cycling4freaks.com

cat 5, it's not a monument.

the cat system is based on the old cycling4all classification.

so doesn't correspond a 100 percent to the uci classification.

for one day races

monuments 6
other pt classics or wt 5
hc 4
1.1 3 or 2
1.2 1.

but not really according to the uci classification, but to the one by cycling4all, as i said. 1.1, especially 1.1 is very wide in uci terms, you have realyl really unimportant things next to things that have a certain importance. the old c4a calendar was more precise there.
1a-5
1b-4
1c-3
1d-2
1e-1
if i remember correctly, then monuments had 1s or something.

stage races similar

gt 5
1a cat 4..
1b cat 3
1c cat 2
1d cat 2/1
1e cat 1
something like that. plus for the pt stage races some then were not 4.. either because not 4 in the c4a calendar, or by consensus, since we all know that eneco, poland are just not as important as tds, dauphine, pn, pais vasco, romandie, tirreno.

i don't know C4A, butb i looking only at real calender, and us...we have 6 cat
UCI at 5, that we can comparate, + the fantasy race...in my opinion the best way for a simple categorie system.If S.Sbastian now is a WT, i think we must considere it cat. 6.
and i stay to the opinion too, Cat. 1-3 tour give to much money, also field 2 have to much money.

So you are now saying that a win in plouay or hamburg should be worth the same as winning milano sanremo? yes, that's what you are saying .and no, that's not a good idea. and no, it's not like that in the uci world tour either. in the world tour, i guess that what wt means, not all races give the same amount of points either, the 5 monument give more than the other world tour one day races. at least last year, not going to check, but fairly sure even the geniuses in aigle didn't manage to make it worse there.

the system itself we use is good enough, but it needs to be applied.

ok, longer, even though it doesn't really belong here. explanation for aux.

the uci calendar
wt
hc
1
2

is less precise and in the end doesn't always reflect the real value of a race. for one, because the races are spread over the continents.
qinghai is a hc race. but everybody who follows cycling knows that it doesn't have the value of hc races in europe in reality, stuff like dunkerque, bayern etc. same with one day races, i guess the japan cup is hc too, like tre valli varesine, like e3, like schelde. but of course it's nowhere near as important. the continental circuits are treated more or less separately by the uci, we at rsf mix all together.
then, the uci decisions of course often are political. hamburg and plouay in the wt, there are x races in italy and belgium that would be more deserving. e3, het volk, emilia, tre valli, piemonte etc. but give france one more one day race, give germany something too, big potential market. eneco the same, political decision to get the support of belgium/holland for the protour, now obviously called world tour, as important cycling countries they want their world tour days, so give eneco wt status. in reality a win at eneco is still less important then winning paris nice of course. but the uci treats it as the same now. then new races, ok, eneco in that sense is new too, as a 3 country race that ignores one i think, development races like the one in poland, like down under, marketing stuff like the 2 races in canada, like the tour of beijing. or paris tours not being in the wt anymore, for reasons i never really understood, probably happened during the aso/rcs-uci war... and aso hasn't gotten around applying for paris tours to be back where it belongs. and doesn't see the need, since a race like that will get the participation and attention it deserves anyway.

so following the uci classification is a bad idea, since in reality it doesn't really reflect the actual value of the races, but a) regional differences, b) politics distort it.

the old cycling4all classification of races was more precise, and c4a being the best cycling site in the history of the internet it was well done. not perfect, there were a few things i would have done differently, but we need an independent source for this, otherwise lesossies and me plus another few fanatics would be discussing about the categorization every year nonstop. much worse than we do now. so we chose the c4a classification as a refrerence. because it was good, reflected the real value well.

as i said, it roughly corresponds to



monuments - cat 6
other pt one day races, cat 5.
1.hc -4
1.1 -3 AND 2.
1.2. 1

roughly. .especially important is the differentation between 2 and 3. not every 1.1 uci race has the same value. only a joker would claim that a historic race like the giro della romagna was worth the same as rund um die braunkohle. coppa agostoni the same as papa carlo and stresa. with the uci there is no differentiation, with c4a there is. good. same for stage races, not going to write that again.

so in general leso is supposed to follow this. he doesn't always... see alsace and sibiu... clear clear clear clear cat 1.

but in some other races, it was clear from the beginning that leso would get some freedom to give a higher cat or a lower one. stuff that we all kind of agreed the c4a calendar didn't classify well either.
for example eneco and poland, pt tours, but not as important as romandie and tirreno, catalunya and pais vasco, tds and dauphine, pn and.. mmh, think that's it. eneco-poland are in the pt, so they get a fairly ok starters field, but a win in one of these races is just not nearly as important as in the other wt races. so, downgrade them to cat 3. same with down under when it got pt status later on. good decision, it reflects reality better than the uci points system.
paris tours will stay cat 5 here, even if it's not in the pt anymore. correct again.
then leso likes to push certani races a bit.. mostly french and german... route du sud for example always cat 3, which for me is ok, since i remember the route du sud being a fairly important race, or let's say more important then it is now. didn't agree with some of the german pushings, but ok, he get's that limited freedom, that was agreed from the beginning. in general we follow c4a, some stuff left to lesos judgement. and in general it works.

and now since c4a stopped to exist in 2007, of course he gets more and more 'freedom'. the importance of races changes over time. some races get bigger, strade bianche, others get smaller, veneto.. there he has the right and duty to adjust a bit. or new races that didn't exist then yet. the 2 things in canada... we won't put them in at cat 5, no way, even if they are in the pt. we started at 2, i would have given them 3, then up to 4 this year than leave them there a while. leso started at 2, i hope he goes up to 3 this year then 4 in 2012. or the tour of beijing this year.. what to do. cat 4, no way. start at cat 2 or 3, probably 2, that's what i would do etc. races losing their hc status, back to 1, happened in italy to a few last year, veneto among others. keep it 4, down to 3, leso decided to go down to 3. i probably would have kept it at 4, but again, down to 3 is ok, and it's in the freedom leso has.

so we have a reference, c4a calendar from 07, leso gets some freedom to upgrade/downgrade certain races, history, changes in importance, etc. and in the end it works out well. except, when this schlitzohr lesossies decides to give sibiu and alsace cat 2 and stuff like that. that's when the ape and everybody else should check and start raising the alarm, threatening to invade herne carrying huge ''down with dupoing, down with pensec'' banners. we haven't always done a good job with it either... forgetting to check ,realizing the mistake after the race etc.

but not in this case, alsace, alsace is a cat 1 stage race leso! we mentioned that early enough. and he changed it. sibiu was probably too late.. mmh, think i mentioned it once early though, mmhh..

anyway, in general the system works. no need to change to the inferior uci system. keep going like that, let's just check more often and thoroughly.

why i must taking as reference a 2007 calender...we are in 2011, the world get away, things change, and we live in a global world...if UCI considered Canada WT, give a reason...i respect MiSa and Paris-Roubaix, but, we get in a new world!!!

and we still without Sterrato

why that as a reference, read above.

things change, read above.

go and read about the wt points system at least before you continue disrepecting msr and pr, which you are doing by ignorance. i did the research for you now... as i was almost sure, read above, in the wt points system the winner of one of the 5 monuments gets 100 points, the winner of the other one day stage races 80 points.

Hi, is there enough time for Brixia? The profiles are online now on the link. Sorry, I can't draw it.

Vuvuzela wrote:Hi, is there enough time for Brixia? The profiles are online now on the link. Sorry, I can't draw it.

Yeah, what about Brixia? Will Brixia take place at RSF?

Thanks.

ist San Sebastian die aktuelle version??

rund um Bochum auch ??

auxilium torino wrote:ist San Sebastian die aktuelle version??

rund um Bochum auch ??

San Sebastian ist die alte.
Bochum müsste passen.

Brixia ist nicht rechtzeitig fertig geworden, Sorry.

gestern war auf der heiligen sebastian seite immer noch das profil von 2010 on... evtl ist es ja auch das von 2011... heute noch nciht gecheckt
brixia nicht fertig kein wunder... wenn sibiu offen ist zeichne ich nicht. ha, reingelegt. jetzt leider ausgetrickst und kaukasus drin... leso mit allen wassern gewaschen... grrr. eigentor, weil dadurch


austria
sibiu
kaukasus
wallonie

1 nach dem anderen für alle alles fahrbar... wer 2012 die tour fährt ist blöd, liegt ja so viel geld und ruhm und spass im nebenprogramm rum.

können wir das gleiche während der vuelta erwarten?

Robyklebt wrote:können wir das gleiche während der vuelta erwarten?

An sich noch schlimmer/besser da parallel zur Vuelta noch Hamburg, Plouay und andere interessante Einzelrennen starten.

gemeint ist. fantasy rennen, unwichtige nebennebenrennen für alle und so....ok, plouay und hamburg gehören ja eigentlich zu so sachen.

Isn't this supposed to be the same stage ?

OL

The problem with stage five of wallonie already solved?

san sebastian looks to be the same course as last year.

so the profile should be ok. some of the climbs and sprints, well all of them almost seem one km off.... if somebody wants to redraw it and try to get those +/- km right, go for it, i won't.. remember swearing at the whole thing last year.. so good enough for me.

leso

put in poland as soon as possible.

after all it overlaps with alsace, should be in before that starts, so everybody knows it overlaps. you should have it, saller made it and posted it in this thread.

plus, it deserves cat 3, like down under and eneco.

OK done

I'm confused. In which desert are Bolton and Wigan?

You don't know the GBD*? Pfffff, you unworthy one.


*Great Britain Desert

iBanesto wrote:I'm confused. In which desert are Bolton and Wigan?

maybe a sahara sandstorm ?
I changed the temperatures for the 20 and 22h races