Most top 10s on GC.

[ingsve]

I've been looking a bit at how various teams have done on GC in all types of stage races. I have stats for the top teams for last year and for all stages races 2.1 and above for this year. I have just counted the number of top 10s without making any distinction between where in the top 10 they end or what type of race it is so Tour of Oman counts just as much as the Tour.

In 2010 the results are as follows:

Radioshack 38
HTC-Colombia 30
Liquigas 25
Rabobank 25
Saxo-Bank 24
Vacansoleil 23
Katusha 19
Garmin 19
AG2r 17
Team Sky 16
Astana 15
Euskaltel 15
Caisse d'Epargne 15
Omega-Pharma 13
Androni 12
Lampre 10
BMC 9
Quick Step 5


2011:

Updated up until 2011/02/27

Radioshack 18
Sky 15
Movistar 11
Lampre 9
FDJ 9
Garmin 8
HTC 8
Liquigas 8
Vacansoleil 8
Androni 8
AG2r 7
Rabobank 7
Europcar 7
Cofidis 6
Saur-Sojasun 6
Quick Step 5
Leopard 5
Omega-Pharma 5
Saxo Bank 4
Euskaltel 4
Colnago 4
Geox 3
Farnese Vini 3
BMC 3
Katyusha 2
Astana 2
Skil-Shimano 2
MTN - Qhubeka 2
Chipotle DT 2
Tabriz 2
D'Angelo Ante. 2
Miche 2
Aqua e Sapone 1
United Healthcare 1
Letua 1
Azad University 1
Andalucia Caja G 1
Acqua & Sapone 1
Geumsan Ginseng 1
Rapha Condor 1
De Rosa 1
Roubaix - LM 1
La Pomme Marseill 1
An Post Sean Kelly 1

One thing that is straight away obvious is that Sky, Movistar and Lampre are going really well this year and have almost equalled their number of top 10s from last year already.

That Radioshack is on top of both lists is also not that surprising given what type of riders they have.

 

[Tuarts]

So...what about all the one day races?

 

[ingsve]

So...what about all the one day races?

That's a completely different story.

This came about because I saw that Radioshack had a lot of top 10s in stage races last year and I wanted to know how dominant they actually were in that specific department and if you look at the numbers for Radioshack here and compare it with where they are on number of wins (26th) and on team rankings (8th on CQ, 11th UCI) then they seem to be extreme in their specialization towards getting places on GC in stage races above everything else.

 

[El Pistolero]

The less top 10 places the better. Because it means the team was working for one guy to take the overall victory.

Just look at Saxo, already 2 overall victories in stage races and one of them is quite prestigious. Saxo did quite well as a team in Catalunya controlling the race from stage 3 till the end.

 

[ingsve]

The less top 10 places the better. Because it means the team was working for one guy to take the overall victory.

Just look at Saxo, already 2 overall victories in stage races and one of them is quite prestigious. Saxo did quite well as a team in Catalunya controlling the race from stage 3 till the end.

Well, getting 1-2-3 like Radioshack did in West.Vlaanderen isn't exactly a bad thing but yes of course this doesn't say anything about who wins or does well in the top races.

Multiple people in the top 10 mostly happens in races that are mainly determined by a ITT or in smaller 2.1 races where PT teams are above many other teams like in Tropicale Amissa Bongo. In thougher races teams will mostly have one rider in the top 10 and sometimes perhaps two.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Yea, Movistar and Radioshack putting a lot of people up in the top 10 in relatively big races is a sign of them being rather headless; they have lots of people capable of getting up there but nobody capable of winning. Caisse d'Epargne had fewer top 10s at this point last year, but those top 10s they had were 1sts, 2nds and 3rds, not 7ths, 8ths and 9ths.

 

[The Hitch]

Would be interesting to give a team 10 points for a 1st place, 9 for 2nd .... 2 for 9th 1 for 10th and see which teams has the most points when all the dust has settled when all the smoke has cleared.

 

[ergmonkey]

Top 10 is a funny sort of thing. Sometimes it indicates a great result for the team and can be worth a lot. On the other hand, lots of stage races (and especially the grand tours) leave some room for the "anonymous Top 10" result--you know, the guys who always get dropped from the most elite final group of climbers but who are always not too far behind, rarely have a bad day, and do decent but unremarkable tt's.

The tv motos have a marked tendency to completely ignore these guys and then suddenly they cross the finish line 45 seconds after the mountain stage winner and the announcers just kind of go: 'oh, so and so seems to have just arrived after a very strong ride'.

Have a look back at Top 10's from the grand tours with an eye towards whom you didn't see on tv very much. There are a few guys who basically mastered the anonymous Top 10--and I don't think it did them or their teams a whole lot of good.

 

[ingsve]

Top 10 is a funny sort of thing. Sometimes it indicates a great result for the team and can be worth a lot. On the other hand, lots of stage races (and especially the grand tours) leave some room for the "anonymous Top 10" result--you know, the guys who always get dropped from the most elite final group of climbers but who are always not too far behind, rarely have a bad day, and do decent but unremarkable tt's.

The tv motos have a marked tendency to completely ignore these guys and then suddenly they cross the finish line 45 seconds after the mountain stage winner and the announcers just kind of go: 'oh, so and so seems to have just arrived after a very strong ride'.

Have a look back at Top 10's from the grand tours with an eye towards whom you didn't see on tv very much. There are a few guys who basically mastered the anonymous Top 10--and I don't think it did them or their teams a whole lot of good.

Ya, that's the typical ride a defensive climber will usually get.

I'm not sure if I agree that they didn't do their team a lot of good. I guess it depends on what is important for the team. Many teams would probably switch a 9th or 10th place on GC for a stage win if they don't have one but a top 10 in a GT is still better than not having one. The thing to remember however is that the type of rider that gets these anonymous top 10s would also not be the ones that could easily win a stage so hte common argument that they should attack and go in breaks rather than holding on for GC is not always a possible alternative since it would be even harder for them to win. Also some of these types of riders are the best result for a certain country so they will still get a bit of attention for that reason so it's not always completely anonymous for all viewers. For example when a guy like Le Mevel gets a top 10 it's pretty much in this way but being the best french rider still gives you attention.

 

[ingsve]

Another three top 10s for Radioshack today it looks like.

 

[ergmonkey]

Ya, that's the typical ride a defensive climber will usually get.

I'm not sure if I agree that they didn't do their team a lot of good. I guess it depends on what is important for the team. Many teams would probably switch a 9th or 10th place on GC for a stage win if they don't have one but a top 10 in a GT is still better than not having one. The thing to remember however is that the type of rider that gets these anonymous top 10s would also not be the ones that could easily win a stage so hte common argument that they should attack and go in breaks rather than holding on for GC is not always a possible alternative since it would be even harder for them to win. Also some of these types of riders are the best result for a certain country so they will still get a bit of attention for that reason so it's not always completely anonymous for all viewers. For example when a guy like Le Mevel gets a top 10 it's pretty much in this way but being the best french rider still gives you attention.

I agree. I'm not one who thinks certain riders could easily switch over from being diesel climbers to fast-finishing small group stage winners. I was thinking more about whether some teams might fall into the trap of over-paying for Top 10 gc talent that will not really generate enough publicity for the team to justify the salary.

As you said, value is complicated, though. Certain results--like being the top Frenchman--may have a lot of value to certain sponsors.

I do think, though, that the risk of heaping too much hype onto a sixth or seventh place in the Tour for an "emerging" rider can be great. So few teams are able to get their hands on legitimate Tour contenders that bidding contests for Tour pretenders can occur.

 

[ingsve]

I agree. I'm not one who thinks certain riders could easily switch over from being diesel climbers to fast-finishing small group stage winners. I was thinking more about whether some teams might fall into the trap of over-paying for Top 10 gc talent that will not really generate enough publicity for the team to justify the salary.

As you said, value is complicated, though. Certain results--like being the top Frenchman--may have a lot of value to certain sponsors.

I do think, though, that the risk of heaping too much hype onto a sixth or seventh place in the Tour for an "emerging" rider can be great. So few teams are able to get their hands on legitimate Tour contenders that bidding contests for Tour pretenders can occur.

Ya, you have to look at the lower top 10s for what they are. If a team goes to a GT with a team that is all about supporting one leader for GC then it would be a disaster if that leader is an anonymous 8th-10th finisher. If you instead look at Garmin who had a different focus going into the Tour with Farrar as a contender in the sprints then the performance that Hesjedal had with fighting himself into the top 10 by hanging on is pure gravy for them since it's not expected and it doesn't cost them the whole team to support it.

I think a top 10 place is probably better for a riders personal profile than for the team itself. But as you say, teams shouldn't be hiring those riders in the hope that they will turn into a GT winner eventually. They are better as domestiques or secondary captains with a semi protected role rather than being the fully supported single captain.