-
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
In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.
Thanks!
I agree. I actually think of the Pro Conti teams they are the one that definitely should get one of the WT licenses. I think they've shown they are as good if not better than some of the current WT teams.
This, if the UCI will do anything it's because of Varjas.
Simone Velasco to Gazprom-Rusvelo, him and Canola are 2 nice non-Russian additions to the team. The team is based in Italy durning the season, so it shouldn't be a big change for the 2 Italians.
Source: https://www.tuttobiciweb.it/article/2019/09/03/1567527935/simone-velasco-gazpromo-renat-khamidulin-
It changes a lot for the Giro d'Italia where Cofidis has zero business in!
There could be an additional Italian farm team instead or Gazprom that pay a check to parcitipate and bring 1-2 decent guys.
These weird reforms hurt the French's major competitiors business! Am I the only one who thinks that's fishy?
I honestly have no idea what you are on about.
The World Tour is in a transition period towards consisting of the 18 teams with the most ranking points, with promotion and relgation from/to the pro-conti division at the end of each season.
You get those ranking points, by actually winning and placing in ranked races, so I fail to see how you could corrupt that ranking towards a certain nationality?
During the transition btw, the number of teams can go as high as 20, so worst case scenario is status quo, best case the division gains 2 teams.
Epower team has been planned a long time, rebellin signed with them right after the italian nats.
I for one am looking forward to it
I for one am looking forward to it
Yes. Yes you are.
They have more WT points than several WT teams (almost double Di Data) and have made several very good signings on top of this. Their 2020 squad is definitely worthy of the WT.
IMHO the world tour should only consist out of 16 teams anyway. Simply to avoid teams with no true business in the race cruising around at the Giro d'Italia, instead of an ambitious local team.
This is gonna be 2005 all over again. Maybe for one Giro d'Italia these teams bring a decent rooster, but on long term they just block precious places! Teams shouldn't be world tour, just to archive a spot for the Tour de France. It's wrong. Vini Fantini already got closed down because of that. In the meantime the French pro continental teams have no problem with the wildcards battle as they've been promoted. Do they add more to the Giro d'Italia than an Italian farm team or an ambitious project like E Power or LPR in the past? No they don't.
These reforms only cause problems for the French's major competitors business. Weakening & watering the sporting level of the Giro d'Italia and ruining important farm teams. This all happened before, but was revoked by 2008. Yes, I call that corruption as it's pretty obvious who's interests have been represented and who's have been hurt & ignored!
Dimension Data has no place in the world tour. I was very vocal about that in the past. They're actually the reason for these swelling of the world tour.
A core of 16 teams + 5 wildcards for the organizers. That's how it worked off very well for the Giro d'Italia & Vuelta a Espana before these stupid changes back in 2005.
Androni Giocattoli, E Power and Bardiani or Neri Sotolli deserve to be at the 2020 Giro d'Italia. So do Caja Rujal, Burgos or Euskadi and probably even Arkea at the 2020 Vuelta a Espana.
Cofidis shouldn't be at the Giro d'Italia.
They were just an example anyway. We've had Credit Agricole doing quite well with Caucchioli & Halgand in 2005, while Euskatel placed an ambitious team including a young Sammy Sanchez & Zubeldia! Even Cofidis was 14th with Daniel Atienza.
The teams impact in the following editions would be slim. Although Cofidis bought Parra and Moncoutie intended to win the mountain prize in 2010.
Euskatel of course came back strong in 2011!
The teams impact in the following editions would be slim. Although Cofidis bought Parra and Moncoutie intended to win the mountain prize in 2010.
Euskatel of course came back strong in 2011!
Especially with Viviani onboard they might be one of the more successful teams of the race. I'm assuming he doesn't intend to skip the race to prioritise TdF for example.
I just discovered this very interesting thread saterted by @Libertine Seguros : https://forum.cyclingnews.com/threads/the-cycling-transfer-market.34830/ . Thanks for that. To avoid a same discussion in different topics, i'd thought it was best to pen down some thoughts in this original transfer thread.:
A couple of things come to mind:
I do believe teams like Ineos benefit heavily from being able to buy out contracts of top riders or top talents. Just simply because they're one of the only teams that have the money or connections (see further) to do so. That gives them a direct advantage over other teams. And yes they haven't been the only team attracting riders through the buy out of contracts but in the past big riders mostly bought out their own contract (like Boonen etc..), with most teams refusing to pay for the buy-out themselves (fair play or simply because they don't have the means).
Acquadro was mentioned, so was Savio..Well it seems (just an observation of everything that has happened in the past and recent years) that Savio and Acquadro have an understanding when it comes to setting up a scheme where riders of Savio become clients of Acquadro (or clients of Acquadro become riders in Savio's team), to then "sell" those riders to bigger teams like Ineos with Acquadro getting a percentage of that sell. That Acquadro is a household name with Brailsford shouldn't come as a surprise. To me that's a little sketchy (but who am i).
To me it should be all or nothing. let me explain:
ALL: Allow cycling transfers of riders under contract but by also allowing market prices to play a role where both teams agree on a price that reflects the market price of that rider (and assuming that the rider found an agreement with his new team). Why ? Because it allows teams that show great scouting and developing of riders to benefit from their good structure and working. It allows every team to develop a budget, not only based on sponsoring but also on their own merits of being a well organized team.
Very talented riders today on a smaller salary can be easily bought out today after which a bigger team present them a huge increase in salary. In the end, the team that discovered the rider and/or developed the rider ends up with nothing. This solution would prevent that.
NOTHING: here's when it comes useful to look at a system as applied in the NBA. In the NBA transfers are impossible. You serve your contract. The current team is allowed to negiotate a new contract during the contract period. A new team would only be allowed to open negotiatons once the market opens and the rider is out of contract. This allows current teams to be one step ahead of other teams and it keeps agents or other teams from putting pressure on the team or rider. It also prevents riders to sign contrats with other teams already one or more years before the contracts ending (also a recent evolution) which can lead to dissatisfaction, frustrations and even blocking riders from riding certain races or riders themselves refusing to ride. It doesn't offer a solution as to the inequality of team budgets but it does offer a healthier framework for transfers, especially for teams who aren't able to work with massive budgets.
A couple of things come to mind:
I do believe teams like Ineos benefit heavily from being able to buy out contracts of top riders or top talents. Just simply because they're one of the only teams that have the money or connections (see further) to do so. That gives them a direct advantage over other teams. And yes they haven't been the only team attracting riders through the buy out of contracts but in the past big riders mostly bought out their own contract (like Boonen etc..), with most teams refusing to pay for the buy-out themselves (fair play or simply because they don't have the means).
Acquadro was mentioned, so was Savio..Well it seems (just an observation of everything that has happened in the past and recent years) that Savio and Acquadro have an understanding when it comes to setting up a scheme where riders of Savio become clients of Acquadro (or clients of Acquadro become riders in Savio's team), to then "sell" those riders to bigger teams like Ineos with Acquadro getting a percentage of that sell. That Acquadro is a household name with Brailsford shouldn't come as a surprise. To me that's a little sketchy (but who am i).
To me it should be all or nothing. let me explain:
ALL: Allow cycling transfers of riders under contract but by also allowing market prices to play a role where both teams agree on a price that reflects the market price of that rider (and assuming that the rider found an agreement with his new team). Why ? Because it allows teams that show great scouting and developing of riders to benefit from their good structure and working. It allows every team to develop a budget, not only based on sponsoring but also on their own merits of being a well organized team.
Very talented riders today on a smaller salary can be easily bought out today after which a bigger team present them a huge increase in salary. In the end, the team that discovered the rider and/or developed the rider ends up with nothing. This solution would prevent that.
NOTHING: here's when it comes useful to look at a system as applied in the NBA. In the NBA transfers are impossible. You serve your contract. The current team is allowed to negiotate a new contract during the contract period. A new team would only be allowed to open negotiatons once the market opens and the rider is out of contract. This allows current teams to be one step ahead of other teams and it keeps agents or other teams from putting pressure on the team or rider. It also prevents riders to sign contrats with other teams already one or more years before the contracts ending (also a recent evolution) which can lead to dissatisfaction, frustrations and even blocking riders from riding certain races or riders themselves refusing to ride. It doesn't offer a solution as to the inequality of team budgets but it does offer a healthier framework for transfers, especially for teams who aren't able to work with massive budgets.
Now Brambilla seemingly is linked to them. If will be a running joke to the world both in- and outside cycling if this team gets a green light from the UCI. UCI might as well invite blood centrifuge producers in as sponsors as well.
https://www.wielerflits.be/nieuws/w...nluca-brambilla-merhawi-kudus-trek-segafredo/
Movistar announced today that Erviti has signed a new 2 year contract. He'll be with the team through 2021.
Unless they send Laporte to the Giro and Viviani to the Tour! (I'm assuming Bouhanni will be out.)
There was never even any thought for a moment that Erviti would go anywhere else. He is next in the lifer line following Pablo Lastras and Txente García Acosta. Next one after him is probably Amador.
There was a question as to whether he was going to keep racing or if he was going to retire. However, I'm somewhat wondering if he's going to retire in 2021 if Valverde does retire. They did come to Movistar together in 2005 and have raced so many times together.
Stefan Bissegger to EF from August 2020 confirmed:
www.efprocycling.com
Bissegger to race for EF Education First Pro Cycling - EF Pro Cycling
The 2020 season is set to be a big one for Stefan Bissegger. He will make his move to the WorldTour with EF Education First Pro Cycling in August. Before his WorldTour start, he hopes to make his Olympic debut on the track in Tokyo with the Swiss team pursuit squad. While the track commands
www.efprocycling.com
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
Liege Bastogne Liege-7 hour monument, Sunday, April 21, 2024- Started by topcat
- Replies: 983
-
Paris - Roubaix 2024, one day monument, April 7- Started by Dreginald
- Replies: 2K
-
-
Volta Ciclista a Catalunya 2024 (March 18-24)- Started by Devil's Elbow
- Replies: 2K
-
-
De Ronde van Vlaanderen (270.8 km), 2024 March 31 (Sunday)- Started by Netserk
- Replies: 1K
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram