Yeah, i thought about that but I prefer how it is now.
Let the system sort it out ifself how many PCT teams worthy of promotion and WT teams worthy of relegation are there.
-
The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to
In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.
Thanks!
Let the system sort it out ifself how many PCT teams worthy of promotion and WT teams worthy of relegation are there.
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.
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.
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:
Hey - When you have a 1.1 local race achieving the same points as a stage win in a GT then you have a problem.
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.
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.
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.
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.
It would be less 'catastrophic' to be relegated if there were fewer WT teams and thus more wildcards. But the logic of the creation of the WT was to make it as important as possible.
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.
But when Valverde has won the Vuelta, Worlds and Lombardia, the problem will have disappeared.
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.
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.
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.
Yes, they descend a placing and are now behind Cofidis. Not in critical danger, though.
They can't relegate, though.
EF will gain 35 points if every rider behind Quintana moves up one spot.
Movistar will gain 10 points.
Israel and Lotto Soudal will gain nothing.
Movistar will gain 10 points.
Israel and Lotto Soudal will gain nothing.
I could be wrong about this, but I think if a non-podium finisher get's DQed nobody moves up and the finish position is left vacant
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
Paris - Roubaix 2024, one day monument, April 7- Started by Dreginald
- Replies: 2K
-
-
Tour of the Alps 2024 (April 15 - 19)- Started by Devil's Elbow
- Replies: 274
-
-
Volta Ciclista a Catalunya 2024 (March 18-24)- Started by Devil's Elbow
- Replies: 2K
-
De Ronde van Vlaanderen (270.8 km), 2024 March 31 (Sunday)- Started by Netserk
- Replies: 1K
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram