2 races for BIG teams
Posted: Fri Mar 12, 2010 12:43 pm
What would this forum be without this classic topic, always fun, not that I expect it to happen in the next 5 years, but Roby is patient.
Big teams, huge teams.. 18 riders plus. they have no flexibility, their tax rate too high, smaller teams for example can sell a young climber that doesn't train well at 23/24 and get enough money to buy a new young climber. The big team with 70% tax.. hahahaha... never. And with 18 riders you are at 70% usually. Buy a climber for 3 Mio, sell him for 4 Mio you get.... 45% (youth rule) so 1,8 Mio. The average team with 13-14 riders probably around 50% tax gets 65%, 2,6 Mio, only 400k to the new rider... the even smaller team with 11-12 riders and 40 or so tax gets 75%, 3Mio, enough to buy the replacement. Sell a rider after 25... even worse since for a 4 Mio man you'll only get 1,2 Mio... A big disadvantage, if you want to stay a big team, you have to keep what you bought basically. Plus every rider rides less, in a 12 rider team in a month with 30 races 9 riders per race there are 270 places for 12 riders, 22,5 races per month if they split them, in the 18 man team it's 15. The riders have more problems to "amortize" themselves. It's obvious that it's MUCH more difficult to keep a 18 riders team than to keep a 11-12-13 man team with a low tax rate or to build a 18 riders team (which in fact is very easy, keeping it on the other hand is not) So what advantages do the big teams have?
-They can change the team every day and don't need to look at the regeneration. Well..... right now I have a 13 riders team, had a big team before and.. irrelevant. I actually have a special 13 riders team, with 2 very expensive climbers that almost never race, for at least 20 days a month I have in fact a 11 man team, and I still have no reg problems. The reg argument is mostly bullshit.
- Can have more leaders. True, see my 2 climbers that don't ride much. Could buy a Pavéleader, a 70-80 80TT Leader, a better sprinter, 2 more support riders and be competitive on all terrains. Correct. That is an advantage. But actually the 13 man team can come close to that too... no Buonarroti, no Eiterolloid for Roby, a 95 sprinter for Karl, a 70-80 80 TT for Ivan. and I'm almost as competitive as the 18 man team with 13. Plus unlike the 18 rides team I don't need to pay that much attention to the cost per race, since I have only 13 riders and a lower tax rate with regular changes in the team it's unlikely I'll run into big problems.
Another disadvantage of course is.... you ride a GT or a smaller stage race. 9 riders ride, 9 do nothing. If you have 20 riders, 11 do nothing. A waste.
Plus now it seems we are thinking about changing the standard from 9 for every race to 8. Another disadvantage for the big teams. Then in a smaller race like Tirreno or PN they have 10-12 riders just doing nothing.
Give the BIG teams another advantage. The reason that there are so few is not that it's difficult to get, difficult to keep yes, one of the reasons, but the main reason is: It's just clearly and VERY clearly a much worse team strategy than the old Ticos/Mangahn strategy, smaller team, high turnover, keep the tax down, be flexible. Nothing wrong with that strategy, it's a good one. But why not finally give an advantage to the lovers of big teams? Give them the possibility to ride 2 races if 2 important races are at the same time. Catalunya and E3/Gent, Vuelta and all the italian fall classics etc. etc. The Ticos/MM method will still be the better one, but at least the big teams have a real advantage from their big team. Especially if we go down to 8 riders as a standard.
Oh, and I say BIG teams. Not 2 races for teams... If there are 2 races with 6 riders parallel, no, teams with 12 riders can't ride both. It's for BIG teams, teams with 18 riders or more can do that. If we go down to 8, ok, maybe could live with 16. But not less, even if only 14 riders are needed.
Big teams, huge teams.. 18 riders plus. they have no flexibility, their tax rate too high, smaller teams for example can sell a young climber that doesn't train well at 23/24 and get enough money to buy a new young climber. The big team with 70% tax.. hahahaha... never. And with 18 riders you are at 70% usually. Buy a climber for 3 Mio, sell him for 4 Mio you get.... 45% (youth rule) so 1,8 Mio. The average team with 13-14 riders probably around 50% tax gets 65%, 2,6 Mio, only 400k to the new rider... the even smaller team with 11-12 riders and 40 or so tax gets 75%, 3Mio, enough to buy the replacement. Sell a rider after 25... even worse since for a 4 Mio man you'll only get 1,2 Mio... A big disadvantage, if you want to stay a big team, you have to keep what you bought basically. Plus every rider rides less, in a 12 rider team in a month with 30 races 9 riders per race there are 270 places for 12 riders, 22,5 races per month if they split them, in the 18 man team it's 15. The riders have more problems to "amortize" themselves. It's obvious that it's MUCH more difficult to keep a 18 riders team than to keep a 11-12-13 man team with a low tax rate or to build a 18 riders team (which in fact is very easy, keeping it on the other hand is not) So what advantages do the big teams have?
-They can change the team every day and don't need to look at the regeneration. Well..... right now I have a 13 riders team, had a big team before and.. irrelevant. I actually have a special 13 riders team, with 2 very expensive climbers that almost never race, for at least 20 days a month I have in fact a 11 man team, and I still have no reg problems. The reg argument is mostly bullshit.
- Can have more leaders. True, see my 2 climbers that don't ride much. Could buy a Pavéleader, a 70-80 80TT Leader, a better sprinter, 2 more support riders and be competitive on all terrains. Correct. That is an advantage. But actually the 13 man team can come close to that too... no Buonarroti, no Eiterolloid for Roby, a 95 sprinter for Karl, a 70-80 80 TT for Ivan. and I'm almost as competitive as the 18 man team with 13. Plus unlike the 18 rides team I don't need to pay that much attention to the cost per race, since I have only 13 riders and a lower tax rate with regular changes in the team it's unlikely I'll run into big problems.
Another disadvantage of course is.... you ride a GT or a smaller stage race. 9 riders ride, 9 do nothing. If you have 20 riders, 11 do nothing. A waste.
Plus now it seems we are thinking about changing the standard from 9 for every race to 8. Another disadvantage for the big teams. Then in a smaller race like Tirreno or PN they have 10-12 riders just doing nothing.
Give the BIG teams another advantage. The reason that there are so few is not that it's difficult to get, difficult to keep yes, one of the reasons, but the main reason is: It's just clearly and VERY clearly a much worse team strategy than the old Ticos/Mangahn strategy, smaller team, high turnover, keep the tax down, be flexible. Nothing wrong with that strategy, it's a good one. But why not finally give an advantage to the lovers of big teams? Give them the possibility to ride 2 races if 2 important races are at the same time. Catalunya and E3/Gent, Vuelta and all the italian fall classics etc. etc. The Ticos/MM method will still be the better one, but at least the big teams have a real advantage from their big team. Especially if we go down to 8 riders as a standard.
Oh, and I say BIG teams. Not 2 races for teams... If there are 2 races with 6 riders parallel, no, teams with 12 riders can't ride both. It's for BIG teams, teams with 18 riders or more can do that. If we go down to 8, ok, maybe could live with 16. But not less, even if only 14 riders are needed.