Pro Tour Licenses
by TheFigurehead on Aug 3, 2009 10:38 AM EDT
Email
Print
While the Pro Tour as an exclusive club have been watered down since the start it's still a membership that most of the teams are looking for. Five of the 18 licenses expires this year, and all five teams have applied for a renewal. The five teams are:
- Ag2R
- Bbox Bouyges Telecom
- Cofidis
- Lampre
- Team Milram
Perhaps more interesting are the three other teams that have applied:
- Team Sky
- Team Radioshack
- Skil-Shimano
Cervelo Test Team is obviously happy with the current situation and that is no surprise.
I feel that it can get a bit tense, both on the transfer market and the relation between UCI and the race organizers. First because of teams who wants to be competetive and interesting enough to get wild cards (like Cervelo), and second because of the organizers who may want more discretion when choosing which teams to invite to their races.
Updatitude: Interesting article by Shane Stokes at Cyclingnews.
UCI President Pat McQuaid confirmed to Cyclingnews on Saturday that the governing body was planning on raising the standard and, as a result of this, there was the chance that some teams may be left disappointed.
Currently eighteen teams hold a licence, with five of those due to expire at the end of the 2009 season. All have reapplied, as have two new teams plus one squad currently competing at Professional Continental level. That totals 21, meaning that if the number of ProTour members remains at eighteen, three teams will have to drop to the second tier.
"This is a situation that we are studying," McQuaid told Cyclingnews over the weekend. "What we are doing is raising the bar for ProTour teams. In doing so, one or two teams which are asking for licences to be renewed or to be granted for the first time will not meet the criteria. The rules state we can have up to 20 teams but, in continuing to raise the bar, it may mean that one or two teams may not get a licence."
64 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Very interesting
Are there a maximum of 18 licenses given out?
It seems that Ag2R would be a shoe in given their Tour performance. Lampre probably two as if they didn’t there would only be one ProTour team from Italy, if I am not mistaken.
Bbox makes me wonder because they didn’t have many results this year aside from a Voeckler stage victory.
fedrigo won stage 9
"Wizard's first rule. People are stupid. They will believe anything they want to be true or fear to be true." -- Terry Goodkind
The UCI vs ASO/RCS/Unipublic controversy
18 licenses might have been the result, I don’t remember really.
Staring at the swim team gets you killed by a gang of dancing ninja men who know how to twirl.
by TheFigurehead on Aug 3, 2009 12:52 PM EDT up reply actions
UCI Rulebook (post inclusion of Historic races etc rules changes 1/1/9)
Still lists 20 as the maximum no of teams – see Page 82 – if that’s any help. (Also references “geographical distribution”)
It would be hard for the UCI to deny LA Shack considering how much attention he draws to the sport.
If the ASO were in charge who knows where they might stand?
But is great for the sport to have the problem of too many teams vying for a few coveted spots after what has been happening the past couple of years.
Has a team ever started from scratch and immediately competed in the Pro Tour?
( VeloNews style)
The first cyclist to stand up to him. And he did it in silence.
Isn't Katusha more or less ex Tinkoff?
As in Katinkoff.
Staring at the swim team gets you killed by a gang of dancing ninja men who know how to twirl.
by TheFigurehead on Aug 3, 2009 4:54 PM EDT up reply actions
Yes they are, and they kept a few of Tinkoff's riders
and kicked most of them the hell out. Cervelo came from scratch but they aren’t PT, just better than 90% of the PT teams.
"On a personal level, I have never had admiration for him and I never will"
~AC about LA, me about Johan "drama queen" Bruyneel
RadioShack is the easiest to pass I think.
They still haven’t found themself enough riders are they?
Supposedly...
Teams and riders are, by UCI regulations, forbidden to discuss transfers until September 1. Rule 2.15.125 states "Riders and UCI ProTeams may not, before 1 September, reveal that they are involved in negotiations about renewal of their contracts or transfers.
—cn
Someone should inform the Velits brothers, Ballan, Contador, Didier, and everybody else who’s announced a transfer or refusal to renew.
But I suppose at least some of the transfers won’t be announced until they’re supposed to be. Well, maybe?
Throughout the stage all I kept on thinking was: ‘don’t finish second, you can’t finish second again’.--Heinrich Haussler
The Velits brothers' transfer was actually announced by their current team, wasn't it?
& hasn’t Contador revealed more the negotiations he isn’t in than ones he is?
Contador announced he's refused to renew with Astana.
Don’t have the link handy, but I’m sure you can find it if you look.
Throughout the stage all I kept on thinking was: ‘don’t finish second, you can’t finish second again’.--Heinrich Haussler
That's what I mean...
The (clumsy) phrasing of the clause says riders & teams are not allowed to reveal that they’re in negotiations. It doesn’t say that they can’t reveal that they’re not… & somehow I don’t think Contador thinks he is. ;-)
I wonder why Bweeg bother
they seem to compete mostly in domestic races anyway, and would be a pretty sure thing for a wild card invite to the Tour. For a wild guess I would say that they would be out for either no-one (if only 17 licences are given) or Sky.
The problem comes with next year’s wild cards. Both the Giro and Tour start in the Netherlands, so if Skil want to go PT then maybe Vacansoleil have already got the “Dutch” invite (which would be very tough, especially given the Kenny factor). That then leaves Radioshack, Sky, Cervelo and the second Dutch team fighting for two invitations.
An hypothesis:
If I’m not mistaken, Bweeg’s sponsorship ends next year… it might be easier to find a new sponsor with a ProTour license (more visibility)
Age and treachery will overcome youth and skill (F. Coppi)
Someone remind me...
Wasn’t there a designated number of pro tour licenses per country also? Or, did I dream that. I probably dreamed it.
Once upon a time, yes
When they first had to apply for a licenses (2004?) UCI designated them to different countries. Denmark, totally out of the blue of course, got one license, Netherlands and USA too. I don’t remember the exact number of licenses designated to which countries, but I do remember that it matched the old Division 1 teams pretty well. I assume it was some kind of grandfathering.
I would guess that it’s still relevant, but not exactly as before since there are new teams and new countries. And it raises the question if UCI wants three Pro Tour teams from the US (same as Spain, more than Italy).
Staring at the swim team gets you killed by a gang of dancing ninja men who know how to twirl.
by TheFigurehead on Aug 3, 2009 12:40 PM EDT up reply actions
Hmm. Would be interesting to see Teh Lance Shack not get a PT license.
(That’s the nickname I’ve decided upon :-))
____________
"Reality has a well-known Contador bias." -Sui Juris, PdC Editor
I might not give them one
Why would they need it? If he builds a grand tour team, he can just take wildcard entries and not bother the organizers of Flanders, Roubaix, Lombardia, etc.
And that nickname sounds like a keeper.
ABRUZZIAM...uh oh
by Chris Fontecchio on Aug 3, 2009 2:52 PM EDT up reply actions
In the news peice about Ballan
saying that he’s rejected a 1-yr deal with Lampre, he mentioned RS prominently as a viable option. i highly doubt that he’s being wooed as a Lance helper. Perhaps we will see RS in the classics afterall.
"It looks like talking, but it’s just words that comes out"
~ Andy Schleck
How is he in the TT ...
… at least, when he stays on the bike? Team La Shack will need to hope to put time on Contador’s team in the TTT.
Not sure when the licensing decisions are made
but at this point, isn’t Lance the only person officially linked to Team Radio Shack? Won’t they need a little more than one rider to get a pro license?
OK so I am always learning
Cervelo doesn’t have a pro tour license …. but gets the occasional wild card invite? Do they have some other sort of license to get to other events.
I’d guess Cofidis must be getting a little nervous. Polemic if The Shack doesn’t get a license. So perhaps Sky should allso be nervous.
Moo
Cervélo
is Pro Continental. They hired Sastre to get into the Tour, basically – that and Hushovd for the classics. So, basically, they get the invites based on their roster rather than the pro tour license.
And to add to what Gav said
there weren’t meant to be, but somehow several types of Pro-Conti teams have evolved. First, you have to apply for wild card status within Pro-Conti. And next you have to enrol in the biological passport scheme (it’s only an automatic thing for the PT teams). One team lost a wild card invite this year because they weren’t. And in a particularly nasty twist there are two rates for the BP, one whole team price and one per rider price which works out a lot more expensive, but the UCI apparently has the authority to reject applications for the cheaper rate without saying why. It happened to LPR and one other team this year.
WHat is the value proposition here?
I remember having this discussion last year (at least) here. What is the actual value to a team to be a Pro Tour Team? It seems the GT’s can leave you out. It seems you need special permission to have your riders take part in local races that even the race organizers want the riders in. It seems like you must have higher financial guarantees. Why wouldn’t all teams go to Pro-Conti? I don’t see any real tangible benefits other than branding. That can be valuable of course, but is it really?
Gets you
Flanders, Ghent, Romandie, the Dolphin, Suisse, and Amstel Gold, in no particular order. Plus the TDU and California next year (so I believe). Pro Tour status also requires more riders and places you in the bio passport program automatically.
I think it actually might make it easier to recruit riders. If you can guarantee invites to a bunch of important races, riders might see you as a safer bet than Cervelo or Skil. I’d imagine it makes a DS’s life a lot easier, too, knowing long ahead of time where riders will be tuning up for the Giro and the Tour.
Could see more teams going the Cervelo route
If you look back this year they got invited to every single important race basically. Now I understand this is due in large part to the composition of their team, but if you follow a similar pattern with say Sky or Radio Shack, thereby foregoing the whole protour license you might be able to guarantee yourself spots in these events simply by putting together your roster in a strategic way.
I'd like to see that
but the rub is there are a limited number of teams that can ride in key events. The Tour de France has, roughly speaking, the same value to sponsors as the entire rest of the calendar. Thus all the sturm und drang between the UCI and ASO/UNI/RCS was about how many invites to the GCs that the race owners were allowed to control. IF the UCI passed out 20 Protour licenses, there is no room for teams like Skill/Shimano or Cervelo at le tour.
So as much as I’d like to see more teams following their own path rather than toeing the UCI line, I don’t think there is a lot of room for more Cervelos, at least until the ProTour asplodes for the dozenth time. Until then, we are still going to see Euskatel taking up a start spot in Flanders and Roubaix and the Belgian teams soft-pedalling through the grand tours.
Brooklyn Chewing Gum: Vlaanderens Mooiste
Vuelta defence?
Didn’t the Vuelta to try to claim that the agreement between the GTs/the UCI/the PT teams was only valid for the teams that were part of the PT at the date of the agreement? Hence, Garmin could be invited as a so-called “wild card” but Katusha left out without the Vuelta having to acknowledge it was because they’re an embarrassment?
it also allows a larger roster
somethingn like 5-10 more riders than a Pro-Conti team so you can have more specialist / more easily compete year round as a Pro Tour team
The Shack
Rumor has it Radioshack is about to rebrand itself as The Shack . I hope Lance hasn’t printed up all those t-shirts and jerseys yet.
Blame my wife!
Waiting until August!
Named after their new PR person
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_X_d6JjJ00I4/R6tN9-JbtFI/AAAAAAAAK_M/k2jY5LycPps/s400/shaq.jpg
"On a personal level, I have never had admiration for him and I never will"
~AC about LA, me about Johan "drama queen" Bruyneel
My mind went elsewhere
Someone’s ego just took it to the next level: http://theshackbook.com/
Brooklyn Chewing Gum: Vlaanderens Mooiste
Lance is going to call himself
The Big Aristotle cuz the others “have a lot to learn.”
by BTD on Aug 3, 2009 6:51 PM EDT up reply actions
I thought
Gavia had copyrighted that?
ABRUZZIAM...uh oh
by Chris Fontecchio on Aug 3, 2009 2:53 PM EDT up reply actions
Yay!
It’s been awfully quiet around here the past few days.
Throughout the stage all I kept on thinking was: ‘don’t finish second, you can’t finish second again’.--Heinrich Haussler
We're not resting
We’re tensing ourselves with cat-like energy, getting ready to pounce.
ABRUZZIAM...uh oh
by Chris Fontecchio on Aug 3, 2009 4:43 PM EDT up reply actions
Your chief weapon is surprise...surprise and fear...fear and surprise....
Staring at the swim team gets you killed by a gang of dancing ninja men who know how to twirl.
by TheFigurehead on Aug 3, 2009 4:46 PM EDT up reply actions
My cat is currently sleeping, which will be followed be eating and more sleeping
is that what you mean?
"On a personal level, I have never had admiration for him and I never will"
~AC about LA, me about Johan "drama queen" Bruyneel
What about more pro teams, fewer riders per race
For example, instead of 20 teams of 9 riders for the TdF, why not go with 22 teams of 8 riders? Are more teams better? Will it make for more competition?
No it's not that simple
The safety issue isn’t so much about a few more riders in the peloton(or status quo) but the size of the cortage, more teams will mean more cars.
Another thing is value, not so much the entertainment value but the fact that with more teams it’s even less likely for a team to have a “successful” race which means its sponsors get less value for their money.
I see your point
What about more riders per team, fewer teams then? Say 18 teams of 10 riders. I’m not saying I favor this, just trying to spark a discussion about what makes the ideal race/tour/team makeup.
teams
would go ballistic at the thought of only 8 guys. Not that that’s a bad thing.
ABRUZZIAM...uh oh
by Chris Fontecchio on Aug 3, 2009 7:58 PM EDT up reply actions
The big problem for the GTs
is finding enough reasonable quality accommodation (see Charley Wegelius’ tweets for example). Twenty years ago they used to use school dormitories, camp beds in the hall, etc. and everyone would queue to wash their kit then hang it out for the next day. They can’t do that any more.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Featured Stories
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
![This is funny on so many levels. [Html should open bigger]](http://cdn3.sbnation.com/fan_shot_images/239959/flagged_small.jpg)
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
