Battle for 2023-2025 WT licenses

Page 4 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
The way to make it work would be to have a fixed number of forced relegations from the WT. So as an example to have the least scoring WT team relegated each year.
How would the top 2 PCT thing to get WCs work then tho? All points count for that? And what with the team that relegates. Do they not get WCs the next year? I don't know, that seems a system build to kill of teams when they have a bad year.
 
How would the top 2 PCT thing to get WCs work then tho? All points count for that? And what with the team that relegates. Do they not get WCs the next year? I don't know, that seems a system build to kill of teams when they have a bad year.
If you have a relegation system, it will always punish teams for performing poorly. The easier it is to be relegated, the easier it is to be promoted (back again). It's a fixed sum.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
If you have a relegation system, it will always punish teams for performing poorly. The easier it is to be relegated, the easier it is to be promoted (back again). It's a fixed sum.
I don't really believe in a system like that in cycling because of it's economic ecosystem. I fear sponsors wouldn't go for long time partnerships and would just pull out when their team relegates. No longterm guarantees to ride bigger races is bad for the sport. Cycling isn't football where TV rights and other revenues are more important than the sponsor ones.

Also the reason why the UCI chose a 3 year cycle btw, to atleast give teams a bit of stability.
 
But how are you going to give the PCT teams a fair chance of moving up?
I've previously posted that the relegation system is a farce - You can guarantee it that one or two WT teams will fall over in the next cycle and will be replaced by new projects which has always happened in the sport. I'll also add that if you want a strong eco-system then you need to make it attractive for sponsor involvement PCT Teams - Arkea gamed the system by refusing an invitation to the Giro and instead clocked up points riding insignificant races, while the WT teams can't refuse to ride WT races.
 
Last edited:
I've previously posted that the relegation system is a farce - You can guarantee it that one or two WT teams will fall over in the next cycle and will be replaced by new projects which has always happened in the sport. I'll also add that if you want a strong eco-system then you need to make it attractive for sponsor involvement PCT Teams - Arkea gamed the system by refusing an invitation to the Giro and instead clocked up points riding insignificant races, while the WT teams can't refuse to ride WT races.
It doesn't seem like that guarantee is very good, considering that all the top 21 teams (at least) have been top teams for more than three years.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
It does feel a bit like the insane system used to determine relegation in Mexican football. The average points-per-game over a three year period is kept and the team with the lowest rolling PPG at the end of the season is relegated. Even if they had a really good season but sucked for the previous two. Given the apertura-clausura system, in fact, if a team had a great season, then two terrible ones and survived at the top level, they could then have a bad apertura, but win the league outright in the clausura and still get relegated.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan and Lui98
Yeah which is why I think the points system needs to change but only awarding points in WT races would make the relegation system pointless.
I did not clearly explain my point - You don't ONLY consider WWT points, but you give then a greater weighing as compared to 1.pro,1.1 and 2.1 races.
It's going to be a big day for Israel today. Already got a "free" 40 points with Einhorn and will get a ton of points out of Norway. Once again no points for Movistar and Lotto not taking a lot either.
BEX got a surprising 90 points from Mezgec in the Euro's RR, however they'd argue they missed out on Groenewegen who would have gone close in the final.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
I did not clearly explain my point - You don't ONLY consider WWT points, but you give then a greater weighing as compared to 1.pro,1.1 and 2.1 races.


BEX got a surprising 90 points from Mezgec in the Euro's RR, however they'd argue they missed out on Groenewegen who would have gone close in the final.
BEX has been safe for over 2 weeks now.
It's between Movistar, Israel and Lotto.
 
It does feel a bit like the insane system used to determine relegation in Mexican football. The average points-per-game over a three year period is kept and the team with the lowest rolling PPG at the end of the season is relegated. Even if they had a really good season but sucked for the previous two. Given the apertura-clausura system, in fact, if a team had a great season, then two terrible ones and survived at the top level, they could then have a bad apertura, but win the league outright in the clausura and still get relegated.
That sounds... interesting :eek:
 
Yeah which is why I think the points system needs to change but only awarding points in WT races would make the relegation system pointless.
I think the relegation system is dumb because of the potential sponsor turn-off. However, if one must exist, just relegate a fixed number of teams based upon WT points and promote an equal number based upon Pro Series races.

Another option would be to bring back the Hammer Series. Lowest 4 WT teams and 4 highest Pro engage in weekends of Hammer battles. Top 4 over the month are in the next season's WT.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
BEX has been safe for over 2 weeks now.
It's between Movistar, Israel and Lotto.
Are you sure EF are out of this?

They get 3 points out of Tour de l'Ain ouf of which 0 count out of riders like Piccolo and Eiking.
Or they get 3 points out of Circuito de Getxo out of which 0 count out of a team that includes Bettiol, Cort, Eiking, Carthy and Guerreiro.
And it's like that in almost every small race.

Meanwhile Israel scores around 300 points in a day like today or Lotto scores 300 points in Circuit Franco-Belge alone out of which 200 count. I don't remember the last time EF even scored 300 points on one day, may not even be in 2022 at all.

I think the relegation system is dumb because of the potential sponsor turn-off. However, if one must exist, just relegate a fixed number of teams based upon WT points and promote an equal number based upon Pro Series races.
Not sure why would relegating a fixed number of teams be better than what we have now? Especially from the potential sponsor turn-off point of view. Having certainty that some of the WT teams must be relegated is certainly not better in that regard than a system that gives a possibility that all WT teams can survive if they perform well enough.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
Are you sure EF are out of this?

They get 3 points out of Tour de l'Ain ouf of which 0 count out of riders like Piccolo and Eiking.
Or they get 3 points out of Circuito de Getxo out of which 0 count out of a team that includes Bettiol, Cort, Eiking, Carthy and Guerreiro.
And it's like that in almost every small race.

Meanwhile Israel scores around 300 points in a day like today or Lotto scores 300 points in Circuit Franco-Belge alone out of which 200 count. I don't remember the last time EF even scored 300 points on one day, may not even be in 2022 at all.
Well obviously not 100% sure but even though they're having a bad season they need to do horribly bad to relegate still. Lotto needs to make up around 800 points and Israel even more than 1000, that's a ton. They both had good weeks but they won't have that every week and EF. I wouldn't look to much into those after Tour results. A lot of those guys were nowhere. They have a good enough team to score points in those Italian classics, Worlds, Vuelta, etc. I don't see it happening. 2 months ago they were almost level with Lotto and 2 weeks later they were a 1000 points behind. You never know tho.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
Are you sure EF are out of this?

They get 3 points out of Tour de l'Ain ouf of which 0 count out of riders like Piccolo and Eiking.
Or they get 3 points out of Circuito de Getxo out of which 0 count out of a team that includes Bettiol, Cort, Eiking, Carthy and Guerreiro.
And it's like that in almost every small race.

Meanwhile Israel scores around 300 points in a day like today or Lotto scores 300 points in Circuit Franco-Belge alone out of which 200 count. I don't remember the last time EF even scored 300 points on one day, may not even be in 2022 at all.


Not sure why would relegating a fixed number of teams be better than what we have now? Especially from the potential sponsor turn-off point of view. Having certainty that some of the WT teams must be relegated is certainly not better in that regard than a system that gives a possibility that all WT teams can survive if they perform well enough.
Any relegation system is dumb related to sponsors. They shouldn't do it. It's dumb since it will discourage sponsors and will ultimately make things less stable for Women's and Developmental teams that are under the same umbrella se men's WT. I'm not sure how anyone thought this is a good idea.

But at least with a set # of teams relegated (1 or 2, max) based upon WT races only, we would actually be retaining the World teams that perform best at the highest level and avoid teams scrambling to gain points by riding x.1 races that they wouldn't otherwise ride.

The current system only benefits x.Pro and x.1 races which now get better start lists. And it leads to less opportunities for secondary riders at larger teams and sub-WT teams in general.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY