What makes for a better team?

[kurtinsc]

At this point in the season, what is a more impressive win list for a top pro-tour team?

Is it better to just have 1-win... but have it be in a big event (Like BMC and Lotto have with their Fleche/AGR wins?)

Or is it better to have more wins but not of the same prominence (Like Cervelo, Radioshack, Garmin or Lampre)

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

At this point in the season, what is a more impressive win list for a top pro-tour team?

Is it better to just have 1-win... but have it be in a big event (Like BMC and Lotto have with their Fleche/AGR wins?)

Or is it better to have more wins but not of the same prominence (Like Cervelo, Radioshack, Garmin or Lampre)

BMC isn't a pro tour team.

 

[kurtinsc]

BMC isn't a pro tour team.

True... not the best wording on my part. I don't think Cervelo is either (or did they become one after last year).

I guess I meant "big name teams". Having riders like Sastre, Hushovd or Evans qualifies them in that category I guess.

 

[BroDeal]

The bigger the win, the bigger the chance that casual fans will be aware of it. For marketing purposes one win in well known event is worth much more than lots of stage wins in rinky dink stage races that only hardcore fans have ever heard of.

Saxo is killing it this year. Not only do they have huge wins, but they have featured prominently in the ones they did not win.

 

[Publicus]

The bigger race, the bigger the audience, the bigger the impact/impression.

 

[Mellow Velo]

I'd say Liquigas have had a very successful season, thus far, without a major win.
I'm not sure I'd want to swap their results for those of BMC or Lotto.

Saxo have the best combination of number+quality victories, IMO.

Once again, it's the UCI v CQ ranking systems.

 

[ingsve]

I would say it depends on what expectations are reasonable for a team. With the riders that Lotto and BMC have they ought to have more wins so eventhough they now have a big win each that still doesn't change the fact that they have ridden sub par in alot of races.

On the other hand a team like Garmin doesn't have the same huge stars that are expected to win the biggest races so the fact that their wins are mostly stages and lesser stage races is what's to be expected and thus the lack of a big win can't be seen as a failure in any way for them.

 

[luckyboy]

Once again, it's the UCI v CQ ranking systems.

I don't know about that. CQ is all races (quality + quantity), UCI is a few big races (Vlaanderen, Amstel, Dauphine) and some other great races (TDU, GP Ouest-France, Canadian 1-dayers)..

 

[tgsgirl]

I don't know about that. CQ is all races (quality + quantity), UCI is a few big races (Vlaanderen, Amstel, Dauphine) and some other great races (TDU, GP Ouest-France, Canadian 1-dayers)..

No, CQ is all races, UCI is just those races who the UCI like / who pay enough. How can you say the Canadian one dayers are great races? They're new! And it's ridiculous that you get points for 7th in the Tour of Poland GC but none for winning KoM in the Vuelta. According to the UCI, Lotto is the third best team in the world right now (before Flèche they were at least). That's ludicrous. And I'm Belgian.

Rant over.

 

[luckyboy]

No, CQ is all races, UCI is just those races who the UCI like / who pay enough. How can you say the Canadian one dayers are great races? They're new! And it's ridiculous that you get points for 7th in the Tour of Poland GC but none for winning KoM in the Vuelta. According to the UCI, Lotto is the third best team in the world right now (before Flèche they were at least). That's ludicrous. And I'm Belgian.

Rant over.

Hey calm down I guess the large amount of sarcasm didn't jump out immediately

 

[ergmonkey]

Big wins are almost always going to be great for a team. The value of smaller wins, though, can't really be talked about in the abstract. You have to look at who sponsors the team, and then ask which small races are being won. On one end of the spectrum, lots of smaller wins in Belgium might be useful for Lotto or Quickstep and wins in Italy may be a big boost for Liquigas. If your sponsor is North American, though, you had damn well better have a good Tour de France; the only real advantage in winning even a race like Flanders or Amstel Gold on an American team will be the big contract it nets the winning rider when he changes squads! I haven't heard much talk or read much press about Chris Horner's Pais Vasco win here in the U.S. I'll bet a win for Sammy Sanchez and Euskaltel would have made a lot of noise in Spain, though.

 

[tgsgirl]

Hey calm down I guess the large amount of sarcasm didn't jump out immediately

It did not The ridiculousness that is the UCI ranking just irks me.

 

[kurtinsc]

I wasn't intending to get into the whole ranking thing so much. I was just asking the question that if you were a fan of a team, would you be happier with your team if they won AGR or Fleche... but nothing else, or would you prefer they had more wins of less import... say something like 2 stages of Castilla y Leon, 1 stage of Murcia, 1 stage of Catalunya, 1 stage of Paris-Nice and the Clasica de Almeria.

Your talkinga bout 6 wins to 1 win... but how big does that 1 win weigh in your minds?

 

[TRDean]

I wasn't intending to get into the whole ranking thing so much. I was just asking the question that if you were a fan of a team, would you be happier with your team if they won AGR or Fleche... but nothing else, or would you prefer they had more wins of less import... say something like 2 stages of Castilla y Leon, 1 stage of Murcia, 1 stage of Catalunya, 1 stage of Paris-Nice and the Clasica de Almeria.

Your talkinga bout 6 wins to 1 win... but how big does that 1 win weigh in your minds?

It is a good question...I would want both!!

 

[Ferminal]

I wasn't intending to get into the whole ranking thing so much. I was just asking the question that if you were a fan of a team, would you be happier with your team if they won AGR or Fleche... but nothing else, or would you prefer they had more wins of less import... say something like 2 stages of Castilla y Leon, 1 stage of Murcia, 1 stage of Catalunya, 1 stage of Paris-Nice and the Clasica de Almeria.

Your talkinga bout 6 wins to 1 win... but how big does that 1 win weigh in your minds?

I'd be pretty happy if I were BBox or Cofidis. Both have plenty of wins already this year, most coming from great riders, but not absolute stars. Liquigas have also done very well, without bagging a major classic or stage race. BBox etc can't expect to compete in the top races because they don't have the genuine contenders most of the time - it's just a matter of targeting the good races which you can win, and performing.

BMC are just lucky that Evans is racing well, did they make the mistake of going for a few big names, without getting anyone who you know will go out there and race, and get a few wins?

 

[Timmy-loves-Rabo]

It did not The ridiculousness that is the UCI ranking just irks me.

+1

terrible system...

 

[kurtinsc]

I'd be pretty happy if I were BBox or Cofidis. Both have plenty of wins already this year, most coming from great riders, but not absolute stars. Liquigas have also done very well, without bagging a major classic or stage race. BBox etc can't expect to compete in the top races because they don't have the genuine contenders most of the time - it's just a matter of targeting the good races which you can win, and performing.

BMC are just lucky that Evans is racing well, did they make the mistake of going for a few big names, without getting anyone who you know will go out there and race, and get a few wins?

If I were to pinpoint a mistake, it was not getting a legit sprinter. Guy's like Hincappie and Ballan are good riders... but even in their best years you're not looking at a slew of wins. Ballan in 2008 (his WC year) had 2 wins.

If they had gotten a couple mid-level sprinters, they probably would have some better results in terms of wins in lesser races. I'm not talking about Greipels or Cav's here... I'm talking about guys like Bozic (5 wins last year) or Van Hummell (6 wins last year).


Look at Garmin... 7 wins on the season (9 if you include NC's). But 4 of the 7 were sprint wins, and 2 were time trials. They didn't get near the heat that Lotto and BMC were getting prior to this past week... largely because of having a couple quality sprinters (and Millar having incredible time trial form early this season).

 

[pedaling squares]

I wasn't intending to get into the whole ranking thing so much. I was just asking the question that if you were a fan of a team, would you be happier with your team if they won AGR or Fleche... but nothing else, or would you prefer they had more wins of less import... say something like 2 stages of Castilla y Leon, 1 stage of Murcia, 1 stage of Catalunya, 1 stage of Paris-Nice and the Clasica de Almeria.

Your talkinga bout 6 wins to 1 win... but how big does that 1 win weigh in your minds?

As a fan I would prefer to see my team winning more races and most importantly being competitive in as many races as possible.

As a sponsor, give me a big win. I want to see my logo on all the papers, web sites, and TV screens.

As a DS/team owner, I still want the big win because that's what gets me sponsorship.

 

[jaylew]

If I were to pinpoint a mistake, it was not getting a legit sprinter.

If they had gotten a couple mid-level sprinters, they probably would have some better results in terms of wins in lesser races. I'm not talking about Greipels or Cav's here... I'm talking about guys like Bozic (5 wins last year) or Van Hummell (6 wins last year).

Totally agree. I think mid-level sprinters are a great buy for a team. You give them their shot at the big boys but you also take them to the smaller races and you can usually count on 2-6 wins right there. Guys like you mentioned above, G Brown, K Fernandez, Chicchi, Weylandt, M Gavazzi, etc...

Even the small wins can sometimes take the pressure off of a big-name team. I can think of a few other big name teams who could use a decent sprinter(Lotto comes to mind). Saxo, who usually don't have any problem winning races, picked up JJ Haedo and he's won like, 15-16 times over the last few years. Even for a team that wins big races like they do, that has a lot of value.

 

[Cerberus]

Totally agree. I think mid-level sprinters are a great buy for a team. You give them their shot at the big boys but you also take them to the smaller races and you can usually count on 2-6 wins right there. Guys like you mentioned above, G Brown, K Fernandez, Chicchi, Weylandt, M Gavazzi, etc...

Even the small wins can sometimes take the pressure off of a big-name team. I can think of a few other big name teams who could use a decent sprinter(Lotto comes to mind). Saxo, who usually don't have any problem winning races, picked up JJ Haedo and he's won like, 15-16 times over the last few years. Even for a team that wins big races like they do, that has a lot of value.

If nothing else it gets you out of the "team X hasn't won any races so far" discussions and help you get into the "team Y has won the most/seconds most/impressive number of victories this year" discussions.

 

[Highlander]

The only thing that matters is if you win the team classification for a given race. The rest is completely irrelevant.

 

[Ferdinand Artichoke]

At this point in the season, what is a more impressive win list for a top pro-tour team?

Is it better to just have 1-win... but have it be in a big event (Like BMC and Lotto have with their Fleche/AGR wins?)

Or is it better to have more wins but not of the same prominence (Like Cervelo, Radioshack, Garmin or Lampre)

Faster, stronger riders who win everything is best

 

[craig1985]

HTC - Columbia are having another profilic year win wise.

But I get the gist of the OP's point though, you could count on two hands the amount of wins AG2r got last season, but it was considered a success on their part because of Nocentini wearing yellow for 8 days.