Professional Cycling For the Fans - Pro - Racing

Im new to watching, following Pro Racing.....(have always watched Tour')...few questions.....

Why do teams take certain riders to some races and not others....seems like they would want continuity between all team mates.

Why do some teams at the end of a race propel their best sprinter(ie, Sky and HTC) and others are all discombobulated.....Do they not have a protocol or rehearsed plan..?

Why do Pros, example T. Phinney, place 11th one stage and then not even top 100 the other stages when there very similiar stages.......Did they burn out, team agenda...?

Sorry about all the questions but alot of it doesnt make sense to me.....It seems that Pro Racers go into some races not even thinking of placing much less winning, then Why go...? Seems like teams should have more strategy built into place in my oppinion...

Thanx, Sean

Why do teams take certain riders to some races and not others....seems like they would want continuity between all team mates.Above all else, they want to make a good showing, maybe even get a victory. They take the teammates who they think can give a good accounting and contribute. Perhaps not through victory, but by helping other teammate to victory.


Why do some teams at the end of a race propel their best sprinter(ie, Sky and HTC) and others are all discombobulated.....Do they not have a protocol or rehearsed plan..?They try. That and they just don't have as good a leadout train as HTC/Sky/etc... So they wait & see if HTC/Sky make a mistake that they can take advantage of. The width of the roadway limits it to 2 or 3 teams on the front. Also, you should try and get organized into a leadout train at 35mph for an hour after already racing for 5 hours previous.


Why do Pros, example T. Phinney, place 11th one stage and then not even top 100 the other stages when there very similiar stages.......Did they burn out, team agenda...? Million reasons, here's a few off top o' my head: first-they may look like similar stages to you, but they're not; maybe Phinney got caught up/behind in a crash; they're resting for the next day's stage; Phinney is young-maybe he is tired; maybe a teammate has a better power-to-weight ratio and is better at climbing finishes; maybe another rider has more power and is better at false-flat or downhill finishes.


...It seems that Pro Racers go into some races not even thinking of placing much less winning, then Why go...?Training, helping another teammate to victory, getting exposure for the team (the very purpose of sponsored racing)


Seems like teams should have more strategy built into place in my oppinion...Ya, you're right. Those professionals who have been doing it for lifetimes really don't know what they're doing. You should go over there and show them all that they're wrong.

Why do teams take certain riders to some races and not others....seems like they would want continuity between all team mates.

The big teams have 20 or even more professionals on their roster, far more than you can send to a race, and there are also more races each year than any individual athlete can take part in (and have any hope of completing); so to maximise a team's victories/exposure the managers figure out who races where, while focusing on some specific races - spring classics, Giro, Tour, whatever, depends on the team.


Why do some teams at the end of a race propel their best sprinter(ie, Sky and HTC) and others are all discombobulated.....Do they not have a protocol or rehearsed plan..?

Most teams simply don't have the talent to do it. HTC basically put most of their money into that one specific purpose while others either can't afford it or set different priorities, like winning the general classement or mountain stages. Or maybe they do have one or two good sprinters, but that's not enough to set up a HTC-like "train", so they have to freeload off another team which maybe makes it look chaotic, but they do know what they're doing.