Later on tonight, a second rate Australian rider

[Hmmmmm]

IMO a closer analogy with F1 would be awarding full race points for a first testing session where not everyone has their new cars ready.

I follow you - a race before the racing has begun.

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

Comparison with F1 is invalidated by the fact that it is logically impossible to participate in all UCI WT races (many are simultaneous), and physically impractical for any rider to be competitive at more than half of them. In F1 there is little specialisation of types of track: in the WT, San Remo, San Sebastian and PR are never likely to be won by the same person, and that's without considering the half the seroies that are stage races.

So all the UCI can try to do is to try to establish a balance of races and points that allows the top riders, regardless of specialisation, to be in genuine contention for high positions. No doubt there can be doubt and debate about whether they do it well, or whether the races that provide a balance represent the finest traditions of the sport, but the alternative is simply to say that we can no more try to compare Cavendish and Anton than the IAAF can compare Usain Bolt and Haile Gebresalasie.

 

[Ferminal]

Tour Down Under to include a hilltop finish in the future?

http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/7...-include-a-hilltop-finish-in-the-future.aspx?

 

[rgmerk]

Affirmative action

There seems to be an assumption here that the most important races of the year are all, and should forever be, located in France, Belgium, Italy and Spain.

Might I suggest that while that might be cycling's glorious past, it's not sustainable indefinitely into the future.

 

[Ferminal]

There seems to be an assumption here that the most important races of the year are all, and should forever be, located in France, Belgium, Italy and Spain.

Might I suggest that while that might be cycling's glorious past, it's not sustainable indefinitely into the future.

Sustainable in what way?

Races like the Giro, Tour, Paris Roubax, LBL etc will exist long into the future in some form regardless of what happens to cycling on the administrative level.

The TdU in its current form is "sustained" by public funding. If the UCI collapses, which races do you think would still attract the top cyclists, STdU and AToC or the TdF and LBL?

 

[Sanitiser]

There seems to be an assumption here that the most important races of the year are all, and should forever be, located in France, Belgium, Italy and Spain.

Might I suggest that while that might be cycling's glorious past, it's not sustainable indefinitely into the future.

Cycling will always be an European sport. Much like AFL will always be an Australian-ish (since NSW and Queensland don't really follow it) sport.

You've got 100+ years of history there. I mean soccer crossed over but I'm not sure that can be repeated.

 

[Nearly]

I don't. I just said that he wasn't 'second rate'.

I suppose that when a 23 year old Indurain won the 1988 Tour of Catalonia, you would have derided him as a second rate Spaniard.

Let's see what Meyer becomes before saying he's rubbish.

At the risk of surfing the Hitch's rise, I might add what about when Contador won a stage at the TDU 4 years ago was he a third rate Spaniard or when Peter Sagan challenged Evans, Valverde and said LL Sanchez on the Willunga stage early last year he was an unheard of who would ever amount to anything?

And of course McEwen, Greipel, O'Grady, Gerrans etc have never won a race outside Australia.

As for the UCI points being equal to 5th in the TdF what has Juergen Van de Broeck ever won other than the world junior TT champs in 2001 (and he has no doubt served his time as a domestique as Meyer had to do last year)?

Cam Meyer and Matthew Goss are very classy riders but just watch out for Michael Matthews in the future by the way - he could easily have won on the day and seems very versatile.

 

[Ferminal]

JVdB had a top placing in the Giro a few years ago if I remember correctly.

 

[Tuarts]

Cycling will always be an European sport. Much like AFL will always be an Australian-ish (since NSW and Queensland don't really follow it) sport.

You've got 100+ years of history there. I mean soccer crossed over but I'm not sure that can be repeated.

Absolute ********. Cycling is a lot more world wide and more of an international sport than Aussies Rules. Absolutely stupid comparison. AFL would be more like bandy or similar in a geographical exlusive sense...

 

[Sanitiser]

Maybe not AFL. Maybe Rugby. Union.
Point still stands unless there's some Asian golden age in the future.

 

[Tuarts]

Rugby Union? Argentina re slowly becoming bigger in that.

 

[The Hitch]

There seems to be an assumption here that the most important races of the year are all, and should forever be, located in France, Belgium, Italy and Spain.

I for one dont like it when some people on here call out others as trolls. But here i have no option but to do just that. I correctly predicted that they would arrive with this exact line.

Its the "never tested positive" of the TDU/TOC hype debates.

Its such a scummy thing to say. But at the same time it reafirms my hate for these races.

Usually i feel sorry for the TDU that it is such a crap race, and hope it gets better. But when they come in with this line, you are kind of glad that their aim - to make TDU/TOC even bigger, is almost certainly bound to failure.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

There seems to be an assumption here that the most important races of the year are all, and should forever be, located in France, Belgium, Italy and Spain.

Might I suggest that while that might be cycling's glorious past, it's not sustainable indefinitely into the future.

I don't know that it isn't sustainable. Now, other races may rise to challenge them, but those are the four countries with the strongest national calendars, which supports the most high quality racing all year round, which is why their peak races are seen as the most important of the year.

Look at the youngsters starting to race today. I don't mean the Sagans, Meyers and Sicards of the world, I mean the 12-13 year olds. When they look at the sport, they have their heroes. They want to emulate their heroes' accomplishments. And what did their heroes do? They wanted to win the big races in Belgium, France, Spain and Italy. Now, winning a race like California is nice to one of these kids, sure, but they're conditioned to feel more proud of a win in one of the big races, cos those are the races their heroes laid it all on the line for. It's only once we have a generation of people for whom races like California are absolute peak events and not just for a handful while everybody else rides around to warm up for bigger events that the race can be seen as being as big as the 'traditional' events, because that's when the young kids watching the sport will be inspired and want to win the Tour of California as much as they want to win the Giro or Vuelta. We're a long way from reaching that level yet.

At the risk of surfing the Hitch's rise, I might add what about when Contador won a stage at the TDU 4 years ago was he a third rate Spaniard or when Peter Sagan challenged Evans, Valverde and said LL Sanchez on the Willunga stage early last year he was an unheard of who would ever amount to anything?

And of course McEwen, Greipel, O'Grady, Gerrans etc have never won a race outside Australia.

As for the UCI points being equal to 5th in the TdF what has Juergen Van de Broeck ever won other than the world junior TT champs in 2001 (and he has no doubt served his time as a domestique as Meyer had to do last year)?

Cam Meyer and Matthew Goss are very classy riders but just watch out for Michael Matthews in the future by the way - he could easily have won on the day and seems very versatile.

I think "second tier" is what was meant, rather than "second rate". "Second rate" is very derogatory and insulting to a very promising youngster - but "second tier" may seem the same, but is really an honest appraisal that Cameron Meyer is not on the same level as the Evanses, Nibalis, Schlecks and Menchovs of this world. It's the same as I call the likes of Rojas, Henderson and van Hummel "second-tier" sprinters. Not because I don't rate them, but because ultimately, they aren't likely to beat the top stars, the Cavendishes, Greipels and Petacchis, in a fair fight.

Cycling will always be an European sport. Much like AFL will always be an Australian-ish (since NSW and Queensland don't really follow it) sport.

You've got 100+ years of history there. I mean soccer crossed over but I'm not sure that can be repeated.

And even then with soccer - I mean, it's a global sport, but where are all the biggest, most prestigious leagues? Europe. Everybody everywhere plays the sport, but Britain, Spain and Italy have the strongest leagues. Russia and Mexico have very competitive and financially powerful leagues, Argentina and Brazil are of course huge football hubs, but ultimately the biggest players tend to end up congregating in the big European leagues. I see cycling as being like that at present. Places like the US have thrown money at a football league a few times in the past, but it's never really sunk in the way it has in rabid football-supporting countries like the ones in Europe. Maybe one day it will, but for the foreseeable future, the hub of the sport is still Europe, with South America 2nd.

 

[Sanitiser]

The other thing is most kids pretty much grow up with soccer. It may not be the main sport they play but they've played at one point, know players etc. As you pointed out the US has thrown money at it (Beckham, Pele after their peak) but Europe just has the edge of being something special being culture, tradition or whatever that both players and fans love. Just like cycling.

 

[Zinoviev Letter]

The other thing is most kids pretty much grow up with soccer. It may not be the main sport they play but they've played at one point, know players etc. As you pointed out the US has thrown money at it (Beckham, Pele after their peak) but Europe just has the edge of being something special being culture, tradition or whatever that both players and fans love. Just like cycling.

It's not just culture and tradition. It's also money.

Europe is full of rich countries where football is the number one sport. Latin America is full of poor countries where football is the number one sport. They have just as much of a football culture and a football tradition and in international football are just as successful. But money means that the European leagues are preeminent and the best players from around the world congregate there. Real Madrid can pay you more than River Plate.

This holds true in most sports - competitions in rich countries attract better athletes than competitions in similarly interested poor countries. If the money available shifts, so too will the athletes.

An example of the sporting "balance of power" shifting dramatically in recent times is cricket. India is obviously a very poor country, but it's so huge and cricket so popular there that the money factor has shifted in its favour. And so too has the popularity of its domestic cricket with international cricketers. On a less dramatic scale, you can also see the ongoing exodus of Southern hemisphere, and in particular New Zealand, Rugby Union players to the European Heineken Cup. Rugby Union is a major sport in France and England, but it isn't the dominant sport in the way it is in New Zealand. But now that there's more money to be made in Europe, that's where the players are going.

 

[M Sport]

will get as many ranking points as the 5th place rider in the Tour.

What a wonderful system we have.

Who was fifth on the tour last year? F@#k knows. Who cares? I know roughly who it was but geez, fifth place, who cares about fifth?

Who won the TDU last year? Andre Greipel.

Yeah the points allocation seems fair.

Seriously though, when the UCI and cycling can go some way to addressing the massive imbalance between the TDF and every other event (the general sporting publics perception) then I might join in and criticise lower level events. Until then good luck to them.

Cycling should have a good look at what F1 have done in the last thirty years, and what WRC have done in the last ten to fifteen years. They both had similar problems.

 

[El Pistolero]

Who was fifth on the tour last year? F@#k knows. Who cares? I know roughly who it was but geez, fifth place, who cares about fifth?

Who won the TDU last year? Andre Greipel.

Yeah the points allocation seems fair.

Seriously though, when the UCI and cycling can go some way to addressing the massive imbalance between the TDF and every other event (the general sporting publics perception) then I might join in and criticise lower level events. Until then good luck to them.

Cycling should have a good look at what F1 have done in the last thirty years, and what WRC have done in the last ten to fifteen years. They both had similar problems.

Greipel will get less help in the Tour next year because of the #5 of the Tour last year. Seriously, couldn't have picked a worse example than Greipel to make your point.

And as far as popularity goes, I think more people know Jurgen than Greipel. But that has more to do with his nationality than anything else.

 

[jaylew]

I think Greipel is more well-known than VdB2 (except maybe in Belgium).

 

[rickshaw]

Your mistake

will get as many ranking points as the 5th place rider in the Tour.

What a wonderful system we have.

You used the phrase "second rate Australian rider". BIG NO NO.

If I may paraphrase, your complaint is that the winner of a second rate (or less) RACE gets points that have the same value as other / better / more difficult races. Right? That it happens to be in Oz is an accident of geography ( and the UCI's machinations).

FWIW I recorded the VS highlights, watched the first half hour then deleted the rest. There was a good cooking show on......

 

[simo1733]

Who was fifth on the tour last year? F@#k knows. Who cares? I know roughly who it was but geez, fifth place, who cares about fifth?

Who won the TDU last year? Andre Greipel.

Yeah the points allocation seems fair.

Seriously though, when the UCI and cycling can go some way to addressing the massive imbalance between the TDF and every other event (the general sporting publics perception) then I might join in and criticise lower level events. Until then good luck to them.

Cycling should have a good look at what F1 have done in the last thirty years, and what WRC have done in the last ten to fifteen years. They both had similar problems.

i hope they dont follow F1.They would make Oman ,Qatar and Langkawi into world tour events whilst France could have nothing.Is that what u want?Coz that's what'll happen

 

[Libertine Seguros]

What has F1 done in the last 10-15 years? Sold out to the highest bidder, the big manufacturers have come in and priced all the traditional teams out of business; no Tyrrell, Lotus (except in new, bought-out, *******ised form), Benetton, Brabham, Ligier or Jordan, and now McLaren exist only in corporatised form as essentially a Mercedes satellite team until last year, and the formerly dominant Williams are a midfield team at best. Then when the bottom falls out, half the manufacturers go running and leave teams high and dry. The traditional and beloved races are being sold down the river and circuits neutered; all the tracks are designed to similar criteria by the same man, and you're left with identikit racing with most of the 'thrill' created by stewards' decisions pertaining to what happens when a driver misses the corner, and just cruises around the ocean of tarmac and rejoins the race rather than being eliminated from the race by a tyre wall or gravel trap like the old days.

But that's not likely to happen, because ultimately, cycling is NOT like F1 at all. It's more like sportscar racing. In sportscar racing, the FIA run the international series, but their rules end up being more or less controlled by the Automobil Club de l'Ouest (ACO), because the ACO control the 24h du Mans, by far the biggest event on the calendar. There are a number of series that run to their rules (American Le Mans Series, Le Mans Series, Asian Le Mans Series) plus a number of contingent series (Rolex Grand Am, FIA GT, GT2 World Championship, JGTC etc), but ultimately, Le Mans is the biggest deal of them all. They've creamed the biggest events from the ALMS, LMS and Asian LMS and combined them with the 24h du Mans to create the Le Mans World Series; but no team must compulsorily attend. The FIA wants control over sportscars, but as long as it doesn't have sole ownership of Le Mans, it can't have it, and will be flexing its muscles and trying to pressure the ACO, and the ACO will go along with some stuff for an easier life, and kick back at other stuff because they know that ultimately, they hold the power.

Sound like the UCI and ASO? It should.

 

[delbified]

F1 is just a clever way of selling smokes. since asia and the middle east are the emerging markets for smokes, that's where F1 has headed.

 

[unsheath]

And as far as popularity goes, I think more people know Jurgen than Greipel. But that has more to do with his nationality than anything else.

you on drugs bro?

The man who had the most wins in 2010 vs a man who has 0 professional wins to his name.

 

[unsheath]

You used the phrase "second rate Australian rider". BIG NO NO.

If I may paraphrase, your complaint is that the winner of a second rate (or less) RACE gets points that have the same value as other / better / more difficult races. Right? That it happens to be in Oz is an accident of geography ( and the UCI's machinations).

FWIW I recorded the VS highlights, watched the first half hour then deleted the rest. There was a good cooking show on......

I guess you Yanks rate our race just as we rate yours.

 

[Mambo95]

F1 is just a clever way of selling smokes. since asia and the middle east are the emerging markets for smokes, that's where F1 has headed.

There's very little cigarette sponsorship in F1 these days. I think Ferrari are the only team left that still have cigarette advertising (and their deal ends at the end of this year).