, which are another 10,000 euros.
- Is not that much money?
- If you want to be in the top of the cycling world is what it costs. Also have greater impact. You are in a very small group of races. Anyway there are more expenses.
- What?
- You have to give € 7,500 to each team's World Tour comes to the race, plus accommodation for the group, which are about 11,000 euros for training. Multiply by 18 teams out 198,000 euros. The cost of accommodation will be the 250,000 euros. We've lowered the budget by EUR 250,000. People go home if arrivals and departures are nearby.

UCI has raised the money organisers have to pay them with a lot of % the last few years. This is causing the demise of many spanish and italian races, countries where the economy is stuttering the most. Typical...

One thing is for sure, RCS are winning the public relations war, and based on a few things in belgium, streaming of kbk, the reworked flanders which arguably is to make it more enjoyable for the spectator (the tradition of the muur etc aside). It would appear that Pais Vasco have made a pretty direct swipe at the UCI regarding the race fees, and now asking for public support to help make these races go ahead. One does wonder how much is going on behind closed doors, and if discussions arent under way between some of the race organisers, then why not.

the aso's new found friendship with the uci bothers me intensly. Oman, Qatar, Beijing, the new Chinese race, and the ASO also have a share in the Vuelta, Tour of California, and have now entered into a "media partnership" with the Tour Down Under. Add Paris Nice, Fleche, Liege, Paris Tours into their armoury and they have a pretty serious arsenal. Plus likely a Russian race, the planned Ports Classic.

Then again, a combined force of the Giro, Milan San Remo, Flanders Classics, Tirreno, Lombardy, Castilla y Leon, Pais Vasco, Murcia, Catalunya, San Sebastian with maybe races like Tour Med etc, and they can put together a pretty solid alternative.

looking a little better

http://www.diariovasco.com/v/20120302/deportes/ciclismo/organizacion-confia-cerrar-acuerdos-20120302.html