The Aqua Blue Sport thread

[samhocking]

Well it's a little different in this case because this is 4 Continental wildcards based off the domestic calendar primarily and there are only 6 domestic Continental teams racing that calendar anyway. The point is, all the teams and their sponsors know the selection criteria for ToB a year in advance. That makes good business sense for the sponsor and encourages investment into the teams wanting to do well at domestic continental level. Wiggins was complaining about this when the team was aiming at Pro Continental. He said, they simply couldn't get the invites because they were not a French, Italian or Spanish team and it was getting excessively expensive racing outside those countries. ie they were having to go to Eastern Europe to race each weekend despite being a Western European team.

 

[King Boonen]

Re:

Well it's a little different in this case because this is 4 Continental wildcards based off the domestic calendar primarily and there are only 6 domestic Continental teams racing that calendar anyway. The point is, all the teams and their sponsors know the selection criteria for ToB a year in advance. That makes good business sense for the sponsor and encourages investment into the teams wanting to do well at domestic continental level. Wiggins was complaining about this when the team was Pro Continental. He said, they simply couldn't get the invites because they were not a French, Italian or Spanish team and it was getting excessively expensive racing outside those countries. ie they were having to go to Eastern Europe to race each weekend despite being a Western European team.

Did the Wiggins team have anyone of value for the races they weren't getting invited to? Which teams should they have replaced?

What you are suggesting is akin to a football league it seems with a few "cup" competitions that lower league teams fight it out to compete with the bigger teams, like GTs, monuments etc. I'm not massively against this kind of set up, but I don't see how it's realistically going to work. You used the ToB as an example, how does this example apply to the Vuelta? Your example just seems to show that the teams who would have probably been selected as wildcards with no system got selected anyway. What structure are you proposing and where do those teams come from? How do you rank the races? How do you ensure that there is parity across the different domestique seasons so wildcard selection is fair? Will this mean the same teams ride all 3 GTs? If so you're going to have to show that the sponsorship is there to support big enough squads across all possible competing teams.

 

[samhocking]

The point with ToB system was made to demonstrate the wildcard Continental teams racing the event is based on the team qualifying, not the whim of the race organiser, which is clear to business and therefore encourages sponsorship, growth and relative stability. The stability of Pro Continental teams is especially fragile, because they simply don't know what big TV races they will race. ie Caja Rural are racing Vuelta, yet ranked below Aqua Blue. Based on merit it should not be them or Aqua-Blue should it. It makes no sense for the sport to use a wildcard system which allows weak teams from within the division below simply because they are the right Nationality. That isn;t even best for the race organiser and we know those teams just ride the break for sponsors and that is their main contribution to the race much of the time. I understand it wouldn't help Aqua-Blue in this situation, although they were not invited to most ASO races, so perhaps ranking is distorted anyway. But anyway, his point was how come we got in last year, but not this year - what is the criteria and the reality is there is no sporting criteria to Wild Cards, it's unknown and bias therefore allows the status quo to continue and discourages sponsors aiming high in the sport with such a nonsense system to reward it.

 

[LaFlorecita]

Re:

The point with ToB system was made to demonstrate the wildcard Continental teams racing the event is based on the team qualifying, not the whim of the race organiser, which is clear to business and therefore encourages sponsorship, growth and relative stability. The stability of Pro Continental teams is especially fragile, because they simply don't know what big TV races they will race. ie Caja Rural are racing Vuelta, yet ranked below Aqua Blue. Based on merit it should not be them or Aqua-Blue should it. It makes no sense for the sport to use a wildcard system which allows weak teams from within the division below simply because they are the right Nationality. That isn;t even best for the race organiser and we know those teams just ride the break for sponsors and that is their main contribution to the race much of the time. I understand it wouldn't help Aqua-Blue in this situation, although they were not invited to most ASO races, so perhaps ranking is distorted anyway. But anyway, his point was how come we got in last year, but not this year - what is the criteria and the reality is there is no sporting criteria to Wild Cards, it's unknown and bias therefore allows the status quo to continue and discourages sponsors aiming high in the sport with such a nonsense system to reward it.

Are you claiming it isn't in the race organizers' interest to stimulate cycling in their country by supporting riders and teams from the same country?

The ToB wildcard system heavily favors the British teams. If la Vuelta were to create a ranking based on results throughout the season in Spanish races, Caja Rural would be in prime position for a wildcard spot.
An idea would be to create an international ranking, but then the same few teams would be invited to every WT race which isn't desirable either.

 

[del1962]

Re: Re:

The point with ToB system was made to demonstrate the wildcard Continental teams racing the event is based on the team qualifying, not the whim of the race organiser, which is clear to business and therefore encourages sponsorship, growth and relative stability. The stability of Pro Continental teams is especially fragile, because they simply don't know what big TV races they will race. ie Caja Rural are racing Vuelta, yet ranked below Aqua Blue. Based on merit it should not be them or Aqua-Blue should it. It makes no sense for the sport to use a wildcard system which allows weak teams from within the division below simply because they are the right Nationality. That isn;t even best for the race organiser and we know those teams just ride the break for sponsors and that is their main contribution to the race much of the time. I understand it wouldn't help Aqua-Blue in this situation, although they were not invited to most ASO races, so perhaps ranking is distorted anyway. But anyway, his point was how come we got in last year, but not this year - what is the criteria and the reality is there is no sporting criteria to Wild Cards, it's unknown and bias therefore allows the status quo to continue and discourages sponsors aiming high in the sport with such a nonsense system to reward it.

Are you claiming it isn't in the race organizers' interest to stimulate cycling in their country by supporting riders and teams from the same country?

The ToB wildcard system heavily favors the British teams. If la Vuelta were to create a ranking based on results throughout the season in Spanish races, Caja Rural would be in prime position for a wildcard spot.
An idea would be to create an international ranking, but then the same few teams would be invited to every WT race which isn't desirable either.

Why are people comparing the TOB to La Vuelta

 

[LaFlorecita]

Re: Re:

Why are people comparing the TOB to La Vuelta

Because Rick Delaney complained about not getting a WC for la Vuelta and now he/the team management are complaining about the WC system again, and samhocking claims the ToB WC system is so much better and that it should be used for every race.

 

[del1962]

Re: Re:

Why are people comparing the TOB to La Vuelta

Because Rick Delaney complained about not getting a WC for la Vuelta and now he/the team management are complaining about the WC system again, and samhocking claims the ToB WC system is so much better and that it should be used for every race.

Correct me if I am wrong but for an .HC race continental teams with the exception of concessions are from the host nation, for Grand Tours and pro-conti teams this is not the case

 

[LaFlorecita]

Re: Re:

Why are people comparing the TOB to La Vuelta

Because Rick Delaney complained about not getting a WC for la Vuelta and now he/the team management are complaining about the WC system again, and samhocking claims the ToB WC system is so much better and that it should be used for every race.

Correct me if I am wrong but for an .HC race continental teams with the exception of concessions are from the host nation, for Grand Tours and pro-conti teams this is not the case

I am just trying to understand if samhocking would suggest a similar system for all races or if he has a different idea, considering his criticism regarding the current wildcard system.

 

[42x16ss]

Re: Re:

Why are people comparing the TOB to La Vuelta

Because Rick Delaney complained about not getting a WC for la Vuelta and now he/the team management are complaining about the WC system again, and samhocking claims the ToB WC system is so much better and that it should be used for every race.

Correct me if I am wrong but for an .HC race continental teams with the exception of concessions are from the host nation, for Grand Tours and pro-conti teams this is not the case

I am just trying to understand if samhocking would suggest a similar system for all races or if he has a different idea, considering his criticism regarding the current wildcard system.

Sometimes I wonder if Sam’s ideal system would have British and Irish teams having first dibs every time...

In all seriousness though, if it was done through qualifying, the teams selected for early season WT races would have a huge early advantage with Asian and North American teams who race in Europe later in the year struggling to qualify due to travel and budget constraints.

Then you need to consider teams that focus on their domestic calendars. This is particularly important for Spanish and Italian teams with local sponsors and riders suited to those races. Imagine Burgos or Caja Rural trying to ride the classics in order to qualify for La Vuelta? It would be a massacre. Also, the Dutch and Belgian teams focused on the classics wouldn’t have much to offer in the stage races apart from races like Binckbank, de Panne and maybe Paris Nice.

The concept of season long qualifying certainly has merit but with the geographical spread of teams and variety of focus this would struggle to be equitable.

 

[Koronin]

Or allow WT teams to opt out of a set number of WT races. Movistar would be highly unlikely to go to many of the cobbled races if they weren't required to.

 

[search]

Re:

Or allow WT teams to opt out of a set number of WT races. Movistar would be highly unlikely to go to many of the cobbled races if they weren't required to.

the Classics are not an issue I think, with 7 or 8 wild cards handed out anyway. And for many races there are just not many PCT teams interested I think. So what would happen if 4 or 5 WT teams opt out of Eneco, Poland or so? Even for the Vuelta usually only a handful of teams apply for a Wildcard

 

[42x16ss]

Re:

Or allow WT teams to opt out of a set number of WT races. Movistar would be highly unlikely to go to many of the cobbled races if they weren't required to.

What about Erviti and Bennati? These are their main individual goals for the year. Having said that, it would allow teams to focus almost entirely on one or two styles of racing if they wanted. You would probably see more specialists going to Pro Continental teams for the increased wildcard entries and better support.

 

[Koronin]

Re: Re:

Or allow WT teams to opt out of a set number of WT races. Movistar would be highly unlikely to go to many of the cobbled races if they weren't required to.

What about Erviti and Bennati? These are their main individual goals for the year. Having said that, it would allow teams to focus almost entirely on one or two styles of racing if they wanted. You would probably see more specialists going to Pro Continental teams for the increased wildcard entries and better support.

I agree with you, but Movistar's boss has actually said they wouldn't race the cobbled races if they weren't required to. However, next year Erviti and Bennati have a little help coming in Roelandts, and maybe Valverde (who keeps saying he wants to race a couple of them and specifically Flanders).

 

[Koronin]

Re: Re:

Or allow WT teams to opt out of a set number of WT races. Movistar would be highly unlikely to go to many of the cobbled races if they weren't required to.

the Classics are not an issue I think, with 7 or 8 wild cards handed out anyway. And for many races there are just not many PCT teams interested I think. So what would happen if 4 or 5 WT teams opt out of Eneco, Poland or so? Even for the Vuelta usually only a handful of teams apply for a Wildcard

Nothing different than say California which is now a WT event and around that many WT teams don't go there.

 

[search]

as a new WT race, different rules apply for California anyway though

 

[King Boonen]

Re: Re:

Why are people comparing the TOB to La Vuelta

In this case, ABS raced it last year but not this year and Delaney complained about the arbitrary nature of wildcard picks (ignoring the fact it worked out for him last year of course...). Samhocking used the Tour of Britain as an example of a ranked wildcard system so we are interested to know how this system could actually be applied across several different national racing calendars and levels of racing to ensure every pro continental team has a chance of qualifying for the races they want to, not just, as Cav would put it, "some rubbish small race" (paraphrased so I don't get reported ). A couple of posters pointed out that the teams who qualified for the ToB were likely the teams that would get picked anyway and if a similar system existed for other Tours, focusing on domestic races/calendar, the same is likely to happen. There is the aded confounding factor of using other WT races to rank people for WT race spots, grading the races and so on. So far we've been told that the Tour of Britain is an example but nothing more.

 

[samhocking]

Re: Re:

Why are people comparing the TOB to La Vuelta

Because Rick Delaney complained about not getting a WC for la Vuelta and now he/the team management are complaining about the WC system again, and samhocking claims the ToB WC system is so much better and that it should be used for every race.

Correct me if I am wrong but for an .HC race continental teams with the exception of concessions are from the host nation, for Grand Tours and pro-conti teams this is not the case

I am just trying to understand if samhocking would suggest a similar system for all races or if he has a different idea, considering his criticism regarding the current wildcard system.

I'm not comparing, i'm simply saying every WT races wildcards should be based on the team qualifying for that Wildcard regardless of that teams nationality difference with the race organiser. This is supposed to be a World Tour.

 

[samhocking]

Re: Re:

Why are people comparing the TOB to La Vuelta

In this case, ABS raced it last year but not this year and Delaney complained about the arbitrary nature of wildcard picks (ignoring the fact it worked out for him last year of course...). Samhocking used the Tour of Britain as an example of a ranked wildcard system so we are interested to know how this system could actually be applied across several different national racing calendars and levels of racing to ensure every pro continental team has a chance of qualifying for the races they want to, not just, as Cav would put it, "some rubbish small race" (paraphrased so I don't get reported ). A couple of posters pointed out that the teams who qualified for the ToB were likely the teams that would get picked anyway and if a similar system existed for other Tours, focusing on domestic races/calendar, the same is likely to happen. There is the aded confounding factor of using other WT races to rank people for WT race spots, grading the races and so on. So far we've been told that the Tour of Britain is an example but nothing more.

As a simple example, you could simply take the top 3 teams from Europe Tour ranking the end of the previous season and offset UCI points upto the selection date deadline of this season. So in La Vuelta's 4 wildcards, that would be something like:

UCI Ranked - Points - Team
1st - 4164 pts - WANTY - GROUPE GOBERT (WGG)
2nd - 3649 pts - COFIDIS, SOLUTIONS CREDITS (COF)
3rd - 2486 pts - ANDRONI GIOCATTOLI - SIDERMEC (ANS)
4th - 2442 pts - DIRECT ENERGIE (TDE)

Instead we have

UCI Ranked - Points - Team
2nd - 3649 pts - COFIDIS, SOLUTIONS CREDITS (COF)
11th - 1629 pts - EUSKADI BASQUE COUNTRY - MURIAS (EUS)
23rd - 971 pts - CAJA RURAL - SEGUROS RGA (CJR)
69th - 360 pts - BURGOS - BH (BBH)

Now, obviously many teams simply won't want to race Vuelta regardless if they are ranked highly. That is fine, then it works like Aqua Blue & Wiggins, the qualification criteria simply cascades down to a team that does want to race and meets qualification criteria. THe point is there are 64 Pro Conti teams much more highly performing than BURGOS for example. You could have four of the best Pro Conti teams racing Grand Tours. At the moment really only Cofidis deserves to be at Vuelta from the wildcards, the others are simply there to get in a break and get TV time for their sponsor.

 

[LaFlorecita]

Re: Re:

I'm not comparing, i'm simply saying every WT races wildcards should be based on the team qualifying for that Wildcard regardless of that teams nationality difference with the race organiser. This is supposed to be a World Tour.

And what you suggest for qualification? An international ranking with as a result the same 4-5 teams in every race? A domestic ranking which would result in mainly domestic teams getting a wildcard?
There is already a selection: the teams that the organizers deem most interesting are selected. So yes, in French races, those will be mainly French teams. In Italian, mainly Italian teams. But guess what. If Aqua Blue had rocked up the Europe tour, winning a dozen races, or signed some big names, they'd have a much easier time getting invites for the big races. Direct Energie secured a wildcard for basically all cobbled classics through signing Terpstra. That is the system currently and I don't see why it's an issue. Or would you also say British teams shouldn't be prioritized for the Prudential RideLondon Classic, Australian teams for the Tour Down Under and Basque teams for the Vuelta al Pais Vasco? Do you not understand that for those teams, those are among the most important races on their calendar?

Edit: you answered some of my questions in your post above mine. So you don't see an issue in having the same 4 teams in every race? So smaller teams have no chance to ever race a big race? Especially for these smaller teams, like Caja Rural or Burgos, one of the ways they can attract bigger riders is by using their more or less guaranteed wildcard for bigger races to lure them in. If you take that away from them, they are forced to develop young or mediocre riders in the hopes of moving up in the rankings, and of course they'd have to hope no big team snags their riders from them once they start performing.

 

[Bolder]

Re: Re:

Why are people comparing the TOB to La Vuelta

Because Rick Delaney complained about not getting a WC for la Vuelta and now he/the team management are complaining about the WC system again, and samhocking claims the ToB WC system is so much better and that it should be used for every race.

Correct me if I am wrong but for an .HC race continental teams with the exception of concessions are from the host nation, for Grand Tours and pro-conti teams this is not the case

I am just trying to understand if samhocking would suggest a similar system for all races or if he has a different idea, considering his criticism regarding the current wildcard system.

Sometimes I wonder if Sam’s ideal system would have British and Irish teams having first dibs every time...

In all seriousness though, if it was done through qualifying, the teams selected for early season WT races would have a huge early advantage with Asian and North American teams who race in Europe later in the year struggling to qualify due to travel and budget constraints.

Then you need to consider teams that focus on their domestic calendars. This is particularly important for Spanish and Italian teams with local sponsors and riders suited to those races. Imagine Burgos or Caja Rural trying to ride the classics in order to qualify for La Vuelta? It would be a massacre. Also, the Dutch and Belgian teams focused on the classics wouldn’t have much to offer in the stage races apart from races like Binckbank, de Panne and maybe Paris Nice.

The concept of season long qualifying certainly has merit but with the geographical spread of teams and variety of focus this would struggle to be equitable.

I agree completely. There's an entire calendar of worthy races in Spain, France etc. where the serious entries are mostly country based PC and PT teams, and as noted the Dutch/Belgian teams that focus on classics etc. PC-grade wild card teams are an integral part of races, and they ideally should be country specific. French fans want to come out to see their local heroes take on the TdF; same with ToB I'm sure.

Overall the problems is the uncertain funding to run a cycling team rather than the nuances of wild card invites. We've seen teams at every level implode with only days' notice. Something about cycling seems to attract mercurial milllionaires...or purported millionaires...what was the name of that crazy US-based team that raced in black uniforms that was sponsored by a jeans company?

 

[samhocking]

If you believe French teams should get wildcards to French races, Italian to Italian races & Spanish to Spanish races, then there's absolutely no point having the 'World Tour' or even a Europe Tour. What you actually have is no Tour at all, nothing Worldly or European about it, it's a closed old boys club based on Nationality and race organisers doing what's best for their profit rather than the sport at a World level. It's as Brailsford says, if you want a Tour de France for French teams, then make it a race for only French teams.

 

[LaFlorecita]

Now here's an idea. As search wrote earlier, there are so many wildcard teams in the classics that there are usually no problems with teams missing out in those. What if we bring team sizes in GTs down to 7 or even 6, and invite 2-3 more wildcard teams. Then, let's say 2 or 3 teams are selected through a ranking (with the ToB system that if a team refuses, the next team in line received the invite) and 2 or 3 are selected by the organizers themselves.

 

[LaFlorecita]

Re:

If you believe French teams should get wildcards to French races, Italian to Italian races & Spanish to Spanish races, then there's absolutely no point having the 'World Tour' or even a Europe Tour. What you actually have is no Tour at all, nothing Worldly about it, it's a closed boys club based on Nationality and race organisers doing what's best for their profit rather than the sport at a global level. It's as Brailsford says, if you want a Tour de France for French teams, then make it a race for only French teams.

It is called a "World Tour" because the races are held all over the world. Europe Tour, Africa Tour, Asia Tour, America Tour races are held on their respective continent.

French fans want to see French riders and teams, French riders want to ride French races, French races want to support French cycling. It makes perfect sense to me.

As for what Brailsfraud said, that is absolute nonsense of course. No one wants an entirely French Tour de France. It's just another senseless comment in a long line of "boohoohoo the French are so mean to us because we're British and successful and they're not" whining. Has any other team received hate from the French fans? No? Right. So it's got nothing to do with wanting an all-French Tour.

 

[King Boonen]

Re: Re:

Why are people comparing the TOB to La Vuelta

In this case, ABS raced it last year but not this year and Delaney complained about the arbitrary nature of wildcard picks (ignoring the fact it worked out for him last year of course...). Samhocking used the Tour of Britain as an example of a ranked wildcard system so we are interested to know how this system could actually be applied across several different national racing calendars and levels of racing to ensure every pro continental team has a chance of qualifying for the races they want to, not just, as Cav would put it, "some rubbish small race" (paraphrased so I don't get reported ). A couple of posters pointed out that the teams who qualified for the ToB were likely the teams that would get picked anyway and if a similar system existed for other Tours, focusing on domestic races/calendar, the same is likely to happen. There is the aded confounding factor of using other WT races to rank people for WT race spots, grading the races and so on. So far we've been told that the Tour of Britain is an example but nothing more.

You simply take the top 3 teams from Europe Tour the end of the previous season and offset UCI points upto the selection date deadline. So in La Vuelta's 3 wildcards, that would be something like:

UCI Ranked - Points - Team
1st - 4164 pts - WANTY - GROUPE GOBERT (WGG)
2nd - 3649 pts - COFIDIS, SOLUTIONS CREDITS (COF)
3rd - 2486 pts - ANDRONI GIOCATTOLI - SIDERMEC (ANS)
4th - 2442 pts - DIRECT ENERGIE (TDE)

Instead we have

UCI Ranked - Points - Team
2nd - 3649 pts - COFIDIS, SOLUTIONS CREDITS (COF)
11th - 1629 pts - EUSKADI BASQUE COUNTRY - MURIAS (EUS)
23rd - 971 pts - CAJA RURAL - SEGUROS RGA (CJR)
69th - 360 pts - BURGOS - BH (BBH)

Now, obviously many teams simply won't want to race Vuelta regardless if they are ranked highly. That is fine, then it works like Aqua Blue & Wiggins, the qualification criteria simply cascades down to a team that does want to race and meets qualification criteria.

My point is, you could have four of the best Pro Conti teams racing Grand Tours. At the moment really only Cofidis deserves to be at Vuelta from the wildcards.

And how biased are those points based on which teams are invited to which races? There are 27 PCT teams. How do you ensure they all get a fair chance to earn points and it isn't biased by say, being a team in an area with lots of racing? You also end up affecting the make up of the teams, riders who score points in one day races and small tours aren't necessarily the best riders for GTs, but PCT teams don't have the budget to keep a hugely diverse range of riders. Any young talent gets dropped in the race to ensure they have points for next season. You then have to old problem of who holds the points, the rider or the team, and how do you balance this in the rankings. They'll find it even harder to attract sponsors if they end up having to race outside of their traditional heartlands just to ensure they can enter the races the sponsors actually care about. It also doesn't take into account the fans who make up the biggest audience for each race. Chances are most Spanish cycling fans couldn't care less about anyone on Wanty or ABS, but want to see how the Spanish talent fair for Euskadi, Rujal and BH. This kind of system works fine if all races are the same and interest is evenly spread, like football. You take the best teams in the European leagues and you know you are going to get attractive football people will tune in to, it doesn't matter who you support, if you're a football fan you'll watch Champions league football whether your team is playing or not. Do it in cycling and you'll probably alienate a lot of your core demographic.

 

[King Boonen]

Re:

If you believe French teams should get wildcards to French races, Italian to Italian races & Spanish to Spanish races, then there's absolutely no point having the 'World Tour' or even a Europe Tour. What you actually have is no Tour at all, nothing Worldly or European about it, it's a closed old boys club based on Nationality and race organisers doing what's best for their profit rather than the sport at a World level. It's as Brailsford says, if you want a Tour de France for French teams, then make it a race for only French teams.

Sorry but that's almost as childish as Delaney binning the team because he didn't get his way.