Race Thread

[Armchair Cyclist]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1854162636729954538

View: https://x.com/PS_BG_CT/status/1854162636729954538


L Brador, you say: I have just the jersey for them:

 

[theyoungest]

4 of the 7 races were won by non Benelux countries..........

The Benelux isn't really a thing. Nobody in the Netherlands feels any connection to Luxembourg, and vice versa. When you say Benelux you usually mean the Netherlands and Belgium

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

What's with the classification of races in CX? Today there is nothing televised, but two events I notice:
Rucphen Starting lists include Aerts, Adams, Kamp, Loockx, Van Kessel, Vandeputte; Bakker, Van Alphen, Verdonschott, Zemanova: recent winners include Kamp, Van der Haar, Pidcock; Verdonschott, Vos, Van der Heijden
and
Timisoara Highest career points on startlist are Malnasi , Jetta, Sylvester and Stan; Sels (OK, she was good a few years ago), Defour, Szekeres and Punk: previous winners Van der Meer and Ourliac, De Keersmaeker and Peeters.

So guess which is graded C1, and which C2, by the UCI.

Similar incoherencies are widespread.


Is this just protection against too high a percentage of the top 30/50/100 in World rankings being Belgo-Dutch? Is Eastern European and North American CX of such a standard that they deserve these points hauls but I am just unaware of most of the riders because of different levels of coverage?

Why are the likes of Boros and Konwa able to farm loads of C1 wins, but when they are in WC events they are typically placed mid to high teens: those from NW Europe finishing around them in the World Cups, for the most part, never get a sniff of a C1 podium in home events.

It seems like a much wider scale of race designations below WC is needed if rankings are to be meaningful.

 

[Hugh Januss]

What's with the classification of races in CX? Today there is nothing televised, but two events I notice:
Rucphen Starting lists include Aerts, Adams, Kamp, Loockx, Van Kessel, Vandeputte; Bakker, Van Alphen, Verdonschott, Zemanova: recent winners include Kamp, Van der Haar, Pidcock; Verdonschott, Vos, Van der Heijden
and
Timisoara Highest career points on startlist are Malnasi , Jetta, Sylvester and Stan; Sels (OK, she was good a few years ago), Defour, Szekeres and Punk: previous winners Van der Meer and Ourliac, De Keersmaeker and Peeters.

So guess which is graded C1, and which C2, by the UCI.

Similar incoherencies are widespread.


Is this just protection against too high a percentage of the top 30/50/100 in World rankings being Belgo-Dutch? Is Eastern European and North American CX of such a standard that they deserve these points hauls but I am just unaware of most of the riders because of different levels of coverage?

Why are the likes of Boros and Konwa able to farm loads of C1 wins, but when they are in WC events they are typically placed mid to high teens: those from NW Europe finishing around them in the World Cups, for the most part, never get a sniff of a C1 podium in home events.

It seems like a much wider scale of race designations below WC is needed if rankings are to be meaningful.

So races in other parts of the cross world should only be C1 if a certain number of the top 20 riders in the world are gonna rock up on the starting line? No C1 in Italy, Eastern Europe, Japan, France the US or Canada unless they can import some Dutch and or Belgians? They already have almost all the World Cups so I guess that seems fair.

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

So races in other parts of the cross world should only be C1 if a certain number of the top 20 riders in the world are gonna rock up on the starting line? No C1 in Italy, Eastern Europe, Japan, France the US or Canada unless they can import some Dutch and or Belgians? They already have almost all the World Cups so I guess that seems fair.

So what does C1 mean if races at C1 level have a field far inferior to those that are C2?
Do you believe that the wins today of Takacs and Sels today are of a much higher level of achievement and prestige than those of Orts and Verdonschott? Because apparently the UCI does.
Andrea Tamacs took 8th place in a C1 (and 15 UCI points) race by finishing 2 laps behind Loes Sels (UCI ranking 140); Nette Coppens got 8th ( no UCI points) in a C2 by finishing 2:07 behing Verdonschot (UCI ranked 5th). Where do you think Coppens would have finished in Timisoara or Tamacs in Rucphen?


Compare 2 races a week before the Euros: both given the same ranking by UCI:
Overijse: top six came 1, 3, 5, 4, 19 and 10 in Ponferrada;
Melgaco: Top 6 came 13, 21, [7th in U23], 23, 26, 30 in Ponferrada (most of them, with 'home advantage')
That does not indicate equivalence of standard in the races to me.

Yes, it does seem odd to have races defined as Class 1 if they do not have top class riders in them. As I said, perhaps there should be more levels than just C1 & C2 above NC. We would not accept a Road Race as being .Pro if no WT were willing to enter it.

It is perhaps unfortunate that the sport's elite is so geographically concentrated, but it is churlish to pretend that it is not and dishonest to give world ranking points in ways that are so ill proportioned to the achievement inherent in the result.

 

[ManicJack]

Maybe someone , if they really care, should look into how the different C's (permits virtually) of each race are applied for and awarded and the cost of obtaining that 1 or 2. I don't know the specifics but I think it's a pretty screwy process from what I've heard.

 

[Sciatic]

So what does C1 mean if races at C1 level have a field far inferior to those that are C2?
Do you believe that the wins today of Takacs and Sels today are of a much higher level of achievement and prestige than those of Orts and Verdonschott? Because apparently the UCI does.
Andrea Tamacs took 8th place in a C1 (and 15 UCI points) race by finishing 2 laps behind Loes Sels (UCI ranking 140); Nette Coppens got 8th ( no UCI points) in a C2 by finishing 2:07 behing Verdonschot (UCI ranked 5th). Where do you think Coppens would have finished in Timisoara or Tamacs in Rucphen?


Compare 2 races a week before the Euros: both given the same ranking by UCI:
Overijse: top six came 1, 3, 5, 4, 19 and 10 in Ponferrada;
Melgaco: Top 6 came 13, 21, [7th in U23], 23, 26, 30 in Ponferrada (most of them, with 'home advantage')
That does not indicate equivalence of standard in the races to me.

Yes, it does seem odd to have races defined as Class 1 if they do not have top class riders in them. As I said, perhaps there should be more levels than just C1 & C2 above NC. We would not accept a Road Race as being .Pro if no WT were willing to enter it.

It is perhaps unfortunate that the sport's elite is so geographically concentrated, but it is churlish to pretend that it is not and dishonest to give world ranking points in ways that are so ill proportioned to the achievement inherent in the result.

in road racing, though I know it’s not an equivalent example, races given WT status do not always have superior fields and higher status than some non-WT races. Strade Bianchi, for example, was for years not designated WT during the period when the best classics riders showed up every year. And in stage races, we know the UCI awards WT status to certain (mostly non-European) races just to prop them up.

 

[Hugh Januss]

Maybe someone , if they really care, should look into how the different C's (permits virtually) of each race are applied for and awarded and the cost of obtaining that 1 or 2. I don't know the specifics but I think it's a pretty screwy process from what I've heard.

Well it is the UCI.........
If I remember correctly at least part of it has to do with price list valuation.

 

[Hugh Januss]

So what does C1 mean if races at C1 level have a field far inferior to those that are C2?

By your logic then no other country in the world save Holland and Belgium should be able to get a UCI C1 sanction for any race held in their country. #makecyclocrossbelgianagain

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

By your logic then no other country in the world save Holland and Belgium should be able to get a UCI C1 sanction for any race held in their country. #makecyclocrossbelgianagain

I'm saying that I don't understand the grounds under which some races are granted C1 status, and others are not. I am remarking on the incongruousness of it, wondering how it is justifiable, and asking what might be a better set of classifications.

I'm not campaigning for anything, but in terms of your question, why do races in other countries A) need and B) deserve C1 status? The races in the US, Czechia, Spain or Romania would still have the same riders, the same budgets, and the same lack of coverage without it, apart from, possibly, the participation of 3rd level Belgians and Dutch trying to find easy points, undermining the local talent.

 

[Hugh Januss]

I'm saying that I don't understand the grounds under which some races are granted C1 status, and others are not. I am remarking on the incongruousness of it, wondering how it is justifiable, and asking what might be a better set of classifications.

I'm not campaigning for anything, but in terms of your question, why do races in other countries A) need and B) deserve C1 status? The races in the US, Czechia, Spain or Romania would still have the same riders, the same budgets, and the same lack of coverage without it, apart from, possibly, the participation of 3rd level Belgians and Dutch trying to find easy points, undermining the local talent.

Speaking only for the US back when I was helping promote cross races in California if we wanted any of the "big guns" to show up (it would be at least a 6-10 hour drive for them) we had to have at least one race on the weekend that gave C1 points. One might also ask how does a country the approximate size of the state of Maryland have so many C1 races. The eastern European countries are nowhere near the size of the US but I would imagine that some race promoters there also are willing to pay for C1 in order to attract the best cyclists of their countries.

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

Thanks: that goes a long way to answering my initial question :"What's with the classification of races in CX?" So how would promoters do to get a race C1 status? Is it simply payment to the UCI? No requirements for level of entries or coverage?

A system whereby a rider gets artificially bumped up world rankings because promoters in this country are willing to put more money in the pockets of the UCI seems to lack sporting integrity somewhat: maybe I am too much of an idealist...

 

[Wvv]

Cross in my hometown coming up. First appearance for Thibau as Euro champ.

 

[ManicJack]

Anyone having trouble with sound on flo bikes?

 

[ChewbaccaDefense]

I'm watching on Max.

Pity that Iserbyt had a mechanical...seems like the course stomped on his bike.

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

Anyone having trouble with sound?

Well, Jez Cox is commentating...

 

[KZD]

Nys gets his third win of the CX season, Brand won the women's race.

 

[Coffeeplanter]

THI-BAU! THI-BAU! THI-BAU!

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

Cross in my hometown coming up.

According to Jez Cox, that means we are entitled to call you a turnip ferret. Should I use my Moderator tools to make that change?

 

[Hugh Januss]

I'm watching on Max.

Pity that Iserbyt had a mechanical...seems like the course stomped on his bike.

It's never a pity when Iserbyt has a mechanical.

 

[Hugh Januss]

Thanks: that goes a long way to answering my initial question :"What's with the classification of races in CX?" So how would promoters do to get a race C1 status? Is it simply payment to the UCI? No requirements for level of entries or coverage?

A system whereby a rider gets artificially bumped up world rankings because promoters in this country are willing to put more money in the pockets of the UCI seems to lack sporting integrity somewhat: maybe I am too much of an idealist...

I don't actually know if the sanction fees are different for C2 and C1 that wasn't my department course design etc. was my purview. The prize list for elites was substantially more for the C1, and we paid the sanction fees to USAC although I'm sure some of it trickled on up to UCI. My point is why shouldn't other countries be able to have their own C1 races to attract the best of their country's talent pool. I don't think the Belgians are at any disadvantage, it's probably pretty easy to do at least 8 races a month in Belgium with probably no more than a hundred mile of driving per weekend. In the US that many races would mean at least 2 plane trips. If it was a problem there would be a bunch of slow guys getting unearned front row starts and clogging up the first corner. As it is it might be an odd American or French rider doing that but it's certainly not wide spread.

 

[Bolder]

THI-BAU! THI-BAU! THI-BAU!

Is he as close to the big 3 as I think he might be? (Meaning a healthy and motivated Mvdp, Wout and Pidcock).

 

[jono]

Is he as close to the big 3 as I think he might be? (Meaning a healthy and motivated Mvdp, Wout and Pidcock).

Perhaps getting closer, but a motivated MVDP probably isn't beating guys like Vandeputte, Michels and Lars by only 5-15 seconds on a course as difficult and selective as today's race.

 

[Gwbert]

Perhaps getting closer, but a motivated MVDP probably isn't beating guys like Vandeputte, Michels and Lars by only 5-15 seconds on a course as difficult and selective as today's race.

Time will tell i guess. I was thinking the same watching him today. I reckon be might be in the Pidcock territory already.

 

[rghysens]

Is he as close to the big 3 as I think he might be? (Meaning a healthy and motivated Mvdp, Wout and Pidcock).

Not this again...
In cyclocross there´s no big three. It´s mvdp>>wva>>>pidcock>iserbyt/nys/van der haar