UCI World classification

The UCI announced today a new World classification. The UCI WorldTour is no longer the leading year classification.

The individual UCI World classification is a 52-week rolling classification and shall be drawn up at least once a week by adding the points won since the previous classification was established. At the same time the remaining points obtained up to the same day of the previous year shall be deducted.
more information in this document published by UCI
 
Aug 16, 2013
7,619
0
0
As long as there is no jersey, it doesn't really matter.

Bad decision btw to downgrade the monuments. Now a victory in a race like Montreal gets as many points as a victory in Flanders. And that's not good.
 
Apr 15, 2013
954
0
0
Arredondo said:
As long as there is no jersey, it doesn't really matter.

Bad decision btw to downgrade the monuments. Now a victory in a race like Montreal gets as many points as a victory in Flanders. And that's not good.
So say a Gerrans wins LBL, and the 2 canadians, and he has 1500 points, more than a Nibali who won the Tour...

Say a Boonen wins the Eneco, the GPE3 and GW, and he would have 1500 points, so as much as a guy winning Tirreno and the Tour de France ???

This is just bonkers.
 
Apr 10, 2011
4,819
0
0
So if these rankings were used in 2014 Gerrans would get as many points for winning Quebec and Montreal as Nibs would get for Tour.

Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

**** me UCI
 
veji11 said:
So say a Gerrans wins LBL, and the 2 canadians, and he has 1500 points, more than a Nibali who won the Tour...

Say a Boonen wins the Eneco, the GPE3 and GW, and he would have 1500 points, so as much as a guy winning Tirreno and the Tour de France ???

This is just bonkers.
You got a point, but not completely true. Riders also get points per stage. So a GC winner mostly get many points with a couple of stage winnings or top 10 places.

Awarding the Monuments the same as other WorldTour day races is ridiculous.
 
Vesica said:
You got a point, but not completely true. Riders also get points per stage. So a GC winner mostly get many points with a couple of stage winnings or top 10 places.

Awarding the Monuments the same as other WorldTour day races is ridiculous.
It's another poorly implemented attempt to package bike racing and "grow the sport."

If you think this is bad, then the rest of the changes will likely be awful to you.
 
Mar 14, 2009
3,436
0
0
What a joke.
Rider who will win on Wilunga Hill next week will most likely win TDU = 500 points + 60 for the stage for 560 total points

Another rider racing in Tour de San Luis (Lets say Nairo Quintana) will win one stage gaining 14 points and and the race 125 for whopping 139 points.

Summary:

TDF winner 1000 points
TDU + one stage 560 points
San Luis + one stage 139 points

We should all ignore this rankings, its pure nonsense
 
Apr 10, 2011
4,819
0
0
It's the step in right direction.

Earlier only Top 10 scored points, now it goes up to 60 at few points.

Winning TDU gives 220 points, winning Giro gives 500. Not that much different to the CQ Rankings at least..
 
Jancouver said:
What a joke.
Rider who will win on Wilunga Hill next week will most likely win TDU = 500 points + 60 for the stage for 560 total points

Another rider racing in Tour de San Luis (Lets say Nairo Quintana) will win one stage gaining 14 points and and the race 125 for whopping 139 points.

Summary:

TDF winner 1000 points
TDU + one stage 560 points
San Luis + one stage 139 points

We should all ignore this rankings, its pure nonsense

More like

TDF winner +3 stages + 10 days in Yellow + other stage placings ~2000 points

Is your argument that TDU is scored to high or San Luis too low or what?
 
Aug 4, 2010
11,337
0
0
Arredondo said:
As long as there is no jersey, it doesn't really matter.

Bad decision btw to downgrade the monuments. Now a victory in a race like Montreal gets as many points as a victory in Flanders. And that's not good.
I agree :cool:

and yes,point system is the worst thing UCI had ever made:eek:
 
Latest news is that the new pointing system will be introduced not this season, but in 2016. The teams were not happy with the fact that they were not informed before. Also from the teams there is discussion about the points ratio between the different races.
 
Mar 14, 2009
3,436
0
0
ingsve said:
More like

TDF winner +3 stages + 10 days in Yellow + other stage placings ~2000 points

Is your argument that TDU is scored to high or San Luis too low or what?
My argument is that the ranking does not make any sense as UCI is heavily rewarding WT events regardless of the quality of the race or even better quality of the field.

Or does TDU winner deserve 3 x more points than San Luis winner?

In an ideal world the ranking would be a combination of:

1. quality of the field based on current rider ratings
2. size of the field (larger fields = harder to win)
3. actual race rating based on history, course difficulty, course length etc

Here is the formula (1+2) X 3
If math is not your thing (SUM rider rating) than apply the race rating (percentage)

For example Paris Roubaix:

200 riders averaging 100 points per rider = 20,000 points times 100% you will have 20K points to devide between riders

Next race Grand Prix Cycliste de Montréal:

170 riders averaging 70 points per rider as there is fewer good riders, therefore you have 11900 points to start with, than you apply the race rating, lets say 80% and you will get 9500 points to share.

As you can see, there is a big difference between Roubaix and Montreal, yet UCI will reward the same number of points, where in reality, the winner of P-R should score double points than then winner of Montreal GP because it is longer, harder race with bigger field and more tradition.
 
Apr 11, 2010
191
0
0
Jancouver said:
If math is not your thing (SUM rider rating) than apply the race rating (percentage)
While I don't disagree with the bulk of your post (in fact I still think the ~2:1 ratio in the PR:Montreal example is too low), it wouldn't hurt to deliver it in a less condescending manner.
 
Apr 16, 2011
1,074
1
0
I tried to think of some comparisons within the Tour that would test the new ranking system:

Edit: nevermind
 
^ How did you came to 120 points for Sagan?

4 x 2nd = 4 x 50 = 200
1 x 3rd = 1 x 25 = 25
3 x 4th = 3 x 15 = 45
1 x 5th = 1 x 5 = 5

plus green jersey = 120

makes in total 395 points


Some of the races must be re-valued, like the monuments, in comparison to other world tour races. But I think the is a step in the good direction and should be developed more. And introduce a jersey for the classification leader.
 
Apr 16, 2011
1,074
1
0
Vesica said:
^ How did you came to 120 points for Sagan?

4 x 2nd = 4 x 50 = 200
1 x 3rd = 1 x 25 = 25
3 x 4th = 3 x 15 = 45
1 x 5th = 1 x 5 = 5

plus green jersey = 120

makes in total 395 points


Some of the races must be re-valued, like the monuments, in comparison to other world tour races. But I think the is a step in the good direction and should be developed more. And introduce a jersey for the classification leader.
I completely messed that up, and skipped the 2nd through 5th on the stage finishes.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY