Composition of a best pro cycling team
08-28-09, 08:20 AM
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,952
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
Composition of a best pro cycling team
Just wondering - if you were a team sponsor and out to get the best GC (general category) result in a European pro tour like the Tour de France, which would you think would be the better setup for a team:
1) Top rider & strong but unquestionably inferior support riders. Thus, no conflict in the team as to who's the leader. Like Armstrong in his 7 tour wins.
2) Same top rider, but 1 or more domestiques who can clearly challenge the top rider on a good day. Like Armstrong + Contador in the last tour.
Assume the top rider is equally strong, and that there is not a huge overall difference in the composition of the remainder of the team. (The stronger domestiques are accompanied by slightly weaker ones in option #2)
Obviously the top pro would prefer #1, but as a sponsor looking for the best GC result possible, what would they pick?
1) Top rider & strong but unquestionably inferior support riders. Thus, no conflict in the team as to who's the leader. Like Armstrong in his 7 tour wins.
2) Same top rider, but 1 or more domestiques who can clearly challenge the top rider on a good day. Like Armstrong + Contador in the last tour.
Assume the top rider is equally strong, and that there is not a huge overall difference in the composition of the remainder of the team. (The stronger domestiques are accompanied by slightly weaker ones in option #2)
Obviously the top pro would prefer #1, but as a sponsor looking for the best GC result possible, what would they pick?
08-28-09, 12:20 PM
#3
Senior Member
Heh I love these kinds of questions.
As a sponsor you want the best return for your dollar. A huge factor is just how many of those dollars you have (or euros or whatever).
It's a lot better to have one good guy and as many good support riders as possible. Eddy Merckx took this approach, using lieutenants that were good enough to be leaders. In more recent times, La Vie Claire did that too (Hinault, Lemond, Hampsten, Kim Andersen, Bauer, JF Bernard were all team leaders at some point in their career, and they were all on LVC in 1985 and/or 1986). Finally look at Astana - Contador, Armstrong, Zubeldia, Azevedo (sp?), Levi, again, a lot of team leaders here. The problem with stacking the deck is that it costs money to buy those cards.
However, I think a truly strong racer can race on their own on the climbs and therefore make a difference in Grand Tours without the best team around.
It's cheaper to have one good guy and a lot of so-so guys. Look at ADR in 1989. Minimal salary for Lemond (along with huge bonuses), whose team got obliterated during the Tour. He finished with Johan Lammerts, a new Johann Museeuw, I think one other guy? They were good enough in the TTT to keep Lemond in the hunt, then they got shelled in the mountains. Other riders in that Tour had great teams - Reynolds, PDM in particular. But when it came down to it, at the top of the climbs, it came down to each racer's fitness.
Granted, Delgado's screw-ups in the first couple days made a HUGE difference (Delgado lost almost 8 minutes for no reason at the start of the Tour - 2:40 late to the prologue start house and loses 5 minutes in the TTT), but still, he did make those mistakes.
If I had a minimal amount of money, I'd sign the absolute best rider I could. Usually they'll bring some baggage - specific support riders, support staff - but that's the price to pay.
I'd look for a team leader that's good, maybe the best, but has some issues. Lemond in 1989 is a good example. He was one of the strongest riders in 1983-1986, but he got shot and then had an operation due to tendonitis in 1987 and 1988. So he was an unknown, but with a huge engine/potential. Ditto Armstrong in 1999.
Then, for sure, you need flatlanders / time trialers, and lower-slope climbers.
Flatlanders: I'd focus on guys who are not quite the best TT riders, so guys that get 2nd, 4th, etc in various TTs they contest (i.e. they tried to do well). They'd be my flat land riders, guys that can go 40kph all day, day in and day out. I'd want them to be savy too, smart, no-nonsense guys. I'd get 4-5 of these guys because you'll need to have 3-4 working each day you're in the lead. You need to give them rest days so you can't use all of them every day. It's the saving energy during the flatter stages that makes a difference to the leaders. The team leader needs pack savy and big shelters.
Lower Slope Climbers: Once the selection's been made on the mountain stages, there are only 5-10 racers in the world that can stay up there. It's hard to get a second team member in that small group, so you need to use your guys earlier to get your leader into position. I'd get some middling lower-slope climbers, the guys that get shelled with 2 climbs to go, but that can motor for a while before that. Even the big pros can climb surprisingly well (think Thor this year, or Hincapie, or Cancellara). If you have say 3 of these guys, you can have one go hard every 3rd climbing day in a row. I figure these guys would cost more because they can probably do well in minor stage races and such.
Offer huge incentives for various overall wins, Grand Tours, Worlds, Classics. The sponsor just needs to take out a "bonus" insurance policy to cover the bonuses if the team pulls through. The racers and staff win big if they pull off a coup.
cdr
As a sponsor you want the best return for your dollar. A huge factor is just how many of those dollars you have (or euros or whatever).
It's a lot better to have one good guy and as many good support riders as possible. Eddy Merckx took this approach, using lieutenants that were good enough to be leaders. In more recent times, La Vie Claire did that too (Hinault, Lemond, Hampsten, Kim Andersen, Bauer, JF Bernard were all team leaders at some point in their career, and they were all on LVC in 1985 and/or 1986). Finally look at Astana - Contador, Armstrong, Zubeldia, Azevedo (sp?), Levi, again, a lot of team leaders here. The problem with stacking the deck is that it costs money to buy those cards.
However, I think a truly strong racer can race on their own on the climbs and therefore make a difference in Grand Tours without the best team around.
It's cheaper to have one good guy and a lot of so-so guys. Look at ADR in 1989. Minimal salary for Lemond (along with huge bonuses), whose team got obliterated during the Tour. He finished with Johan Lammerts, a new Johann Museeuw, I think one other guy? They were good enough in the TTT to keep Lemond in the hunt, then they got shelled in the mountains. Other riders in that Tour had great teams - Reynolds, PDM in particular. But when it came down to it, at the top of the climbs, it came down to each racer's fitness.
Granted, Delgado's screw-ups in the first couple days made a HUGE difference (Delgado lost almost 8 minutes for no reason at the start of the Tour - 2:40 late to the prologue start house and loses 5 minutes in the TTT), but still, he did make those mistakes.
If I had a minimal amount of money, I'd sign the absolute best rider I could. Usually they'll bring some baggage - specific support riders, support staff - but that's the price to pay.
I'd look for a team leader that's good, maybe the best, but has some issues. Lemond in 1989 is a good example. He was one of the strongest riders in 1983-1986, but he got shot and then had an operation due to tendonitis in 1987 and 1988. So he was an unknown, but with a huge engine/potential. Ditto Armstrong in 1999.
Then, for sure, you need flatlanders / time trialers, and lower-slope climbers.
Flatlanders: I'd focus on guys who are not quite the best TT riders, so guys that get 2nd, 4th, etc in various TTs they contest (i.e. they tried to do well). They'd be my flat land riders, guys that can go 40kph all day, day in and day out. I'd want them to be savy too, smart, no-nonsense guys. I'd get 4-5 of these guys because you'll need to have 3-4 working each day you're in the lead. You need to give them rest days so you can't use all of them every day. It's the saving energy during the flatter stages that makes a difference to the leaders. The team leader needs pack savy and big shelters.
Lower Slope Climbers: Once the selection's been made on the mountain stages, there are only 5-10 racers in the world that can stay up there. It's hard to get a second team member in that small group, so you need to use your guys earlier to get your leader into position. I'd get some middling lower-slope climbers, the guys that get shelled with 2 climbs to go, but that can motor for a while before that. Even the big pros can climb surprisingly well (think Thor this year, or Hincapie, or Cancellara). If you have say 3 of these guys, you can have one go hard every 3rd climbing day in a row. I figure these guys would cost more because they can probably do well in minor stage races and such.
Offer huge incentives for various overall wins, Grand Tours, Worlds, Classics. The sponsor just needs to take out a "bonus" insurance policy to cover the bonuses if the team pulls through. The racers and staff win big if they pull off a coup.
cdr
