UCI Points system

[Samu Cuenca]

Euskaltel already have over half the points they got in 2022.

On the women's side, Zaaf's already scored more points than Uno-X and HPH did last season. HPH has had a great start this year, too, and looks to be on their way to secure their WWT spot, while it won't be easy for Uno-X to avoid relegation.

 

[Lequack]

UAE extend the lead again, Jumbo falls below UnoX.

 

[yaco]

So QS have dropped Vernon down to the Development Team to ride the Tour of Rwanda and any points he obtains goes onto QS's total - Not that QS is in danger of relegation but it's taking the mickey out of the UCI points system.

 

[Lequack]

Jumbo have gained a place, now above UnoX!

 

[tobydawq]

Jumbo have gained a place, now above UnoX!

Still hard to see where they will find the points to go to the green zone. Also, Cavendish beating Kooij today means that they are threatened from below.

 

[Lequack]

An Roglic doesn't begin racing for another month.

 

[Logic-is-your-friend]

An Roglic doesn't begin racing for another month.

And when he does, chances are he'll crash out. Luckily they now have Kelderman to pick up the slack.

 

[RedheadDane]

And when he does, chances are he'll crash out. Luckily they now have Kelderman to pick up the slack.

Kelderman being the man to pick up the slack when someone else crashes out. That's new...

 

[Logic-is-your-friend]

Kelderman being the man to pick up the slack when someone else crashes out. That's new...

I hoped the sarcasm was evident.

 

[RedheadDane]

I hoped the sarcasm was evident.

Yeah.
Alternatively, it could be that when Roglic is done crashing, Kelderman will pick up the slack.

 

[Logic-is-your-friend]

Yeah.
Alternatively, it could be that when Roglic is done crashing, Kelderman will pick up the slack.

I could see those two crash one on top of the other.

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

Oops

https://twitter.com/x/status/1627674604645806080

View: https://twitter.com/raulbanqueri/status/1627674604645806080


Mick Rogers replied, thanking him for pointing it out and promising to correct it. No apology or acknowledgement of error though.

An insight into the appalling level of professionalism in the UCI

It is unlikely that a relegation battle comes down to a single point between Ineos and Bahrain, but presumably if it were to do so, it could be argued that the published laws at the time, no matter how illogical, should pertain.

 

[tobydawq]

It is unlikely that a relegation battle comes down to a single point between Ineos and Bahrain, but presumably if it were to do so, it could be argued that the published laws at the time, no matter how illogical, should pertain.

I don't agree with that.

 

[SafeBet]

I don't agree with that.

Which part? You think it's likely the relgation battle comes down to that single point?

 

[tobydawq]

Which part? You think it's likely the relgation battle comes down to that single point?

No. But nobody knew about this error, hence any argument that the rider in question had tried to brake to get 4th instead of 3rd on the stage would be ridiculous and in bad faith.

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

I think a team's lawyers could argue that points for any race can only be distributed according to the published scale of points that was in force at the time of said race. I'd be amazed if they didn't if the scenario were to arise whereby it is relevant, except perhaps if the UCI were to get teams to sign up to a waiver of the right to complain about that error. But that would mean that they have to publicly admit their error.

 

[BR2]

I am proposing a new format: Before the season every team has to rank the races of equal official status and tell us which are their priority. Give points from 1-30 to the 1.1 races they are doing for instance. And then their results in that race are factored accordingly. Would it improve the situation? Likely not. Would it be fun? For me, yes.

 

[Carrick-On-Seine]

Still hard to see where they will find the points to go to the green zone. Also, Cavendish beating Kooij today means that they are threatened from below.

There are lots of points for finishing second in Monuments.

 

[yaco]

I am proposing a new format: Before the season every team has to rank the races of equal official status and tell us which are their priority. Give points from 1-30 to the 1.1 races they are doing for instance. And then their results in that race are factored accordingly. Would it improve the situation? Likely not. Would it be fun? For me, yes.

I have given the simplest and fairest system - WT Teams only accrue points for the UCI ranking only in WT races - The men's tour has 167 race days and the women's tour has 87 days - Pro teams can accrue UCI points for the ranking in .pro and 1.1 races.

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

Yes, yu have said that repeatedly, but it only works if there is to be a set number of promotions/relegations each time. Which does not appear to be the intention.

 

[yaco]

Yes, yu have said that repeatedly, but it only works if there is to be a set number of promotions/relegations each time. Which does not appear to be the intention.

It should be two up and two down - One of the problems with the current system is that the WT and pro teams are in the same pool - For purposes of UCI points they should be in separate pools.

 

[Ricco']

It should be two up and two down - One of the problems with the current system is that the WT and pro teams are in the same pool - For purposes of UCI points they should be in separate pools.

But what if the best ProSeries team is still worse than the worst WorldTour team?

Right now there is good quality in the ProSeries teams but there were years where there weren't two WT worthy teams in the second division, or at least two teams better than the ones who were on the first division. Looking at the 2017 team CQ ranking the 18 WT teams make up the first 18 places and the 1st PRO team has a score which is 90% of the one achieved by the worst WT team. Doesn't make sense to say that this team deserves a guaranteed place in the WT instead of the team ranked above it.

And if we put a system where second division teams are not rewarded for investing in riders who can give them strong results and points in the biggest races, we'll end up with weaker 2nd tier teams resulting in bigger differentials in quality.

 

[Samu Cuenca]

But what if the best ProSeries team is still worse than the worst WorldTour team?

Right now there is good quality in the ProSeries teams but there were years where there weren't two WT worthy teams in the second division, or at least two teams better than the ones who were on the first division. Looking at the 2017 team CQ ranking the 18 WT teams make up the first 18 places and the 1st PRO team has a score which is 90% of the one achieved by the worst WT team. Doesn't make sense to say that this team deserves a guaranteed place in the WT instead of the team ranked above it.

And if we put a system where second division teams are not rewarded for investing in riders who can give them strong results and points in the biggest races, we'll end up with weaker 2nd tier teams resulting in bigger differentials in quality.

And WT teams wouldn't bother going to the same amount of non-WT races and maybe even hire fewer riders.

That said, we have probably also seen too many WT-teams in some races, where they "stole" points, results and money away from smaller teams, because of the current system.

 

[fmk_RoI]

And WT teams wouldn't bother going to the same amount of non- WT races and maybe even hire fewer riders.

There are actually people who seem to want that outcome. Which strikes me as crazy. You can't grow the sport by cutting off the grassroots.

 

[Samamba]

And WT teams wouldn't bother going to the same amount of non-WT races

That said, we have probably also seen too many WT-teams in some races, where they "stole" points, results and money away from smaller teams, because of the current system.

Really hard to find some balance between those 2. I spoke to a manager of a smaller Belgian team last season who is against the current system exactly because of this and I can't really disagree with him. Fot them in particular, those smaller Belgian races where their main goals of the season cause it was a way to show themselves on the TV. This has become incredibly hard now that those smaller races have double the amount of WT teams at the start than before. It's way better for the viewers and for the organizers who see better riders at their race, but the smaller PCT or Conti teams are struggling because of it. They have to go to other continents to be somewhat competitive and their sponsors obviously don't really care about those races.