Teams & Riders Jonas Vingegaard thread: Mountain Sprinter

[Squire]

Sure you can disregard UCI rankings and say TJV was better than UAE (which it was in my opinion as well). The only problem is when folks try and invent some "objective" criteria, some kind of math which would cover a specific scenario but fail to realise you would need to test every model against all the other possible circumstances and make sure it works best in average for all scenarios. Just because we have a feeling TJV was better than UAE it doesn't mean UCI ranking system is necessarily bad or misconfigured - it's just an outlier which gets statistically compensated over time.

So yes, everyone can say TJV was better but you're going to have a hard time proving that mathematically...

That I agree with. I think I misunderstood your post as you thinking the UCI rankings is the one true 'objective criteria'.

You can of course find strong evidence for a team being the best by looking at rankings or subsets of rankings or even very subjectively handpicked selections. But not proof in any mathematical sense, as you rightly point out. Any attempt at determining the best in a sport as diverse as pro cycling will have some degree of subjectivity anyway.

 

[Rob5091]

So Jonas will be at Visma until 2028 (unless I suppose UAE decide if you can n't beat him, then buy him up).

 

[theyoungest]

Sure you can disregard UCI rankings and say TJV was better than UAE (which it was in my opinion as well). The only problem is when folks try and invent some "objective" criteria, some kind of math which would cover a specific scenario but fail to realise you would need to test every model against all the other possible circumstances and make sure it works best in average for all scenarios. Just because we have a feeling TJV was better than UAE it doesn't mean UCI ranking system is necessarily bad or misconfigured - it's just an outlier which gets statistically compensated over time.

So yes, everyone can say TJV was better but you're going to have a hard time proving that mathematically...

The "problem" in this case is that the UCI ranking is in itself a political tool, a means through which the UCI wants to reach certain goals. You're assigning way too much credence to it if you use it as the sole determiner whether a team is the best team in the world. For example, winning the GP Quebec gets you the same amount of UCI points as a top-5 in the Giro or Vuelta. Now in what world is that even remotely comparable, in terms of performance.

UAE exploited this ridiculousness to the fullest, and they specifically targeted it. Jumbo did not, they had a different objective: winning all three GTs. Now you could argue: fair play to UAE, they reached their goal of becoming the best team in the world... but they're the best team according to the UCI's very peculiar criteria which you don't have to agree with. It's not objective science. It's worth just about as much as a random forumite assigning importance to some races and less importance to others.

If I say winning the Classic Brugge De Panne is worth just as much as winning the Tour de France because it suits the objectives of my organisation, that doesn't mean it's true.

 

[bNator]

The "problem" in this case is that the UCI ranking is in itself a political tool, a means through which the UCI wants to reach certain goals. You're assigning way too much credence to it if you use it as the sole determiner whether a team is the best team in the world. For example, winning the GP Quebec gets you the same amount of UCI points as a top-5 in the Giro or Vuelta. Now in what world is that even remotely comparable, in terms of performance.

UAE exploited this ridiculousness to the fullest, and they specifically targeted it. Jumbo did not, they had a different objective: winning all three GTs. Now you could argue: fair play to UAE, they reached their goal of becoming the best team in the world... but they're the best team according to the UCI's very peculiar criteria which you don't have to agree with. It's not objective science. It's worth just about as much as a random forumite assigning importance to some races and less importance to others.

If I say winning the Classic Brugge De Panne is worth just as much as winning the Tour de France because it suits the objectives of my organisation, that doesn't mean it's true.

Your post outlines another reason why UCI ranking is not as meaningless as many would like to make it. There are specific perks of being high on that ranking that makes teams prefer targeting events that are valued higher by the UCI generating a stronger competition and “fulfilling the prophecy” of these events count for more even when they previously did not.

Of course, that’s not the only or maybe not even the most important factor by which teams decide which events to target (publicity is) but it does count for something.

I don’t take the UCI ranking as some sort of bible and there are some clear ranking errors here. I agree it’s political to some degree, for instance all the monuments equating to the same amount of points. But that’s the case in every sport. In F1, for instance, some races are way more prestigious than others yet they will all bring the same amount of championship points. That doesn’t mean a victory in Monaco is just as important as a victory in Austria and sometimes, a champion is clearly not the same driver who is the best on a particular season.

It’s very similar in cycling. Some events are rewarded a disproportional amount of points but like I said in the earlier post - when aggregating, on the long run it gives us an approximate information about who’s who in cycling.

I have no problem with people disregarding the UCI ranking and say MvdP had a better season than Pog. It’s the inventing of math that supports those claims that I have a problem with… if we are using math, we are hardly going to come up with a system that reflects the reality better - if for no other reason because we are never going to reach a consensus what that system would be… And of course, since the teams are not aware of this ranking system it does not affect the competition nullifying the effect I talked about earlier in this post…

 

[theyoungest]

Your post outlines another reason why UCI ranking is not as meaningless as many would like to make it. There are specific perks of being high on that ranking that makes teams prefer targeting events that are valued higher by the UCI generating a stronger competition and “fulfilling the prophecy” of these events count for more even when they previously did not.

Of course, that’s not the only or maybe not even the most important factor by which teams decide which events to target (publicity is) but it does count for something.

I don’t take the UCI ranking as some sort of bible and there are some clear ranking errors here. I agree it’s political to some degree, for instance all the monuments equating to the same amount of points. But that’s the case in every sport. In F1, for instance, some races are way more prestigious than others yet they will all bring the same amount of championship points. That doesn’t mean a victory in Monaco is just as important as a victory in Austria and sometimes, a champion is clearly not the same driver who is the best on a particular season.

It’s very similar in cycling. Some events are rewarded a disproportional amount of points but like I said in the earlier post - when aggregating, on the long run it gives us an approximate information about who’s who in cycling.

I have no problem with people disregarding the UCI ranking and say MvdP had a better season than Pog. It’s the inventing of math that supports those claims that I have a problem with… if we are using math, we are hardly going to come up with a system that reflects the reality better - if for no other reason because we are never going to reach a consensus what that system would be… And of course, since the teams are not aware of this ranking system it does not affect the competition nullifying the effect I talked about earlier in this post…

I think the most important argument against using the UCI ranking as the determining factor is that the number one team had the ranking as a specific goal and the number two team didn't. UAE were racing for the points, Jumbo were racing to make history. That's the difference. I reckon in ten years nobody will remember who was the no. 1 team on the UCI ranking this year, but people will remember Jumbo winning all three GTs.

Last year Jumbo were the no. 1 team, maybe deservedly so, maybe not, but I think people will see 2023 as the more dominant season, when perhaps according to the UCI ranking it wasn't.

 

[Froome]

This debate about the best team 2023, emirates or Visma doesn't exist. Obviously Visma won the most important races, even in quantity they were the team with most wins in the World tour calendar. Emirates won the ranking in terms of points because they had a lot of second and third places that gave them some points, even if they didn’t won.
There's no debate in that discussion, unless you are some roglic fanboy that obviously cannot stand Visma and vingegaard since what happened in the vuelta, and roglic leaving Visma.

 

[bNator]

This debate about the best team 2023, emirates or Visma doesn't exist. Obviously Visma won the most important races, even in quantity they were the team with most wins in the World tour calendar. Emirates won the ranking in terms of points because they had a lot of second and third places that gave them some points, even if they didn’t won.
There's no debate in that discussion, unless you are some roglic fanboy that obviously cannot stand Visma and vingegaard since what happened in the vuelta, and roglic leaving Visma.

… and choking on La Planche des Belle Filles 😁

 

[Extinction]

I'd say tradition should be the determining factor, the GTs, monuments (with honorable mention by now to Strade Bianche), stage races like Paris-Nice, TA and Catalunya, and worlds, but also Olympics, with wins counting significantly more, because in all of these events riders are mentally and physically prepared to perform at the highest level during the various episodes of the season, in other words peak for them. In this sense, Visma, UEA, and Alpecin are tops.

 

[CyclistAbi]

There's no debate in that discussion, unless you are some roglic fanboy that obviously cannot stand Visma and vingegaard since what happened in the vuelta, and roglic leaving Visma.

Jonas, and his team, is/are Rogličes fan(s), though.

P.S. As for the debate. JV was the best team in the 2023 season.

 

[pastronef]

There's no debate in that discussion, unless you are some roglic fanboy that obviously cannot stand Visma and vingegaard since what happened in the vuelta, and roglic leaving Visma.

I agree Jumbo is the best team of 2023. UAE might have more UCI points but Jumbo's domination is there to see.
and I can't stand Jumbo. but I became a Roglic fan the moment he signed for Bora.

 

[scribers]

Vingo at Worlds or Vuelta, or both? Sorry if his schedule was posted already!

 

[Rob5091]

Vingo at Worlds or Vuelta, or both? Sorry if his schedule was posted already!

Only Vuelta according to PCS.

 

[RedheadDane]

Vingo at Worlds or Vuelta, or both? Sorry if his schedule was posted already!

From what I understand, he's planning to do the Vuelta, and would like to do the Worlds.

 

[scribers]

I would think it would be tough for him to do both. Or at least all three spain + worlds + lombardia

 

[Rob5091]

First Pedersen and now Vingegaard going down with "Young Family Syndrome" (or "Beautiful Wife Syndrome") It must be living in Switzerland, that does it. I say this is something for the W.H.O.!

https://cyclinguptodate.com/cycling...t-cool-to-live-with-an-elite-athlete-at-times

(original article in Danish at
https://www.bt.dk/cykling/vingegaard-familien-lever-med-hele-verdens-opmaerksomhed-det-er-ikke-fedt)

Edit - add . and there's going to be another member in the Vingegaard family too soon according to Mrs Vingegaard (and I think she should know!) - original article in Danish at
https://www.bt.dk/cykling/vingegaard-parret-vil-have-flere-boern-det-er-nemmere-nu

 

[Samu Cuenca]

Vingo at Worlds or Vuelta, or both? Sorry if his schedule was posted already!

He said last week, that it wasn't yet decided whether he would do the Vuelta or not.
Also, since he wants to ride the Olympics, the decision might also depend on whether he gets selected for that. If he does, then I find it likely, that he'll want a longer holiday ahead of Worlds (there are only two weeks between the Olympic RR and the start of the Vuelta).

https://sport.tv2.dk/cykling/2023-12-21-vingegaard-ved-ikke-om-han-skal-koere-vueltaen

 

[RedheadDane]

Edit - add . and there's going to be another member in the Vingegaard family too soon according to Mrs Vingegaard (and I think she should know!)

Well, they want more kids at some point - afaik, they haven't said anything more specific.

 

[Berniece]

Maybe I missed it, but has this been the thread title for long now?

 

[Samu Cuenca]

Maybe I missed it, but has this been the thread title for long now?

It's been the title since last Thursday.

 

[scribers]

He said last week, that it wasn't yet decided whether he would do the Vuelta or not.
Also, since he wants to ride the Olympics, the decision might also depend on whether he gets selected for that. If he does, then I find it likely, that he'll want a longer holiday ahead of Worlds (there are only two weeks between the Olympic RR and the start of the Vuelta).

https://sport.tv2.dk/cykling/2023-12-21-vingegaard-ved-ikke-om-han-skal-koere-vueltaen

That would open up the vuelta to someone else if he doesn’t contest it. Kuss?

 

[Froome]

He said last week, that it wasn't yet decided whether he would do the Vuelta or not.
Also, since he wants to ride the Olympics, the decision might also depend on whether he gets selected for that. If he does, then I find it likely, that he'll want a longer holiday ahead of Worlds (there are only two weeks between the Olympic RR and the start of the Vuelta).

https://sport.tv2.dk/cykling/2023-12-21-vingegaard-ved-ikke-om-han-skal-koere-vueltaen

He gave other interview this week, and he said he wants to do the vuelta next year, but this time at 100%, he said that he wasn't at his best in the vuelta of this year.

He also said that if he wins the double Tour/Vuelta, probably he will try in 2025 the double Giro/Tour.

 

[Samu Cuenca]

That would open up the vuelta to someone else if he doesn’t contest it. Kuss?

Kuss will probably start the Vuelta as co-leader (on paper at least) anyway. He might have a better shot at winning if Vingegaard is present.

 

[Samu Cuenca]

He gave other interview this week, and he said he wants to do the vuelta next year, but this time at 100%, he said that he wasn't at his best in the vuelta of this year.

He also said that if he wins the double Tour/Vuelta, probably he will try in 2025 the double Giro/Tour.

If you're referring to the Ekstra Bladet interview, he also mentions that he still isn't sure he's going to do the Vuelta in 2024.

As I said before, it will probably depend on whether he gets selected for the Olympics. That obviously won't be easy for him, considering all the Danish talent that's around these days, unless he tries to demand to get a package deal with Worlds, but that probably won't be a successful approach.

 

[Froome]

If you're referring to the Ekstra Bladet interview, he also mentions that he still isn't sure he's going to do the Vuelta in 2024.

As I said before, it will probably depend on whether he gets selected for the Olympics. That obviously won't be easy for him, considering all the Danish talent that's around these days, unless he tries to demand to get a package deal with Worlds, but that probably won't be a successful approach.

I cannot understand why he wants to go to the Olympics, because the route is not good for him, and he can win the double Tour/Vuelta.

 

[Samu Cuenca]

I cannot understand why he wants to go to the Olympics, because the route is not good for him, and he can win the double Tour/Vuelta.

It seems he wants to prolong his stay in Paris and make a family holiday out of it.