New Ranking System (Opta)

[Anonymous]

Launches on friday.

Whats the odds the website crashes under the strain.

 

[Dutchsmurf]

Launches on friday.

Whats the odds the website crashes under the strain.

Close to zero if you ask me.

Anyway, to me it sounds like there are many subjective points involved in this ranking. At least that is the feeling I got after reading that email. Also a rolling rating that launches just before the Tour? Does that mean the season goes from Tour to Tour now? I sure am curious about it, but the original message sure leaves tons of things unclear for now.

 

[theyoungest]

I wonder what formula they've come up with to get Bradley Wiggins on no. 1.

 

[The Hitch]

I wonder what formula they've come up with to get Bradley Wiggins on no. 1.

There was an article in the comedy section of a cycle sport Tour preview mag i bought at the airport, speculating who would be top 10 in 2011 so far on this ranking.

Here is a brief summary of what the current rankings will look like (according to the mag)

1 Bradley Wiggins -2,200 (includes 500 pt bonus for having hair like Paul Weller)
2 G Thomas- 1950 (triple points for 10th in Flanders)
Joint second - Swift - (bonus points for having cute dogs)
3 Downing - 1700 (wins on Pinerelo count double unless you ride for Movistar)
4 Uran -1600 (1500 of which for having "good sence" of joining Team Sky)
5 Lofqwist - 1500 (includes umlaut points)

Mark Cavendish - 0 so he is nice and cheap ahead of the transfer to Sky.

 

[The Hitch]

Here are a few things i hope to see in these rankings.

1 Giro ranked more than Vuelta, not by much but by say 2-5%
2 Tour ranked higher than Giro by the same margin.
3 Much more points for kom and points competitions than currently offered by cq which offer same points for KOM as a stage win. (might get it since Cav is joining Sky)
4 no points for young riders jersey
5 less points for points competition at Tour because its not a real points competition (Yeah right (see 3))
6 Count points from not just PT races but smaller ones as well
7 All monuments the same (none of that more for PR crap) and worth at least as much as a TDF stage win.
8 More points for none european race scenes. Not saying Volta a Portugal or Vuelta a Colombia should be given TDF figures but should be worth at least as much as a TDF stage win. CQ offers 20 points for winning VAC - less than 2nd place in an Eneco stage.


To be continued.

 

[icefire]

I've said this many times before, but I don't mind repeating myself. Having a good ranking system is just half the job. If the governing body of the sport uses a ranking system that includes results from all WT races to lock entry to the WT races they're doing a poor job no matter how good the ranking formula.

What's the point of having automatic entry to cobbles classics for a team who gets most of their points in stage races and its best placed rider in Roubaix finishes 64th? Or the opposite, what's the point of getting automatic entry to the 3 GTs for a team that gets most of its points in classics and probably does well in just 1 GT?

 

[Anonymous]

Close to zero if you ask me.

Anyway, to me it sounds like there are many subjective points involved in this ranking. At least that is the feeling I got after reading that email. Also a rolling rating that launches just before the Tour? Does that mean the season goes from Tour to Tour now? I sure am curious about it, but the original message sure leaves tons of things unclear for now.

my understanding is it is a one year rolling rating, and so they have used the data from the last tour de france onwards when their involvement was confirmed.

 

[ScottyMuser]

Here are a few things i hope to see in these rankings.

1 Giro ranked more than Vuelta, not by much but by say 2-5%
2 Tour ranked higher than Giro by the same margin.
3 Much more points for kom and points competitions than currently offered by cq which offer same points for KOM as a stage win. (might get it since Cav is joining Sky)
4 no points for young riders jersey
5 less points for points competition at Tour because its not a real points competition (Yeah right (see 3))
6 Count points from not just PT races but smaller ones as well
7 All monuments the same (none of that more for PR crap) and worth at least as much as a TDF stage win.
8 More points for none european race scenes. Not saying Volta a Portugal or Vuelta a Colombia should be given TDF figures but should be worth at least as much as a TDF stage win. CQ offers 20 points for winning VAC - less than 2nd place in an Eneco stage.


To be continued.

1 and 2 seem a sensible idea, personally I think CQ could fix this easily by simpyl moving the Giro to halfway between the Vuleta and the Tour
3) Not sure, think the balance is almost right , dont think the jerseys should be worth significantly more than a stage victory - maybe a slight rebalancing here, but not significant
4) Probably agreed, maybe keep it for just the GTs
5) Am going to ignore this one
6) CQ rankings already do this, UCI WT don't but are for a) a separate purpose, and b) clearly not what you were talking about for points 1-5 as the WT doesn't have any jersey points (you said more), the points for a GT stage win are minimal (less than a 5th in the smallest 1 day races that count in the WT points),
7) - er, pretty much every single 1 day race is already worth the same as, or more than a stage in the TDF, both in the UCI rankings iand in the CQ - a TDF stage win in the CQ rankings is worth 80, only 1.2s and the like (which, frankly, *don;t* deserve the same points - 1.1 does, and they already do!). In fact, most nations national championships reward with more, or at least similar points (NC3, which is the 4th tier of country's champs, including cycling luminaries as Ukraine, Serbia and Luxembourg reward only marginally less points - compared to the 80 for the TDF stage win and 70 for other GTs, and the other 3 tiers of Nationals reward more). Monuments are already worth the same points wise.
8) Partly agreed, althought he issue is more with the classification of the race then with the points. If these races could show themselves to be worthy of a higher than 2.2 classification, then the issue you have is gone. But as the majority of them currently stand they are not - and it makes no sense for the winner a small week long race in Africa/Asia to be awarded similar points to a GT stage as the achievement *is* much less (quality of field etc.). Colombia, as that was the one you brought up, is an interesting one - the route itself is an incredibly arduous one, and is longer than other stage races of its category, but is very much an insular South America-tour race, and that is why the poitns are less. If it were to open up, and invite a selection of American/European Pro-Conti teams, so that the field has the influx of the competitors you see in the European/TDU etc. then no doubt it would immediately go up a category or more, and be worth more as a result. The TOB, for instance, is worth more then kit (and a stage at the TDF) for the simple reason that it doesn't try to be too insular, and invites PC (and PT) teams - Colombia could do a similar thing, but they don't wish to.