• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.


The gift of giving - is it time the UCI to ban gifts?

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Should this be only applied to two-men sprint? How about three and the other two are completely cooked? Should it be only applied to sprint finish? How about late attack? How about gifting breakaway the win? Sorry if somebody has tried to draw the line in above posts, I'm too lazy since I think there are enough open-for-interpretation rules already in this sport.
  • Like
Reactions: Sandisfan
I completely agree with Gratemans and others so far and I would go a little bit further:

There are many ways to gift a race, besides faking a sprint. Example: Hinault shuts the race down, only one break is allowed and it has to include the chosen teammate and sometimes one or two riders provided that they are deemed very weak. Then, Renault-Gitane blocks the road. Most of the time, it worked. That was Le Blaireau's way to say "thanks" to his domestiques for birthdays, on their home soil, even at the National RRC.

It takes a very secure rider to gift a race besides the belief that there will be plenty more wins in the future. In Roglic's case, it felt like it was a sign of friendship and respect for Remco. For Wout, it was probably friendship and some "thank you" too.

Between the "two-man breakaway understanding: "I get (or solidify) the jersey, you get the stage or waiting when a mechanical occurs or a rider needs a nature break, cycling has some unwritten rules and traditions. Some look obsolete a times, gifting may fall in that category but I hope that traditions live on, without, of course the Vino LBL Option.
  • Like
Reactions: noob and Elos Anjos
My fav. gift was from Contador to Tiralongo
View: https://youtu.be/ghJE5_4Rm90?t=72

Yes, that was great. Tiralongo's first pro win and the way he paid him back on the Fuente Dé stage the following year went down in cycling history.

I of course also like this one. Valverde almost risked the GC to wait on a vomiting Sylwester Szmyd who had trouble handling the prospect of crossing the line first for the first time (in what would be his only ever pro win).

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rTypgQkRRUg&ab_channel=CyclingMemories
An important rule in the world of horse racing is the non-triers rule, which requires a jockey to make the required effort in order to gain the best possible result. Cycling has no such comparable rule and throughout the history of the sport riders have 'gifted' wins to other riders.

Is it time for cycling to take a leaf out of horse racing's rule book? At the finish of every race, every rider must be seen to be making the required effort to achieve result instead of just sitting up and letting some else finish ahead of them?

Not unless cycling gets huge amounts of money from the betting industry........People who have put money on a horse expect the jockey to try and win, as it's in the rules. It's how the sport started - rich owners placing bets on their horses to beat another rich owners best horse.
There's no such thing in cycling - if you had a bet on Wout to win, you'd be livid, but I'm afraid it's 'tough luck'.

You sometimes see similar in motorsport, with riders/ drivers allowing the No2 to win.....
  • Like
Reactions: Sandisfan
Of course, that wasn't the case with Roglic and Evenepoel. Otherwise, it would have been a pretty weird conversation:

PR: "Let's make a deal; you help me stay away from my worst GC rivals, you get the stage."
RE: "I am your worst GC rival!"

That would be a weird conversation.

To the point I was making, though, I like when two riders cooperate, both get their win. When things don't pan out, there are debts too: Alaf' and Bardet helping Pinot chase a (not French and taller than most French) Martinez. Pay back for the RRWC?
Last edited:
  • Wow
Reactions: noob and Sandisfan
I do wonder how often straight up gifts happen between riders on different teams. Mostly, it's probably either:

1: The "I get the GC, you get the stage" deal like described above.
B: A situation like the one between Roglic and Evenepoel; with two GC rivals getting ahead, but one being far enough ahead in GC that he can afford not winning the stage. I'm pretty sure that if Roglic had only had a lead of 4 seconds to Evenepoel, then he wouldn't have just let him have the stage.
III: Something like with Contador and Tiralongo, where two riders used to be teammates, and one basically pays back the work the other has done.

Also quite funny when a GC rider gifts a teammate a stage and people are like "Buuuuuuuuuuuut, the bonus seconds!"
I can't remember one situation in which a rider lost a GC by four seconds because he let a temmate have a win.
  • Like
Reactions: noob
Sounds like a rule that is directly for the purpose of ensuring betting integrity. I don't like the idea of any rule being created just for gambling. Put money on Laporte if you think WvA will gift him the stage IMO.

Not quite. It was created and is enforced in horseracing for 2 major reasons. Because owners bear all the costs of racing a horse and they deserve to get the highest amount the horse can earn every time they go out there. If a jock stops riding unless there is a problem with the horse he Cheats Me as well as the bettors. Why should I get 4th place purse because the jock can't be bothered to ride out? Plus there are bettors that put money on that horse to finish 3rd!
Same with cycling a rider is cheating his team from max UCI points unless the person he gifts to is on the same team.
But gifting has Always been part of cycling and I like and see it as being gracious. Since I can't bet on it in the USA and don't own a team it doesn't affect me except emotionally :).
  • Like
Reactions: Sandisfan

Here, a short Twitter video is included. I guarantee it‘s worth watching…

In the clip, in GP Minsk (UCI 1.2; 2018) Rutkiewicz seems to wait for Shumov, to gift him the race victory. Both rode for different teams.

In another case, there were rumours that Kolobnev gifted the victory in LBL 2010 to Vinokourov. Both from different teams.

Last Sunday, Wout possibly gifted the victory to Laporte. Same team, this time.

I think victories sometimes are gifted, sometimes are sold, and so on.

In any case, proofing something is hard to do. Every case is unique, and has to be regarded separately.

And, with regard to Wevelgem last Sunday: I provocatively (could) claim that there was no gift. Even more so if you see how Laporte rode today in Waregem (DDV). There is no real gifting between a Wout in current shape and a Laporte in current shape.

(By the way: Merckx, Museeuw and Boonen wouldn‘t have gifted. But: Wout already won Wevelgem before. And: Cycling has changed. Wout‘s popularity earns him contracts, that means money. People like him. For his path as an athlete and as a person, „gifting“ (if it was „gifting“) to Laporte will pay off. I think he will not regret a thing.)
  • Like
Reactions: Sandisfan