UCI World Tour Promotion and Relegation

45 thoughts on “UCI World Tour Promotion and Relegation”

1. Cofidis just don’t seem to have the 2025 squad to harvest the required points despite the acquisition of Aranburu and with Fretin providing a good return. Vasseur has talked of a big shake up, but who, as yet unsigned, would be tempted by a Cofidis jersey? They already have 27 riders on the books for 2025 too. They need a (legal) magic potion.

   • The shake-up seems to be internal, about coaching and performance. But you wonder if Vasseur is included in that, seeing him openly criticise his riders at the Tour doesn’t help the mood on the team bus. Fretin’s been a good find for them.

     • If you’re right on the shake-up at Cofidis, then it sounds very much like the changes at Ineos. Will better training and a dose of extra motivation make existing riders score more points?

   • Decathlon scored way more points this year, 15930, compared to 9096 the previous year with most of the points being scored by riders that also rode for them the previous year.

2. Enjoyed tension these rankings brought to races in 2022. Feels like the sport should be making a bigger deal of this where being promoted should be amazing and relegation should be dramatic.

   • One thing is the relegation process is dramatic and bad… so the teams and the UCI didn’t want it to happen in public, which is why people have to turn to blogs, social media etc for the actual rankings because the 3 year total is not made public.

3. It feels like a decent season now gets you disproportionately better off than before (Lotto and Decathlon) because outside of UAE, Visma and Quick Step nobody scores?!

   • Bit of an exaggeration, Decathlon had more points than Ineos or Alpecin this year, Lotto were 9th (so 1/2 way down the list) and ahead of some richer teams, so more than decent. It does feel a bit like everyone who is not UAE, Visma, QS is in a different league. Lotto also score in many smaller races (DeLie has wins at GP Morbihan, Circuit de Wallonie, etc.) which explains their lower visibility at times.

     • It’s subjective but a side ranking is to compare towards expectations, or just the previous year. More objectively Decathlon climbed six places compared to the end of last year, Red Bull up four. Bahrain fell four which is the furthest fall, with Cofidis slipping down three.

       • Bahrain were anonymous this year, which is odd considering the quality of riders in the squad. I expect better of them in 2025.

         • Mohoric had a really difficult year, half the points of 2023. Riders like Fred Wright (who I would have expected to improve) did nothing. The upside is that Tiberi really is a GC rider and looks to be getting better, and Govekar is a huge, positive surprise. Bahrain definitely have a talented squad, it just seems like they haven’t figured out the dark art of sending the right riders to the right races. If they can sort that out, I think they’ll have a much better season next year.

         • I expected Bilbao and Mohoric to have much better years. Turns out that Bahrain benefited hugely from ignoring Tiberi’s feline foibles. He might end up with a great 2025.

         • I don’t get the plural in “years” unless you mean the same 2024 season for… two (each of the riders).

           Mohoric was actually disappointing after a decent though not thundering start at Strade and Sanremo. He was used a lot as a gregario plus he tried to score points in GC at some stage races which suited, as seen in 2023, but being less effective all in all he sat well below the 1,5-2 K UCI points he’d been consistently bringing home after 2020. Incredible may it sound, he’s still “only” 30, so I think he might be able to find a more successful approach again. However, 2024 is a single bad season, if you look back at 2023 it was very satisfying both in terms of performance and UCI scoring.

           Bilbao also had a moot 2024 season but 2023 was on par with his best ever, as it was 2022. He’s already 34, so it was a little daring to expect continued development, although truth is that 2023 and 2022 were a further step up within the process he started since he was back to WT level but whose fruits were visible mainly as he approached his 30s.
           This year anyway he paradoxically had… his best Classics season ever. Hard to imagine that such a stage hunter hits his high in Classics with a couple of WT top 10 in Spring and as much in Autumn, but his one-day results were always dire. He tended not to race if possible and very often failed big time when trying, with very sparse exceptions. Maybe it’s about his character (see the Basque Grand Depart) or his actual technical qualities (an Ulissi syndrome, struggling more over 200km?). If he found some hilly Classics ways, he might be competitive there collecting useful points for a further couple of years, even thanks to the mediocre level below the stars, but I can’t see him growing actually stronger. His recent profile, still, is of a good point machine. Potentially placing high albeit far from victory in big Classics or in GC at small stage races. In 2024 he got some 1,500 points not much less than Tiberi who got 1,650, and Buitrago although quite visible at several ASO races plus final TDF top-10 only brings 1,100… A prototype case of making sponsors happier with some visibility (Buitrago) or harvesting points (Bilbao).

           Their 2024 ingoing market was pretty quiet, too, while they lost a huge scorer in Landa and a decent one in Milan.

           To me, the now middle term disappointments were Haig and Wright as they’ve been now failing to develop for some 2-3 years in a row after a then promising step-up around 2021-2022.

           Finally, as a side note, check how smart they were with Bauhaus, never a prolific winner, steady PCS points for some seasons now, but in 2024 he and the team were able to maximise *UCI points* big time against essentially any other variable.

4. I’m surprised Uno-X isn’t higher up the list. Maybe their bright uniforms make them more visible and therefore seem more successful than the results indicate.

   • No really big wins, nor high GC places. Kristoff was their best scorer. Leknessund was a big signing but didn’t score so big, we’ll see if he can show more of what’s possible next year.

     • Did you (or UCI) mix up Uno x total this year? You have 98xx, they have 89xx.

       And why didnt UnoX go to Asia if they want to score points. Blikra, Gudmestad, Fredheim, Walling would have way better chances to gain points in proraces not in Europe.

       • Will take a closer look later, the UCI didn’t publish the team rankings this week so had to take the points from last week then add on the results since, eg Magnus Cort’s win in Veneto.

         • They are published, but you need to change the season back to 2024 as uci already have changed their page to default 2025.

           As you stated earlier, they really do not want fokus on this. Strange though. Its at very big deal for the teams risking relegation and an exciting theme to follow.

         • Yes, there on the 2024 part… but they weren’t on Tuesday and Wednesday. Anyway, the charts are updated and Uno-X moves just as you say.

           Readers may not see the chart changes if the images are cached by their browser etc, might appear later.

         • End of season rankings are indeed on the UCI website (under Technical Rankings). One last minute change was to put IPT above Movistar and into 13th position in the 2 year standings.

   • They were visible and, it seems, no breakaway was complete without a Uno-X. In any case lots of publicity for Uno-X – though do they need it? – and good value for race organisers with guaranteed attackers.

5. There does seem a few teams at risk of dissolving or dramatically scaling back their operations in the next year.

   Astana if the miracle money from abroad does not appear.
   Arkea who seem likely to be demoted and possibly run out of money at the same moment making it even harder to get a new sponsor.
   TotalEnergies – been around a long time but surely the automatic entry to the tdf is in danger from far more visible teams who have spent big recently.

   The 3 year period after this one looks set to have some cashed up pro teams looking to get promoted. UnoX- Q36.5, tudor. Plus whoever gets relegated if they survive.

   • Yes and more teams have budget issues. Intermarché, the lowest budget team and by a long way, overspent in 2022 and had to measures to cut costs and have more oversight on their costs, once you know this it’s hard not to look at their recent recruitment and see the effects of this. Lotto are going to miss Dstny, although perhaps not the CEO’s sporting advice, and no sign of a replacement. Movistar are still searching for the co-sponsor they need. And so on.

     • All this and yet still we consistently hear people saying that cycling can – and should – make so much more money.
       The interest in this relatively niche sport just isn’t there (outside of one race).
       Plus we hear/read people saying that big sponsors (e.g. Red Bull) coming into the sport is great. What it actually does is – potentially – create another super team. That might even things out a little at the very top, but overall it’ll make things even less even.
       A budget cap would not only help smaller teams be more competitive – and thus make cycling more interesting and entertaining (e.g. more top riders trying to win races rather than being domestiques) – it would help the smaller teams survive.

       • It would likely be legally impossible to enforce in cycling given it is a sport largely based in EU countries (even if the UCI’s head office is in Switzerland) where sporting salary caps are illegal under Restraint of Trade laws.

         Formula One now has a partial spending cap, but that only works because the corporate structure was rearranged to place it in US jurisdiction.

         There’s potentially a role for the race promoters to play though. They could cut their prize pools by half and offer the other half as payments to be shared by the teams which provide audited accounts showing their spending the previous year was under a figure set by the race organisers.

         • Which might result in teams boycotting those races which would put an end to them demanding audited accounts pretty quickly (especially if it would mean no Pogacar or Wout at their race). Also, how much money do teams really make from most races? I’ve never seen figures (outside of the grand tours) published anywhere. If anyone knows where this data is compiled, please share.

         • Only teams spending below a cutoff line would need to show accounts under this model, and only if they want to be eligible for ann extra payment.

           UAE wouldn’t need to bother submitting accounts as they are a high budget team which wouldn’t be eligible. They would continue to be eligible for what they earn from the reduced prize pool, for the mandatory daily participation rate, for all the services provided by organisers (free accommodation and fuel at all races, free flights and vehicles at non-European races) plus the discretionary appearance fees they rake in every time Pog turns a wheel.

         • Doesn’t it happen in European rugby?
           I’m sure it’s complicated, but I suspect it is possible.
           You could make all teams register in Switzerland, for example.

         • @RV The prices for each race are published along with the rules & regulations, normally available in the race guide on the official website. For Lombardia, they say that the amount of prizes corresponds to the *maximum set by the UCI and the FCI* (dunno what that means) and it totals 50K euros, with some minimally significant money only going to the 1st and 2nd placed in 20K and 10K. Even so, it’s like 0.1% of the budget for a small to middle sized team nowadays. I checked back some 7-8 years and it’s been the same for nearly a decade now. Time for some inflation update? I’d say, anyway, that the function of prizes is granting some very welcome victory bonus to gregari (especially some years ago) and mechs, whose salaries can be modest even in a high level team.

         • @J Evans
           No, European rugby doesn’t have budget caps. English rugby (outside the EU) has a salary cap, and French rugby requires teams to break even, but the other countries and European competitions don’t.

           Football has something similar, but seems to find it difficult to enforce. US sports have more fleixibility in this.

       • @JEvans A budget cap just penalises French teams. And doesn’t address/prevent benefits in kind.

         • Do it after tax and it doesn’t punish anyone.

6. I’ve enjoyed it the promotion/relegation element over these past seasons. It’s added some sporting tension to the time period that perhaps wasn’t there before. But I’m not sure promotion/relegation needs to be a threat to teams – if anything it offers certainty around races even if the teams are not guaranteed spots in the TdF or whatever. Certainty helps planning. Perhaps that’s why Arkea are cutting their cloth already.

   And there’s always talk about the business model of cycling needing to change. Does it? I sit here reading about a team apparently in crisis, Cofidis, that has existed almost for as long as I’ve been interested in cycling. Movistar, Visma-LAB, Quickstep, Lotto, FdJ, Decathlon all the same. Even UAE have roots back into the 20th century.

   These are sporting institutions, playing out their sport in races which are even older. That some teams fortunes will ebb and flow over the decades is inevitable and not unique to cycling.

   Hopefully relegation is a bit of seasoning, giving extra sporting flavour, rather than a salting the ground for teams threatened by it.

7. I’m still perplexed. UCI wants promotion/relegation. UCI then does everything to hide/play down promotion/relegation. Shrug.

   • It’s more the teams don’t want it and don’t like the publicity around it so it gets downplayed.

     • Did Intermarche and Arkea make a song and dance about promotion last time? In football, promoted teams will be having bus tours and celebratory events. I felt that Arkea took promotion grudgingly, with Lotto seizing the opportunity to skip their least favoured WT races and making the most of relegation.

       Can teams refuse to be promoted? Must they take a WT licence? Could they finish as the top Pro Team, reap the benefits of the invites to big races, but not have to take on any they don’t want?

       • In theory, a team could refuse promotion. I believe that last time around Alpecin were debating refusing being promoted because they were in a sort of Goldilocks zone where they got automatic invites but could turn down WT races they didn’t want to do. I suppose that if a team felt they did not have the budget and/or personnel to be able to handle three years in World Tour, they might turn it down. The only way I could see this scenario playing itself out would be if a team earned promotion but couldn’t find enough financial backing from their sponsors. If a team refused promotion, I’m not sure if that would mean they would also forfeit automatic invites for the next year (logically, I’d assume so, but I don’t know what the actual UCI regulations say).

       • Yes, promotion is not compulsory. As RV says Alpecin didn’t say they wanted promotion the last time around for some time, something that was driving some rival managers to distraction because they didn’t know whether to count them in or out from their calculations.

         The points are necessary but not sufficient, the team has to qualify this way but then want to move up and then also satisfy the UCI with the admin and financial backing.

8. @inrng
   On a different note, what about some long term review of your “neo-pros to watch” series?

   I know you already have a regular piece on how riders to watch have featured once the season is over, but what about a *comprhensive and long term* hindsight review about the highlighted neo-pro specifically?

   I can’t remember when you started the series, but mid ’10s it was already on, so you could have a look back at, say, 2015-2020 or something like that.

   I was thinking about how much UAE looks to be picking from this series of pieces you made, Del Toro, Ayuso, Christen being now the most obvious names for success and recency bias, but there also Morgado or Baroncini, and after going through some other teams we can add Adam Yates, Sivakov, Narváez or… Hodeg! I didn’t go through each and every piece but with these names alone it’s already a 30% of their roster. I can’t say about Pogačar, Almeida, Vine, Politt or Hirschi, perhaps I skipped them (or inrng did) although they featured very soon in “riders to watch”. And I sure left some names out!

   • On the flip side, I’d be curious to see a rundown of the most successful riders who weren’t on anybody’s watch lists (i.e. riders who had zero significant results as juniors or U23s). With all the data collection and number-crunching these days, it’s probably unusual for a rider fly totally under the radar, but there must be a few examples.

     • Time span?

       Of the current top athletes I think I could come up only with… ahem, Roglič for the well-known reasons (but as soon as he was pedalling, most knew he was strong). Maybe Merlier as a road racer, but it’s because he was very good in CX. Then, uhmm, Derek Gee. Skujins, great at these Worlds, was a late bloomer of sort (yet runner up to Puccio in the baby Ronde, and winner of Course de la Paix). Corbin Strong although picked at SEG wasn’t a flashy one maybe because of geographical reasons, too.

       Vingegaard was probably one of the worst performing U23 among the current, dunno, top 60 athletes or so, despite a favourable structured cycling context (nation, team, local and international calendar). Before landing at Jumbo-Visma in 2019 (22 yo) he barely had some sparse GC top-10s against poor competition and his very top result was an uphill ITT prologue win in the Giro della Valle d’Aosta, normally a serious race but with hindsight we can assess the competition as extremely modest in that occasion, too. Since his first season at JV, anyway, he showed he could be decently competitive although nobody could really imagine how much until the beginning of the 2021 season after a null 2020 (as it happened to many).

       Essentially, 90% or so of the male top-100 current UCI ranking could be clearly seen coming, including supposed “surprises” like Lipowitz or “late bloomers” like Tratnik.

       Out of the final GC top-30 at the 2024 TDF you had few juvenile signs of a future champion, and very relatively so, only for Vingegaard (2°), Gee (9°), Julien Bernard (22°), Verona (24°) and Jegat (28°). All of them could anyway be expected to potentially become decent pro cyclists.

       Obviously, not everybody with the premonitory signs of a future champion actually becomes such, quite the other way around… but nearly all the best had proven their quality very soon (in the corresponding ranks). Besides the obvious Avenir you have Junior or Under Worlds or Monuments, NC, Valle d’Aosta, Isard, Savoie, Course de la Paix, Vaud, Vallées, Pan-American Games, Recioto, Belvedere, Capodarco, Friuli, Lunigiana, Libetazione, Regioni etc etc. Get consistently some victories and/or high GC placings in stage races and you might be worth a spot among the sport’s top-100. In case you don’t, let’s just say it’s not like you don’t have any hope at all, but you’d better have some good excuses like you’re from the opposite side of the world from where most of these races are held, bilharziasis, practising a different sport or whatever.

     • And I’d place the accent away from all that data crunching, as you always have had… juvenile races.
       Now you can pick some extra Vine or Vergallitto of course, but as a term of comparison I checked the 2010 PCS top 50 and again very few athletes couldn’t be seen coming, Hejsedal (but he was on MTB too I think), maybe poor Xavi Tondo, Voeckler (he fared decently at Paris-Roubaix baby, though), Marcato, now a DS at UAE… and essentially full stop.

       Go back to 1999 and the top 50 looks even more selective… by the way, lots of them had become pros before being 23 despite the U23 ranks being a profitable activity in many countries. Perhaps the only one without some strong juvenile seasons is Manolo “Tricky” Beltrán (38t), later with Lance, but I don’t know much of his youngest years.

     • It’s an interesting idea. One observation is the cycling world is rightly fixated on finding the next Pogačar and there’s a lot of effort going into detecting him (and her) at an early age. But every Pogačar needs a team and some of these support riders are almost the opposite kind of riders, forget being able to produce massive bursts of power there’s the need for riders who can work all day and then go again the next day, the Novaks, Politts, Tratniks, Declerqs. It’s here we’re seeing teams recruit rider who are relatively old, think Bart Lemmen, because they don’t emerge so early. See Matteo Jorgenson too.

       • I don’t agree about Jorgenson, many knew he was going to reach heights (as always, not exactly how high or on what terrain). It was a story of being noticed and picked to higher levels. Jelly Belly got him because racing in Switzerland he was already noticeable among strong well reputed juniores. At 19 he was already able to show he could afford hard stage racing in France with elite athletes even if at .2 level. This is the sort of performance which always caught the eye of observers even if it doesn’t come with victories. A top 20 in Colorado when you’re still a teenager among pro athletes of top level can be pure chance… but often isn’t. Riding on a small team you find yourself right between the likes of Powless or Bouwman, the youngest by far among the whole top 30, most guys being at least 5 years older.
         AG2R development duly picked him immediately and he was doing great from scratch both at Avenir and Isard. At Avenir he was shockingly good. He had had that horrible disc brake injury at PR and came in clearly undercooked. Team USA lost 2mins in the TTT. But Jorgenson came afloat and with a brutal string of top placings in days of hard racing he was 2nd in GC. He cracked in the heat to Tignes, but whomever actually had followed the race knew he had engine and class to be among the best.
         Movistar then brought him to WT and granted him quiet years of slow and gradual development he then regretted publicly, but I just think he’s plain wrong, even more so if you consider the issue with his characters he himself describes well from his juvenile years (struggling with pressure and delusion).
         Perhaps he needed for himself big results and challenging the best, for his own confidence I mean, but if you look at the calendar Movistar offered him and his build up of results my very personal opinion is that they set excellent foundations. Of course, the risk is getting stuck in a comfort zone of sort.
         Anyway, my point is that most observers knew about him from a very early age, and essentially everybody in the WT had him on a list after, say, the Loze Avenir stage.

9. I imagine 1.pro & 1.1 races will be extra interesting next year. As for the GT’s, you can pencil in now 4 guys sharing out the podium spots.

Comments are closed.