UCI Points system

[Samamba]

I wonder when UCI ranking page will start to count the results from the Giro.
For example, Mads Pedersen sits at 2597 on their page.
With the 2 Giro stage wins he should be above 3000.

Astana should be a lot closer to PicNic after the first 3 stages as well, maybe already ahead! Just a thought!

UCI only adds points after a race.

 

[ingsve]

I wonder when UCI ranking page will start to count the results from the Giro.
For example, Mads Pedersen sits at 2597 on their page.
With the 2 Giro stage wins he should be above 3000.

Astana should be a lot closer to PicNic after the first 3 stages as well, maybe already ahead! Just a thought!

The UCI rankings only update stage race points once the whole stage race is finished.

 

[ingsve]

There's a big chance it will be 3 guaranteed WC teams so absolutely no problem.

There is no guarantee in that and even so, PicnicPostNL is also in a better spot to recruit and be part of the top 3 than Uno-X. It's inherently more uncertain to have to fight for WCs every year is the point.

 

[yaco]

You end up 19th in the three year cycle of UCI points, so in affect, you are next cab off the rank if a team folds has to withdraw from the WT, however, because you had a shocking year in year three of the cycling and come say 23rd in that year's ranking, then you have no WT access. This makes no sense at all.

 

[ingsve]

If Picnic is not WT, the 3 GC wildcards go to UNO X, Tudor and Q36.5 in 2026 (with the current standings).
UNO X shouldnt be afraid of those 2.

2026 is not the problem It's 2027 and 2028 and beyond that's the issue if they keep bringing in high scoring riders. The only way Uno-X could compete with that is by getting people like Vingegaard, Skelmose or Pedersen etc.

 

[ingsve]

You end up 19th in the three year cycle of UCI points, so in affect, you are next cab off the rank if a team folds has to withdraw from the WT, however, because you had a shocking year in year three of the cycling and come say 23rd in that year's ranking, then you have no WT access. This makes no sense at all.

No team loses WT status just by 1 shocking year though. If you drop down with a year like that it means you were just holding on by a small margin after the first 2 years.

Just look at Lotto. They are currently 24th for this years ranking but because of their first 2 years being very strong they will easily get promoted to the WT regardless of how bad the third year is pretty much.

 

[Copperberg]

UCI only adds points after a race.

Ahh, Thank you for the clarification. I found it a bit strange though as they give out points/stage.


Edit: Thank you counts for Ingsve as well.

 

[Samamba]

There is no guarantee in that and even so, PicnicPostNL is also in a better spot to recruit and be part of the top 3 than Uno-X. It's inherently more uncertain to have to fight for WCs every year is the point.

If you're scared about finishing behind all those 3 teams you don't have a place in the WT anyways.

And of course it's always more uncertain. The question is if it ways up against the advantages of not having to ride every WT race ànd destroying your riders in the process. Imo it doesn't. I know the benefits Lotto got from it. It's insane.

 

[ingsve]

If you're scared about finishing behind all those 3 teams you don't have a place in the WT anyways.

And of course it's always more uncertain. The question is if it ways up against the advantages of not having to ride every WT race ànd destroying your riders in the process. Imo it doesn't. I know the benefits Lotto got from it. It's insane.

Well, I wouldn't be scared in a fair environment but when we are talking rich teams with the potential of buying their way into the WT then it's a different matter.

 

[yaco]

No team loses WT status just by 1 shocking year though. If you drop down with a year like that it means you were just holding on by a small margin after the first 2 years.

Just look at Lotto. They are currently 24th for this years ranking but because of their first 2 years being very strong they will easily get promoted to the WT regardless of how bad the third year is pretty much.

The point is that if Picnic ends up 19th they will get a WT licence if a team falls over. It won't be the 20th or 21st team. If you cannot see the flaw in the system, then you must be related to the UCI.

As I have previously posted, the best system would have been having 2 pools. The 18 WT teams are in one pool, and the Pro Conti teams are in another pool. The WT teams can only accrue points in WT races , which are the elite races on the calendar, so no stat padding in lower-ranked races.. The Proconti teams are competing against themselves and receive points from the dot pro and lower ranked races. Bottom two teams in the WT relegated, and the top two ProConti teams promoted.

 

[Potomac]

The UCI rankings only update stage race points once the whole stage race is finished.

Good to know. That might explain a lot of the differences in the gap claims.

 

[ingsve]

The point is that if Picnic ends up 19th they will get a WT licence if a team falls over. It won't be the 20th or 21st team. If you cannot see the flaw in the system, then you must be related to the UCI.

As I have previously posted, the best system would have been having 2 pools. The 18 WT teams are in one pool, and the Pro Conti teams are in another pool. The WT teams can only accrue points in WT races , which are the elite races on the calendar, so no stat padding in lower-ranked races.. The Proconti teams are competing against themselves and receive points from the dot pro and lower ranked races. Bottom two teams in the WT relegated, and the top two ProConti teams promoted.

I don't get it? Why wouldn't the 19th team get the WT license ahead of the 20th and 21st? You are not making any sense.

So you mean you would want no incentives at all for ProTeams to ride WT races? With that system the ProTeams would benefit more from sending a squad to a 2.2 race rather than them getting a WC to the Tour.

 

[Wyndbrook]

Is it good that a team perhaps on the way down retains its WT status on the basis of performances over two years ago, and a team on the way up winning currently does not get promoted?

 

[yaco]

I don't get it? Why wouldn't the 19th team get the WT license ahead of the 20th and 21st? You are not making any sense.

So you mean you would want no incentives at all for ProTeams to ride WT races? With that system the ProTeams would benefit more from sending a squad to a 2.2 race rather than them getting a WC to the Tour.

I am using Picnic as the hypothetical example. Say they finish 19th in the three year standing. They obviously miss out on a WT licence BUT if 2025 continues to be bad then they will miss out out on WT wildcards in 2026 if they do not finish in the top 21 for this years results. But if at the end of the year a WT team folds etc,etc,etc , then Picnic get the WT licence as the 19th team in the standings. That is the flaw in the system.

The PCT teams will still ride selected WT races and definitely GT's. It's just that their points in WT races will not count against their competing PCT teams. The reason is that you will never get parity with PCT teams being invited to the same number of WT events.

 

[danielzu]

Points today:

PicNic: 265
Intermarche: 155
Cofidis: 110
Astana: 100
UnoX: 25

Astana lost 60 points due to that false relegation from Kanter. Hopefully, this will not be relevant in the end