Inside The War Of Pro Cycling

[86TDFWinner]

http://www.businessinsider.com/aso-uci-war-tour-de-france-pro-cycling-2016-1

 

[Jancouver]

Old news but a nice article never-the-less. Too bad the average fan is not aware of these issues.

 

[Arnout]

Someone please look up the total profit of ASO, divide that by 18, then come tell me that number is gonna make a world of difference (and that's pretending ASO doesn't want their own profit).

Hint: you can find some numbers here: http://inrng.com/2014/01/problem-revenue-sharing/

 

[swuzzlebubble]

http://www.businessinsider.com/aso-uci-war-tour-de-france-pro-cycling-2016-1

If 6 teams were granted a 3 year license each year, then after three years there would be six teams up for revision each year. Wouldn't both ASO and UCI be happy with that?

 

[vedrafjord]

Wasn't sure what thread to put this:
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport/tourdownunder/tour-down-under-2016-puzzling-why-chris-froome-peter-sagan-shunned-tdu/news-story/dffcb7f05bf8831017cf38045d69ef11

Cookson comes across pretty arrogant, questioning why Froome and Sagan aren't at the TDU:

“I think it’s an odd decision by Team Sky, it’s not a helpful decision, but one understands why teams sometimes make these decisions,” he said. “It’s a long season and riders need to prepare in the best way but certainly that was a puzzling decision to me. In a way, perhaps, the Tour Down Under has been a little bit of a victim of its own success: it’s a very difficult event to win, the teams and riders know that, and perhaps some of them choose to have a more gentle start to the season.

“The whole point of the structure of the reforms is to try to iron out some these inconsistencies where teams choose to send riders to events that are not part of the WorldTour.”

Seems 'reforms' means the UCI gets to decide what the big races are and who races what, not the organisers, the fans, the teams, or the riders themselves.

 

[Jancouver]

Re:

Wasn't sure what thread to put this:
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport/tourdownunder/tour-down-under-2016-puzzling-why-chris-froome-peter-sagan-shunned-tdu/news-story/dffcb7f05bf8831017cf38045d69ef11

Cookson comes across pretty arrogant, questioning why Froome and Sagan aren't at the TDU:

“I think it’s an odd decision by Team Sky, it’s not a helpful decision, but one understands why teams sometimes make these decisions,” he said. “It’s a long season and riders need to prepare in the best way but certainly that was a puzzling decision to me. In a way, perhaps, the Tour Down Under has been a little bit of a victim of its own success: it’s a very difficult event to win, the teams and riders know that, and perhaps some of them choose to have a more gentle start to the season.

“The whole point of the structure of the reforms is to try to iron out some these inconsistencies where teams choose to send riders to events that are not part of the WorldTour.”

Seems 'reforms' means the UCI gets to decide what the big races are and who races what, not the organisers, the fans, the teams, or the riders themselves.

That article shows once again the arrogance of Aussie fans and the TDU organizers. They are completely delusional thinking their event is some kind of pinnacle of the cycling universe and it should be mandatory for the top riders to show up.

It is already ENOUGH the WT teams are required to participate.

Six stages, six wins for Australia, yet they are still whining about Froome not being there and Sagan, Quintana and Nibali riding San Luis instead. Common TDU, you can't have your cake and eat it too!

The TDU should be cancelled or should be one day "Willunga Hill" race. No need to be riding in circles for a week. Nobody other than a few Aussie fans care about this event. Enough with this nonsense!

 

[yaco]

Re: Re:

Wasn't sure what thread to put this:
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport/tourdownunder/tour-down-under-2016-puzzling-why-chris-froome-peter-sagan-shunned-tdu/news-story/dffcb7f05bf8831017cf38045d69ef11

Cookson comes across pretty arrogant, questioning why Froome and Sagan aren't at the TDU:

“I think it’s an odd decision by Team Sky, it’s not a helpful decision, but one understands why teams sometimes make these decisions,” he said. “It’s a long season and riders need to prepare in the best way but certainly that was a puzzling decision to me. In a way, perhaps, the Tour Down Under has been a little bit of a victim of its own success: it’s a very difficult event to win, the teams and riders know that, and perhaps some of them choose to have a more gentle start to the season.

“The whole point of the structure of the reforms is to try to iron out some these inconsistencies where teams choose to send riders to events that are not part of the WorldTour.”

Seems 'reforms' means the UCI gets to decide what the big races are and who races what, not the organisers, the fans, the teams, or the riders themselves.

That article shows once again the arrogance of Aussie fans and the TDU organizers. They are completely delusional thinking their event is some kind of pinnacle of the cycling universe and it should be mandatory for the top riders to show up.

It is already ENOUGH the WT teams are required to participate.

Six stages, six wins for Australia, yet they are still whining about Froome not being there and Sagan, Quintana and Nibali riding San Luis instead. Common TDU, you can't have your cake and eat it too!

The TDU should be cancelled or should be one day "Willunga Hill" race. No need to be riding in circles for a week. Nobody other than a few Aussie fans care about this event. Enough with this nonsense!

Mate - You offer nothing to this forum - The quote was attributed to Brian Cookson President of the UCI - Nothing to do with Aussie cycling fans or the TDU Organisation.

I will continue to call you out as long as you post mistruths.

And its a pity that the Top 5 in GC for the Tour of St Louis were Columbians - Maybe this can be your new hobby horse.

 

[vedrafjord]

I certainly don't think the TDU should be cancelled or curtailed - it seems to be a well-run race with plenty of fans in attendance. It's broadly similar to what the Nissan Classic was for Ireland during 1985-92 - a chance for fans who wouldn't normally get to see the top riders from their country, along with selected big names, some of which were paid to be there (although the Nissan Classic was a point-to-point stage race, not based in a single hub).

What I don't like is the UCI thinking they can dictate the status of certain races - that's a natural product of the race's history, the interest of the fans, the parcours, time of year, etc. This doesn't mean that there can't be new races - they just have to capture the interest of fans and riders as, say, Strade Bianche has done.