Alex Dowsett interview

But TGH has more chance of a medal in the RR than Dowsett has in the ITT so it does not make sense to waste a RR slot on Dowsett so he can finish 12th in the ITT.
He does say he’s not mad at the GB selectors as such, but he’s pretty annoyed at the way the UCI/IOC have divvied up the spots. The TT and RR are very different disciplines, and he has a fair point; he could probably top 10 the event, and if it was T&F, gymnastics, swimming etc they’d be damn sure to bring someone they thought would make a final.
 
Reactions: Pinot's goat
He does say he’s not mad at the GB selectors as such, but he’s pretty annoyed at the way the UCI/IOC have divvied up the spots. The TT and RR are very different disciplines, and he has a fair point; he could probably top 10 the event, and if it was T&F, gymnastics, swimming etc they’d be damn sure to bring someone they thought would make a final.
It's a shame Hayter is doing so many track events as he would be the best 2nd option after Thomas.
 
I think that’s part of Dowsett’s point. They bring this rule in, but then plenty of riders get named for both, and then just scratch one or the other. Riders who honour the rule (Tao this year, I think Roche did it for Ireland in the past) end up underperforming in both (except freaks like Spartacus).
Yeah, but as far as we know now, Dennis will ride both races. But I agree that it's a problem when riders opt out at the last minute, so other countries won't get the chance to select more riders.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
So is this the IOC trying to keep the number of athletes down, or the UCI bringing restrictions "because we can" or what?
It's a combination of both. The IOC are trying to keep numbers down so allocate a certain number of places to cycling and the UCI decide how they are split among the disciplines. In this case they have decided not to allocate any spots specifically to the TT. This was the same in 2016, I think it 2012 there were specific TT spaces but don't quote me on that.


There will be more changes in 2024 as gender parity across disciplines will be achieved.
 
That is indeed one of the problems with Olympics. It happens quite often. For all the best competitors in some discipline to not be there.
To be honest, I think the biggest problem with the Olympics is the wide range of sports that are added where the Olympics isn't the pinnacle of that sport. Arguably cycling is one of these, and while riders clearly would like to win it, I think most would pick, for example, the WCRR over an Olympic win. My opinion is that if the Olympics isn't the highest accolade in a sport, it shouldn't be in the Olympics, and they should give higher athlete allocations to the sports where it is (within reason).
 
Reactions: SafeBet
There will be more changes in 2024 as gender parity across disciplines will be achieved.
Maybe not the right place to discuss this, but any idea what this means in practise?

As far as I can see there was already parity in disciplines in 2016 in cycling, but 321 male athletes vs 192 female. Will they reduce the number of spots for men even further? I guess easiest would be to cut the RR, but would it make sense to start with 60 riders or something? I doubt they'll take anything off BMX/MTB, and the track has already suffered, but maybe they have to take another hit.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
What is this rule about the Olympic selections that leads to trackies in the RR and tiime trialists not being allowed to race unless they do something else as well?
There's a reserve rider rule and I think that's the one you're thinking of. Essentially you can use any rider selected in one event to replace a rider selected in another event. I think what happened was sprinters were selected for the road race, started and climbed off (they need to do this to satisfy the rule from what I can remember, they can't just DNS), and were then selected to replace a rider in the individual sprint/team sprint who had been selected in both (track allocations are sprint and endurance so the individual sprint rider comes from your team sprint rider, or did at the time). It's a way of increasing you track squad numbers.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
Maybe not the right place to discuss this, but any idea what this means in practise?

As far as I can see there was already parity in disciplines in 2016 in cycling, but 321 male athletes vs 192 female. Will they reduce the number of spots for men even further? I guess easiest would be to cut the RR, but would it make sense to start with 60 riders or something? I doubt they'll take anything off BMX/MTB, and the track has already suffered, but maybe they have to take another hit.
I had the numbers somewhere but from memory the male peloton will be cut from 150 this time to 90 next time with 90 allocated to the women as well, there will be some extra track places for women's sprint as the teams are going from 2 to 3 and I think the other disciplines are already at parity. The overall number of places allocated to cycling is going down slightly too.

Edit:

Here's the link, I was mainly right but there are a couple of other changes. Mens track reduced, both MTB reduced and freestyle BMX increased.

 

ASK THE COMMUNITY