MinnMan

I know that it's controversial in certain circles and that Unzue hates it (so what?), but I've been enjoying this new dimension. It adds one more of road cycling's many races within a race. Also, it makes it interesting to watch the performance of smaller teams, which don't get glory as frequently in the big races.

For example, EF did itself some favors on Mont Ventoux today. I am sure that their effort was partly owing to their precarious position in the standings. OTOH, Israel-tech set out to do the same thing, but came up short.

Lanterne Rouge has the standings, updated daily

https://lanternerouge.com.au/2022/05...-team-ranking/

GrainBrain

I think EF got like 210 points on mont ventoux? Compare that to Arkea's 200 points for hofstetter's last one day race win, or 60 points for a stage win at these one weeks. Seems better to pickup lesser known races then invest a whole week or three. *Cough* Lotto *cough*

MinnMan

I'll bet race organizers of lesser-known races like the rule, as it will bring stronger riders to their events

slcbob

Similar to WVA's comments, I think the notion is good but some details and weightings are questionable. In particular, the use of Pro Tour (& other??) points to determine who stays in the World Tour seems wacky. Sure, they should be in play for promotion, but for relegation?

Anyway, it does add yet another dimension to this wonderful hot mess / social experiment / athletic endeavor.

sincos

I'm enjoying it. Lets the little guys have a performance-based way to the top, discourages complacency and entitlement, brings energy and awareness to smaller, less well known races. My issues are mostly with weighting, but even there much of that is an attempt to broaden the support base. Having TDU, Montreal, Quebec worth more than Catalunya, Het Volk, Strade Bianchi or Tour of Guanxi more than Milan-Turin o Ruta del Sol is riduculous, but how else are you going to get top level competition there?