• 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.

    Thanks!

The Green Jersey Disrespect in UCI/PCS scoring systems..

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
When was the last time that happened? 2010 Petachi?
2010 Petacchi's train was... Danilo Hondo.

If you want to argue that because he successfully derailed the HTC train of pain on more than one occasion, that made him the best leadout rider, I'd quite likely be with you (I believe I made this argument a few times at the time, since at the time received wisdom was that Renshaw was the best leadout in the world because of being the last one to launch Cav, but I felt he was the final piece of the puzzle in a full well-oiled machine, whereas Hondo and Petacchi would be three or four riders apart, on opposite sides of the bunch, and then miraculously appear together in just the perfect position at just the right time.

2011 Cav was far more the example of the propaganda for the sprinter with the best train. Coincidentally, that was the year that the points system was changed, because it was considered silly that Cav had won 6 stages to Hushovd's 1 in 2009, and 5 stages to Petacchi's 2 in 2010, and still not won a maillot vert, so the system - which already paid sprint stages more importance than intermediate or mountain stages - was revamped to make it even more sprint-weighted.

This also had the separate benefit that the UCI rule penalised missing the time cut by the equivalent points for that stage - meaning that with the new increased value of a sprint stage, missing the time cut not once but twice was the equivalent of a single sprint win as a mountain stage win was worth barely half (55.55%) that of a flat stage.

The high value of the intermediate sprint made it very suitable for Sagan for a long time because he could get a decent enough amount of points in the flat sprints, but he could reach intermediate sprints in breaks in medium and high mountain stages where his rivals couldn't get anything.

Which, ironically, was how Thor Hushovd won the maillot vert in 2009 and caused people to complain that the system didn't benefit the best sprinters enough.
 
I clearly remember them doing something like that on at least one occasion. Maybe you don't realise because the peleton has got more competitive and one team is not capable of being at the front for the entire last 10km. It doesn't mean they don't have 5-6 guys in a formation all working to deliver Philipsen in the best position possible to the final sprint.
They never had 5-6 guys at the pointy end to deliver JP. Obviously they all contributed in the stage, but we are talking about sprint trains in this side bar of the discussion.

EDIT: Remember that Shadow said that I might be JP so... :D
 
  • Wow
Reactions: Sandisfan
I personally don't really care about any other jersey apart from the leader's jersey in a stage race.

Like what is the points jersey even suppose to measure? Who is the best sprinter? There are already the flat sprints for that. If it is the most complete rider then why do the sprint stages weigh much more than mountain stages or time trials?

Sure, winning even a secondary jersey in the biggest race in the world matters but its not on the same level as winning a monument and as other users already said the UCI points that the points jersey winner earns during GT stages should give him more points than actually winning a monument.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: jmdirt
I personally don't really care about any other jersey apart from the leader's jersey in a stsge race.

Like what is the points jersey even suppose to measure? Who is the best sprinter? There are already the flat sprints for that. If it is the most complete rider then why do the sprint stages weigh much more than mountain stages or time trials?

Sure, winning even a secondary jersey in the biggest race in the world matters but its not on the same level as winning a monument.
The teams do care for many reasons, not the least of which is UCI points.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sandisfan and KZD
I feel like this conversation quickly devolves into a teardown of the points system. Every points system is flawed and we all know it. Here are the total points accrued by select riders at least year's Vuelta:

Kuss - 1909.5
Vinge - 1747.5
Rogles - 1439.5
Remco - 1570

Personally I don't have a problem with this outcome, but I'm sure a lot of posters would be incensed that Remco got more points on his way to 12th GC than Roglic did. (In a different points system, the one used by velogames fantasy, Remco got the most points of anyone IIRC.)

Let's also not forget that Mads Pedersen got 150 UCI points for second in the green jersey at the Tour last year. I mean I guess it's a nice reward for honoring the race by making it to the end, but in the case of the tour the sprinters all want to make it to the last stage anyway.

The points system has multiple goals. It's used for ranking teams and riders because people like us forumers and maybe some Emiratis are always asking "who's the best?" But it's also used to make sure the best teams are invited to the best races (ProTeam relegation/promo etc.). The first problem is that they only matter to the teams that are on the verge of relegation, and the second problem is that those teams would probably be motivated to race for 3rd rather than roll the dice for 1st + risk relegation.

UCI points for the mountains jersey makes more sense than green jersey because that competition is more heavily weighted towards intermediate sprint points (KOMs) which are not otherwise rewarded by the UCI. You want the points incentive to help stir up interesting subplots for the long hours of relatively uneventful racing on non-GC days.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sandisfan
2010 Petacchi's train was... Danilo Hondo.

If you want to argue that because he successfully derailed the HTC train of pain on more than one occasion, that made him the best leadout rider, I'd quite likely be with you (I believe I made this argument a few times at the time, since at the time received wisdom was that Renshaw was the best leadout in the world because of being the last one to launch Cav, but I felt he was the final piece of the puzzle in a full well-oiled machine, whereas Hondo and Petacchi would be three or four riders apart, on opposite sides of the bunch, and then miraculously appear together in just the perfect position at just the right time.

2011 Cav was far more the example of the propaganda for the sprinter with the best train. Coincidentally, that was the year that the points system was changed, because it was considered silly that Cav had won 6 stages to Hushovd's 1 in 2009, and 5 stages to Petacchi's 2 in 2010, and still not won a maillot vert, so the system - which already paid sprint stages more importance than intermediate or mountain stages - was revamped to make it even more sprint-weighted.

This also had the separate benefit that the UCI rule penalised missing the time cut by the equivalent points for that stage - meaning that with the new increased value of a sprint stage, missing the time cut not once but twice was the equivalent of a single sprint win as a mountain stage win was worth barely half (55.55%) that of a flat stage.

The high value of the intermediate sprint made it very suitable for Sagan for a long time because he could get a decent enough amount of points in the flat sprints, but he could reach intermediate sprints in breaks in medium and high mountain stages where his rivals couldn't get anything.

Which, ironically, was how Thor Hushovd won the maillot vert in 2009 and caused people to complain that the system didn't benefit the best sprinters enough.
While it was spread out over three intermediates for flat stages, you could win more points relative to a stage win back in the old system than in the following one (18/35 vs. 20/45).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sandisfan
I actually quite enjoy the secondary jerseys, despite their obvious flaws. Pinot v Healy was one of the only vaguely interesting things about last year's Giro. Riders also clearly care about the jersey as a prize in and of itself, not just for UCI points.

I don't think it's undervalued by UCI points, though, given the fact that you by default get plenty of points along the way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jmdirt
They never had 5-6 guys at the pointy end to deliver JP. Obviously they all contributed in the stage, but we are talking about sprint trains in this side bar of the discussion.

EDIT: Remember that Shadow said that I might be JP so... :D
I remember they had a 5-6 guy formation for much of the last 10kms. Of course they wouldn't all arrive at the front under 1 kilometer to go because modern cycling is too competitive for that.

Agree to disagree but in my books, Alpecin had the best train in Tour de France 2023 and it was very much a sprint train.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sandisfan
You get those points regardless of the green jersey. Additional intermediate points for Cavendish in 2009 and 2010 could have made him win the green jersey, and that would matter more than one of his stage wins being a 2nd place instead.
No I meant the premise of the og post, not intermediate sprints. I don't think UCI points undervalue a green jersey as it's a build up of points via stage wins/placings anyway.
 
No I meant the premise of the og post, not intermediate sprints. I don't think UCI points undervalue a green jersey as it's a build up of points via stage wins/placings anyway.
There's no extra UCI points for intermediate sprints. If points from intermediate sprints are the difference between winning the green jersey or not, the only UCI points you are rewarded are those directly from the green jersey, not any UCI points along the way.

Stage place points are not conditional on winning the green, so it is wrong to say that the green jersey is rewarded by those points.
 
I remember they had a 5-6 guy formation for much of the last 10kms. Of course they wouldn't all arrive at the front under 1 kilometer to go because modern cycling is too competitive for that.

Agree to disagree but in my books, Alpecin had the best train in Tour de France 2023 and it was very much a sprint train.
I don't think that we are agreeing to disagree, I think that we are talking about two different things.