| |
Main
Date: 22 Feb 2007 16:36:19
From: tispectrum
Subject: UCI bans teams from racing Paris-Nice
|
UCI bans teams from racing Paris-Nice
UCI bans teams from racing Paris-Nice
February 22, 2007
AIGLE, Switzerland (AP) -- The international cycling federation
banned all ProTour teams from competing in next month's Paris-Nice race.
The UCI said Thursday it had sent letters to all 20 ProTour
teams reminding them that Paris-Nice is now a national event and under
ProTour rules teams are forbidden from competing in the event scheduled for
ch 11-18.
The UCI and big tour organizers are at odds over UCI's 27-event
ProTour and who can issue licenses for teams to take part in the elite
tours.
The UCI has clashed with organizers of the Tour de France since
setting up the ProTour in 2005. Tour organizer Amaury Sports Organization
was dismayed to pay for the right to host a race that dates back more than
100 years.
Organizers for the three-week French race and the sport's two
other main stage events -- the Giro d'Italia and Spanish Vuelta -- insist
that only they can determine which teams can ride in their races. The UCI
has retaliated by announcing it will file a formal complaint with the
European Commission for anticompetitive practices.
The UCI's latest move comes just two days after president Pat
McQuaid met with ASO chief Patrice Clerc in Lyon in an attempt to resolve
disputes between the two sides. But the meetings were unsuccessful and UCI
then accused Tour de France organizers of attempting to seize control of the
sport.
The Tour, the Giro and the Vuelta held their events separately
from UCI's calendar last year.
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
|
|
| |
Date: 24 Feb 2007 13:38:23
From: Jeff Jones
Subject: Re: UCI bans teams from racing Paris-Nice
|
On Feb 24, 5:42 pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky" <mik...@ix.netcom.com > wrote:
> Jeff: You and I aren't what makes The Tour the race that it is though. It's
> the millions of casual fans watching on TV, the hundreds of sports writers
> forced into covering something they know little about. It's not the people
> who read ProCycling or Cyclingnews.com that make The Tour so grand and
> special. It's dependent upon relatively easy translations of epic battles,
> heroes & villains, things common folk can identify with.
>
Probably, but as we're now seeing, the heroes are going to go where
the exposure is so it's a moot point. I will respond though.
The established heroes are important for the fans, but you still get
plenty of people watching the race go by just because it's a fun thing
to do. How are you going to pick out your heroes in a sprinters stage,
until the finish? Hell, it's even hard on TV. And so often, brand new
heroes are very quickly created by a great ride in a particular race.
Jacky Durand springs to mind.
I reckon if you threw a bunch of unknowns into the Tour de France, at
the end of the three weeks, the fans and public would know and
appreciate who they were. Certainly, the Tour would lose a bit of
shine and fan base if all the heroes were suddenly gone, but the
public wouldn't flock to the Tour of Poland if that's were the big
names were.
> > I think the riders will go back to the situation of not so many years
> > ago, where even if you were division I, you couldn't guarantee your
> > salary.
>
> Which could have a chilling effect on new talent coming into the sport.
> Right now, we're finally seeing cycling emerge as something the common
> person can look at and say hey, that guy's making some decent money, maybe
> there's something to this sport. Maybe I could (profitably) be a bike racer.
> Never mind the reality, of course! But the money being paid to Division 1
> riders adds legitimacy to the sport in the eyes of fans, sports writers and
> even aspiring cyclists.
>
Maybe in the US it does, but I don't know if people in Europe view the
sport's legitimacy by how much the riders get paid. A lot of riders
get into it because it's their dream to get paid to ride a bike.
There's always a possibiity that they'll get paid a lot, but I reckon
a bigger motivator for them is to race something like the Tour de
France.
I think this because it's a buyers ket out there. Lots of riders,
not many spots on teams, and it's a 'poor' sport because fans can
watch for free. I know of div. I riders who were getting paid chicken
feed because they were desperate to keep racing at that level and do
some nice races, and keep the pro lifestyle. They could have quit and
got a much better paying job, but chose not to.
>
> So you don't buy into the idea that the heaviest doping in the peloton is
> amongst the ginal players (weaker domestiques)? Of which there would be
> many more? Or would it be the case that the type of person who fit that
> category might feel that had a chance without doping? In the past, such
> riders could be reasonably certain they'd be unlikely to have to pass
> anything but the most random of random drug tests. Nobody paid attention to
> them. That could change.
>
I don't buy into that idea at all. I think doping goes on at all
levels, and the better paid riders can afford better programs. Look at
how many world and grand tour champions have been pinged for doping in
the last five years.
Jeff
|
| | |
Date: 25 Feb 2007 12:17:34
From: Donald Munro
Subject: Re: UCI bans teams from racing Paris-Nice
|
Jeff Jones wrote:
> And so often, brand newheroes are very quickly created by a great ride
> in a particular race. Jacky Durand springs to mind.
Or even Magilla's favourite, Voeckler.
> I think this because it's a buyers ket out there. Lots of riders, not
> many spots on teams, and it's a 'poor' sport because fans can watch for
> free. I know of div. I riders who were getting paid chicken feed because
> they were desperate to keep racing at that level and do some nice races,
> and keep the pro lifestyle. They could have quit and got a much better
> paying job, but chose not to.
And the Pro-Tour makes makes it even more of a buyers ket as it
concentrates entries for the major races with even fewer teams.
|
| | | |
Date: 25 Feb 2007 11:35:16
From: Davey Crockett
Subject: Re: UCI bans teams from racing Paris-Nice
|
* Donald Munro <fat-dumbass@hotmail.com > a écrit
> Jeff Jones wrote:
>> And so often, brand newheroes are very quickly created by a great ride
>> in a particular race. Jacky Durand springs to mind.
>
> Or even Magilla's favourite, Voeckler.
>
>> I think this because it's a buyers ket out there. Lots of riders, not
>> many spots on teams, and it's a 'poor' sport because fans can watch for
>> free. I know of div. I riders who were getting paid chicken feed because
>> they were desperate to keep racing at that level and do some nice races,
>> and keep the pro lifestyle. They could have quit and got a much better
>> paying job, but chose not to.
>
> And the Pro-Tour makes makes it even more of a buyers ket as it
> concentrates entries for the major races with even fewer teams.
http://www.613.org/cantor/kadish-a.ram
That's Davey saying Kaddish for McBoggy and his Pro Tour ;)
--
Le vent à Dos
Davey Crockett [No 4Q to reply]
|
| |
Date: 24 Feb 2007 19:17:51
From: MJ Ray
Subject: Re: UCI bans teams from racing Paris-Nice
|
"ilan" <ilanpi@yahoo.com > wrote:
> I dislike how the UCI operates, e.g., its arbitrary cancellation of
> the Olympic kilometer ITT,
> but it is better than ASO, because it has a minimal level of
> democratic authority, while
> ASO is just a business, and if it wins in this case, it will have no
> one to answer to. [...]
While I agree in principle, what the devil is going on with UCI? Who
is running that Union and in whose interests?
If ASO wins this one, will we see a Professional Cyclists' Union form?
Puzzled
--
MJ Ray - see/vidu http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html
Webmaster/web developer, statistician, sysadmin, trainer, koha dev,
GNU/Linux, debian, gobolinux, gnustep, online shops, mailing lists.
Near Weston-super-e, Somerset, England. http://www.ttllp.co.uk/
|
| |
Date: 24 Feb 2007 00:21:04
From: Jeff Jones
Subject: Re: UCI bans teams from racing Paris-Nice
|
On Feb 24, 6:36 am, "Mike Jacoubowsky" <mik...@ix.netcom.com > wrote:
> I don't think spectator's give a rat's tail about average racing speed, but
> they *do* care about seeing their favorites. And their favorites wouldn't be
> there. It would take a very long time for things to get sorted out... for
> both the riders and the fans to figure out what was going on, who the real
> players were.
>
Yes, it would have an impact this year. But not all the ProTour teams
are going to side with the UCI, so you'd still get enough known knowns
racing the big races.
> Look at last year's TdF. The loss of *some* major players at the last moment
> resulted in a race that took quite some time to really take shape. Some
> might think it was more exciting because you didn't know who was going to
> finally emerge from the field and take the brass ring, but without a
> benchk, a known champion to compare, it was more confusing than many
> would like. No clear story to follow. At least not until the final week.
>
I see where you're coming from, but I quite enjoyed last year's Tour,
right the way through. I just like watching good quality racing. It
can be the stars doing it, but it can also be unknowns.
> Ultimately the UCI would be devastated, no question, as riders leave in
> droves to be able to ride the classics and grand tours controlled by the ASO
> and relevant others. The effect on sponsorship would be devastating as well,
> and, at least in the short run, riders would see a much-smaller pool of $$$
> available for their pay.
>
I think the riders will go back to the situation of not so many years
ago, where even if you were division I, you couldn't guarantee your
salary.
> One other ironic note. Grand Tour riders aren't a dime a dozen. There are
> limited numbers of riders capable of riding a three week tour, and the vast
> majority of such riders are on ProTour teams. Thus you have a field of
> riders where most are probably ill-prepared for the rigors of that much
> continuous racing, which might result in *huge* gaps between the few that
> are up to the task and the rest of the field. OR- here's the ironic part- it
> could lead to much greater temptation to engage in doping, er, I mean,
> things that aid in recovery. If there's any truth at all to the argument
> that the Grand Tours are too long, too tough, and force lesser riders to
> dope, this would assuredly put that to the test.
>
A lot of pros could ride a three week tour totally clean. It's the
actual racing component that encourages doping. I don't think things
would change on that front with the quality of the field.
Jeff
|
| | |
Date: 24 Feb 2007 17:42:09
From: Mike Jacoubowsky
Subject: Re: UCI bans teams from racing Paris-Nice
|
>> Look at last year's TdF. The loss of *some* major players at the last
>> moment
>> resulted in a race that took quite some time to really take shape. Some
>> might think it was more exciting because you didn't know who was going to
>> finally emerge from the field and take the brass ring, but without a
>> benchk, a known champion to compare, it was more confusing than many
>> would like. No clear story to follow. At least not until the final week.
>>
> I see where you're coming from, but I quite enjoyed last year's Tour,
> right the way through. I just like watching good quality racing. It
> can be the stars doing it, but it can also be unknowns.
Jeff: You and I aren't what makes The Tour the race that it is though. It's
the millions of casual fans watching on TV, the hundreds of sports writers
forced into covering something they know little about. It's not the people
who read ProCycling or Cyclingnews.com that make The Tour so grand and
special. It's dependent upon relatively easy translations of epic battles,
heroes & villains, things common folk can identify with.
>> Ultimately the UCI would be devastated, no question, as riders leave in
>> droves to be able to ride the classics and grand tours controlled by the
>> ASO
>> and relevant others. The effect on sponsorship would be devastating as
>> well,
>> and, at least in the short run, riders would see a much-smaller pool of
>> $$$
>> available for their pay.
>>
> I think the riders will go back to the situation of not so many years
> ago, where even if you were division I, you couldn't guarantee your
> salary.
Which could have a chilling effect on new talent coming into the sport.
Right now, we're finally seeing cycling emerge as something the common
person can look at and say hey, that guy's making some decent money, maybe
there's something to this sport. Maybe I could (profitably) be a bike racer.
Never mind the reality, of course! But the money being paid to Division 1
riders adds legitimacy to the sport in the eyes of fans, sports writers and
even aspiring cyclists.
>> One other ironic note. Grand Tour riders aren't a dime a dozen. There are
>> limited numbers of riders capable of riding a three week tour, and the
>> vast
>> majority of such riders are on ProTour teams. Thus you have a field of
>> riders where most are probably ill-prepared for the rigors of that much
>> continuous racing, which might result in *huge* gaps between the few that
>> are up to the task and the rest of the field. OR- here's the ironic part-
>> it
>> could lead to much greater temptation to engage in doping, er, I mean,
>> things that aid in recovery. If there's any truth at all to the argument
>> that the Grand Tours are too long, too tough, and force lesser riders to
>> dope, this would assuredly put that to the test.
>>
> A lot of pros could ride a three week tour totally clean. It's the
> actual racing component that encourages doping. I don't think things
> would change on that front with the quality of the field.
So you don't buy into the idea that the heaviest doping in the peloton is
amongst the ginal players (weaker domestiques)? Of which there would be
many more? Or would it be the case that the type of person who fit that
category might feel that had a chance without doping? In the past, such
riders could be reasonably certain they'd be unlikely to have to pass
anything but the most random of random drug tests. Nobody paid attention to
them. That could change.
--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com
|
| |
Date: 23 Feb 2007 18:21:01
From: SLAVE of THE STATE
Subject: Re: UCI bans teams from racing Paris-Nice
|
On Feb 23, 10:37 am, Bob Schwartz <bob.schwa...@REMOVEsbcglobal.net >
wrote:
> benjo maso wrote:
> > They could invite women riders. That was the trick the organizers of the
> > Giro did in 1924 when all the important men's teams refused to participate.
> > It worked: there was a lot of extra publicity ...
>
> You must be channeling Sierraman.
He's taking inventory, stocking ladies for a rainy day.
|
| |
Date: 23 Feb 2007 18:16:14
From: ilan
Subject: Re: UCI bans teams from racing Paris-Nice
|
On Feb 22, 10:36 pm, "tispectrum" <tispect...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> UCI bans teams from racing Paris-Nice
>
> UCI bans teams from racing Paris-Nice
>
> February 22, 2007
>
> AIGLE, Switzerland (AP) -- The international cycling federation
> banned all ProTour teams from competing in next month's Paris-Nice race.
>
> The UCI said Thursday it had sent letters to all 20 ProTour
> teams reminding them that Paris-Nice is now a national event and under
> ProTour rules teams are forbidden from competing in the event scheduled for
> ch 11-18.
>
> The UCI and big tour organizers are at odds over UCI's 27-event
> ProTour and who can issue licenses for teams to take part in the elite
> tours.
>
> The UCI has clashed with organizers of the Tour de France since
> setting up the ProTour in 2005. Tour organizer Amaury Sports Organization
> was dismayed to pay for the right to host a race that dates back more than
> 100 years.
>
> Organizers for the three-week French race and the sport's two
> other main stage events -- the Giro d'Italia and Spanish Vuelta -- insist
> that only they can determine which teams can ride in their races. The UCI
> has retaliated by announcing it will file a formal complaint with the
> European Commission for anticompetitive practices.
>
> The UCI's latest move comes just two days after president Pat
> McQuaid met with ASO chief Patrice Clerc in Lyon in an attempt to resolve
> disputes between the two sides. But the meetings were unsuccessful and UCI
> then accused Tour de France organizers of attempting to seize control of the
> sport.
>
> The Tour, the Giro and the Vuelta held their events separately
> from UCI's calendar last year.
>
> ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----http://www.newsfeeds.comThe #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
> ---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
You might also expect some amazingly fast climbing since the UCI 6.8
kg bicycle weight limit will no longer be in effect,
and amazingly fast time trials since the TT bikes will no longer be
subject to the purposefully antiquated UCI limitations.
-ilan
|
| |
Date: 23 Feb 2007 16:28:02
From: ilan
Subject: Re: UCI bans teams from racing Paris-Nice
|
On Feb 24, 12:41 am, John Forrest Tomlinson <usenetrem...@jt10000.com >
wrote:
> On 23 Feb 2007 05:27:05 -0800, "ilan" <ila...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >If the Pro Tour teams do boycott, maybe ASO will invite the Iranian
> >and Doha teams that they invited to their Tour of Qatar.
>
> I think I can get enough guys from my team of masters fatties to go.
> Some are in pretty good shape right now.
> --
> JT
> ****************************
> Remove "remove" to reply
> Visithttp://www.jt10000.com
> ****************************
No way, you're American, which, by ASO standards, means you are all
doped. They've had enough with
the last 8 editions being illegitimate due to American dopers. Add to
that the fact that the current mess
is in large part due to the American obsession with due process, why
they even convinced Basso that
he didn't have to prove his innocence and they are worried that
Ullrich will figure this out as well.
Come to think of it, maybe this ASO caused this formal rift with the
UCI in order to exclude Basso and
Ullrich (if he has a team by then) from the Tour de France. That is,
with the Tour out of the UCI, and ASO
having its own entrance criteria, there will be nothing to stop them
from barring these riders.
-ilan
-ilan
|
| | |
Date: 24 Feb 2007 00:39:03
From: Tom Kunich
Subject: Re: UCI bans teams from racing Paris-Nice
|
"ilan" <ilanpi@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1172276882.824731.137660@j27g2000cwj.googlegroups.com...
>
> No way, you're American, which, by ASO standards, means you are all
> doped. They've had enough with
> the last 8 editions being illegitimate due to American dopers. Add to
> that the fact that the current mess
> is in large part due to the American obsession with due process, why
> they even convinced Basso that
> he didn't have to prove his innocence and they are worried that
> Ullrich will figure this out as well.
>
> Come to think of it, maybe this ASO caused this formal rift with the
> UCI in order to exclude Basso and
> Ullrich (if he has a team by then) from the Tour de France. That is,
> with the Tour out of the UCI, and ASO
> having its own entrance criteria, there will be nothing to stop them
> from barring these riders.
It would be pretty funny - in all of the record books there would be
asterisks next to 2007 results.*
* Doesn't reflect real competition because ASO was tired of Americans,
Spaniards, Germans and Italians winning and barred them from competition.
Except for the Germans who kowtowed dramatically and kissed ASO's butt.
|
| |
Date: 23 Feb 2007 16:17:37
From: ilan
Subject: Re: UCI bans teams from racing Paris-Nice
|
On Feb 24, 12:41 am, John Forrest Tomlinson <usenetrem...@jt10000.com >
wrote:
> On 23 Feb 2007 05:27:05 -0800, "ilan" <ila...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >If the Pro Tour teams do boycott, maybe ASO will invite the Iranian
> >and Doha teams that they invited to their Tour of Qatar.
>
> I think I can get enough guys from my team of masters fatties to go.
> Some are in pretty good shape right now.
> --
> JT
> ****************************
> Remove "remove" to reply
> Visithttp://www.jt10000.com
> ****************************
|
| |
Date: 23 Feb 2007 11:49:33
From: Bill C
Subject: Re: UCI bans teams from racing Paris-Nice
|
On Feb 23, 2:05 pm, "Jeff Jones" <drjone...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Feb 23, 5:28 pm, "ilan" <ila...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > I dislike how the UCI operates, e.g., its arbitrary cancellation of
> > the Olympic kilometer ITT,
> > but it is better than ASO, because it has a minimal level of
> > democratic authority, while
> > ASO is just a business, and if it wins in this case, it will have no
> > one to answer to.
>
> I agree. It's not good, whichever way you look at it. Each side has
> some big problems, and if a solution isn't reached (I think some sort
> of compromise will happen before P-N, but it will favour ASO) then an
> enormous mess will result. An even bigger mess than the existing one.
>
> Jeff
I think it's going to have to crash hard, and the UCI realise that
they can't dictate from on high. When that turmoil is happening,
hopefully the riders realise that NONE of this happens without them
and form a real union and become full partners in the sport.
Bill C
|
| |
Date: 23 Feb 2007 11:45:46
From: Bill C
Subject: Re: UCI bans teams from racing Paris-Nice
|
On Feb 23, 8:38 am, "Jeff Jones" <drjone...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Feb 23, 1:27 pm, "ilan" <ila...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > If the Pro Tour teams do boycott, maybe ASO will invite the Iranian
> > and Doha teams that they invited to their Tour of Qatar.
>
> They could invite anyone. Of course, they want the big teams and
> riders, but smaller non-ProTour teams would jump at the chance to race
> the Tour and it would still be quite watchable, IMO. Who cares what
> the average speed is?
>
> It might take a year before all the unknown riders become knowns, but
> it won't affect the Tour as badly as it will affect the UCI.
>
> Jeff
Agreed Jeff.
I'd really savor it for that matter. It would be wide open racing,
and a big shitburger for the UCI. Makes me happy.
Bill C
|
| |
Date: 23 Feb 2007 11:05:51
From: Jeff Jones
Subject: Re: UCI bans teams from racing Paris-Nice
|
On Feb 23, 5:28 pm, "ilan" <ila...@yahoo.com > wrote:
>
> I dislike how the UCI operates, e.g., its arbitrary cancellation of
> the Olympic kilometer ITT,
> but it is better than ASO, because it has a minimal level of
> democratic authority, while
> ASO is just a business, and if it wins in this case, it will have no
> one to answer to.
I agree. It's not good, whichever way you look at it. Each side has
some big problems, and if a solution isn't reached (I think some sort
of compromise will happen before P-N, but it will favour ASO) then an
enormous mess will result. An even bigger mess than the existing one.
Jeff
|
| |
Date: 23 Feb 2007 09:28:30
From: ilan
Subject: Re: UCI bans teams from racing Paris-Nice
|
On Feb 23, 3:30 pm, "Jeff Jones" <drjone...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Feb 23, 1:56 pm, Dan Gregory
>
> <dangreg...@brakes.palaver.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> > Jeff Jones wrote:
> > > They could invite anyone. Of course, they want the big teams and
> > > riders, but smaller non-ProTour teams would jump at the chance to race
> > > the Tour and it would still be quite watchable, IMO.
>
> > Teams just like Unibet were trying until this year?
> > They don't want Jeremy to win stages :-((
>
> I think Unibet was a convenient political playing piece for ASO,
> because of the legal situation in France. That helped bring all this
> to a head. But teams and sponsors like Tinkoff will quite happily
> benefit. And how long would the big name riders stay with the UCI's
> race calendar if they were deprived of the chance of riding the Tour?
> I would estimate as long as their existing contracts ran for, if that.
> The smaller teams wouldn't remain smaller for very long, and the
> sponsorship would follow where the media exposure is.
>
> ASO et al seem to be holding most of the cards, but even if they win,
> it will end up in an awful mess. The UCI has itself to blame for this
> by not consulting and getting total agreement from the organisers
> right at the start [insert Chung quote here].
>
> Jeff
I dislike how the UCI operates, e.g., its arbitrary cancellation of
the Olympic kilometer ITT,
but it is better than ASO, because it has a minimal level of
democratic authority, while
ASO is just a business, and if it wins in this case, it will have no
one to answer to. Already,
ASO is trying to decide legal issues by saying that Pereiro won the
2006 Tour (and
implying that Armstrong didn't deserve any of his victories because of
doping), so giving
ASO a free rein will be a big step backwards to the days of tyrant
organisers and slave athletes (e.g.,
Eddy Merckx was not able to make enough money to retire, which is why
he went into the bicycle
frame business, compare this with his son Axel who has probably earned
more money from racing than his father ever
did, even taking inflation into account).
I believe that the current mess cycling is in, that is, Landis,
Operation Puerto leading nowhere, ASO vs. UCI, is
due to an increasing awareness of legal rights, which leads to serious
challenges to the long tradition of
slave athletes and tyrant organisers. Hopefully, this will result in
better conditions for the riders, which is something that
all fans support. One thing is clear, ASO and the other Tour
organisers are definitely not on the
side of the riders, so they are most in the wrong.
-ilan
|
| |
Date: 23 Feb 2007 06:30:11
From: Jeff Jones
Subject: Re: UCI bans teams from racing Paris-Nice
|
On Feb 23, 1:56 pm, Dan Gregory
<dangreg...@brakes.palaver.freeserve.co.uk > wrote:
> Jeff Jones wrote:
> > They could invite anyone. Of course, they want the big teams and
> > riders, but smaller non-ProTour teams would jump at the chance to race
> > the Tour and it would still be quite watchable, IMO.
>
> Teams just like Unibet were trying until this year?
> They don't want Jeremy to win stages :-((
I think Unibet was a convenient political playing piece for ASO,
because of the legal situation in France. That helped bring all this
to a head. But teams and sponsors like Tinkoff will quite happily
benefit. And how long would the big name riders stay with the UCI's
race calendar if they were deprived of the chance of riding the Tour?
I would estimate as long as their existing contracts ran for, if that.
The smaller teams wouldn't remain smaller for very long, and the
sponsorship would follow where the media exposure is.
ASO et al seem to be holding most of the cards, but even if they win,
it will end up in an awful mess. The UCI has itself to blame for this
by not consulting and getting total agreement from the organisers
right at the start [insert Chung quote here].
Jeff
|
| | |
Date: 23 Feb 2007 16:46:31
From: Robert Chung
Subject: Re: UCI bans teams from racing Paris-Nice
|
Jeff Jones wrote:
> ASO et al seem to be holding most of the cards, but even if they win,
> it will end up in an awful mess. The UCI has itself to blame for this
> by not consulting and getting total agreement from the organisers
> right at the start [insert Chung quote here].
"This is not a well thought-out plan."
|
| | | |
Date: 24 Feb 2007 08:41:01
From: Ryan Cousineau
Subject: Re: UCI bans teams from racing Paris-Nice
|
In article <548gipF1ug3s2U1@mid.individual.net >,
"Robert Chung" <me@address.invalid > wrote:
> Jeff Jones wrote:
>
> > ASO et al seem to be holding most of the cards, but even if they win,
> > it will end up in an awful mess. The UCI has itself to blame for this
> > by not consulting and getting total agreement from the organisers
> > right at the start [insert Chung quote here].
He has quotes as well as charts?
> "This is not a well thought-out plan."
--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@sfu.ca http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos
|
| | | | |
Date: 24 Feb 2007 11:34:33
From: Donald Munro
Subject: Re: UCI bans teams from racing Paris-Nice
|
>> Jeff Jones wrote:
>> > [insert Chung quote here].
Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> He has quotes as well as charts?
He's a statistical Benjamin Franklin.
|
| |
Date: 23 Feb 2007 05:38:01
From: Jeff Jones
Subject: Re: UCI bans teams from racing Paris-Nice
|
On Feb 23, 1:27 pm, "ilan" <ila...@yahoo.com > wrote:
>
> If the Pro Tour teams do boycott, maybe ASO will invite the Iranian
> and Doha teams that they invited to their Tour of Qatar.
>
They could invite anyone. Of course, they want the big teams and
riders, but smaller non-ProTour teams would jump at the chance to race
the Tour and it would still be quite watchable, IMO. Who cares what
the average speed is?
It might take a year before all the unknown riders become knowns, but
it won't affect the Tour as badly as it will affect the UCI.
Jeff
|
| | |
Date: 24 Feb 2007 06:36:17
From: Mike Jacoubowsky
Subject: Re: UCI bans teams from racing Paris-Nice
|
>> If the Pro Tour teams do boycott, maybe ASO will invite the Iranian
>> and Doha teams that they invited to their Tour of Qatar.
>>
> They could invite anyone. Of course, they want the big teams and
> riders, but smaller non-ProTour teams would jump at the chance to race
> the Tour and it would still be quite watchable, IMO. Who cares what
> the average speed is?
I don't think spectator's give a rat's tail about average racing speed, but
they *do* care about seeing their favorites. And their favorites wouldn't be
there. It would take a very long time for things to get sorted out... for
both the riders and the fans to figure out what was going on, who the real
players were.
Look at last year's TdF. The loss of *some* major players at the last moment
resulted in a race that took quite some time to really take shape. Some
might think it was more exciting because you didn't know who was going to
finally emerge from the field and take the brass ring, but without a
benchk, a known champion to compare, it was more confusing than many
would like. No clear story to follow. At least not until the final week.
> It might take a year before all the unknown riders become knowns, but
> it won't affect the Tour as badly as it will affect the UCI.
Ultimately the UCI would be devastated, no question, as riders leave in
droves to be able to ride the classics and grand tours controlled by the ASO
and relevant others. The effect on sponsorship would be devastating as well,
and, at least in the short run, riders would see a much-smaller pool of $$$
available for their pay.
One other ironic note. Grand Tour riders aren't a dime a dozen. There are
limited numbers of riders capable of riding a three week tour, and the vast
majority of such riders are on ProTour teams. Thus you have a field of
riders where most are probably ill-prepared for the rigors of that much
continuous racing, which might result in *huge* gaps between the few that
are up to the task and the rest of the field. OR- here's the ironic part- it
could lead to much greater temptation to engage in doping, er, I mean,
things that aid in recovery. If there's any truth at all to the argument
that the Grand Tours are too long, too tough, and force lesser riders to
dope, this would assuredly put that to the test.
--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com
|
| | |
Date: 23 Feb 2007 16:00:03
From: Davey Crockett
Subject: Re: UCI bans teams from racing Paris-Nice
|
"Jeff Jones" <drjones99@gmail.com > writes:
> On Feb 23, 1:27 pm, "ilan" <ila...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> If the Pro Tour teams do boycott, maybe ASO will invite the Iranian
>> and Doha teams that they invited to their Tour of Qatar.
>>
> They could invite anyone. Of course, they want the big teams and
> riders, but smaller non-ProTour teams would jump at the chance to race
> the Tour and it would still be quite watchable, IMO. Who cares what
> the average speed is?
>
> It might take a year before all the unknown riders become knowns, but
> it won't affect the Tour as badly as it will affect the UCI.
Exactly right
And the Elites won't sit idly by and watch the Wannabees lining up for
the Tour; they'll be clamouring for a spot on the startline, with or
without McBoggy.
The UCI needs the Organizers and the Riders. Neither the Riders nor
the Organizers need the UCI
I was gonna expound at length on the UCI-Pro Tour theme, but
unfortunately am far too busy these days with too many irons in the
fire.
But all in all, the riders, except as a collateral prime, are not
interested in winning the Pro Tour
However they are terribly interested in Winning 'Pro Tour' (sic) races
And so if it comes to a real pissing match, McBoggy's gonna get
longcocked and he'll be heading back to the Emerald Isle scratching
his head and wondering what kind of idiot he was to let Verbruggen rig
the election for him on his promise to nurture Verbruggen's
moribund bastard.
Ponder the old adage, McBoggy: "A fool and his Heritage are soon
Parted"
--
Le vent à Dos
Davey Crockett [No 4Q to reply]
The news CNN doesn't Show
http://azurservers.com:8080
|
| | |
Date: 23 Feb 2007 15:27:56
From: benjo maso
Subject: Re: UCI bans teams from racing Paris-Nice
|
"Jeff Jones" <drjones99@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:1172237880.970011.292520@q2g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> On Feb 23, 1:27 pm, "ilan" <ila...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> If the Pro Tour teams do boycott, maybe ASO will invite the Iranian
>> and Doha teams that they invited to their Tour of Qatar.
>>
> They could invite anyone. Of course, they want the big teams and
> riders, but smaller non-ProTour teams would jump at the chance to race
> the Tour and it would still be quite watchable, IMO. Who cares what
> the average speed is?
>
> It might take a year before all the unknown riders become knowns, but
> it won't affect the Tour as badly as it will affect the UCI.
They could invite women riders. That was the trick the organizers of the
Giro did in 1924 when all the important men's teams refused to participate.
It worked: there was a lot of extra publicity ...
Benjo
|
| | | |
Date: 23 Feb 2007 18:37:19
From: Bob Schwartz
Subject: Re: UCI bans teams from racing Paris-Nice
|
benjo maso wrote:
> They could invite women riders. That was the trick the organizers of the
> Giro did in 1924 when all the important men's teams refused to participate.
> It worked: there was a lot of extra publicity ...
You must be channeling Sierraman.
Bob Schwartz
|
| | |
Date: 23 Feb 2007 13:56:03
From: Dan Gregory
Subject: Re: UCI bans teams from racing Paris-Nice
|
Jeff Jones wrote:
> They could invite anyone. Of course, they want the big teams and
> riders, but smaller non-ProTour teams would jump at the chance to race
> the Tour and it would still be quite watchable, IMO.
Teams just like Unibet were trying until this year?
They don't want Jeremy to win stages :-((
|
| |
Date: 23 Feb 2007 05:27:05
From: ilan
Subject: Re: UCI bans teams from racing Paris-Nice
|
On Feb 22, 10:36 pm, "tispectrum" <tispect...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> UCI bans teams from racing Paris-Nice
>
> UCI bans teams from racing Paris-Nice
>
> February 22, 2007
>
> AIGLE, Switzerland (AP) -- The international cycling federation
> banned all ProTour teams from competing in next month's Paris-Nice race.
>
> The UCI said Thursday it had sent letters to all 20 ProTour
> teams reminding them that Paris-Nice is now a national event and under
> ProTour rules teams are forbidden from competing in the event scheduled for
> ch 11-18.
>
> The UCI and big tour organizers are at odds over UCI's 27-event
> ProTour and who can issue licenses for teams to take part in the elite
> tours.
>
> The UCI has clashed with organizers of the Tour de France since
> setting up the ProTour in 2005. Tour organizer Amaury Sports Organization
> was dismayed to pay for the right to host a race that dates back more than
> 100 years.
>
> Organizers for the three-week French race and the sport's two
> other main stage events -- the Giro d'Italia and Spanish Vuelta -- insist
> that only they can determine which teams can ride in their races. The UCI
> has retaliated by announcing it will file a formal complaint with the
> European Commission for anticompetitive practices.
>
> The UCI's latest move comes just two days after president Pat
> McQuaid met with ASO chief Patrice Clerc in Lyon in an attempt to resolve
> disputes between the two sides. But the meetings were unsuccessful and UCI
> then accused Tour de France organizers of attempting to seize control of the
> sport.
>
> The Tour, the Giro and the Vuelta held their events separately
> from UCI's calendar last year.
>
> ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----http://www.newsfeeds.comThe #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
> ---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
If the Pro Tour teams do boycott, maybe ASO will invite the Iranian
and Doha teams that they invited to their Tour of Qatar.
-ilan
|
| | |
Date: 23 Feb 2007 18:41:05
From: John Forrest Tomlinson
Subject: Re: UCI bans teams from racing Paris-Nice
|
On 23 Feb 2007 05:27:05 -0800, "ilan" <ilanpi@yahoo.com > wrote:
>If the Pro Tour teams do boycott, maybe ASO will invite the Iranian
>and Doha teams that they invited to their Tour of Qatar.
I think I can get enough guys from my team of masters fatties to go.
Some are in pretty good shape right now.
--
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************
|
| |
Date: 23 Feb 2007 08:10:18
From: Davey Crockett
Subject: Re: UCI bans teams from racing Paris-Nice
|
"tispectrum" <tispectrum@hotmail.com > writes:
> AIGLE, Switzerland (AP) -- The international cycling federation
> banned all ProTour teams from competing in next month's Paris-Nice race.
>
P-N will go ahead. Listen to Uncle Davey.
But this may be the end of the UCI and their dictatorial
commandments.
But it might even be not the end, but the beginning of the end, of
Cycling as a major international sport
The Moving Finger has been Writing for some time now already
Then McBoggy can hike back off to Galway or Mayo or wherever he's from
and cut peat or shovel shit which is probably his former means of
livlihood, happy with his spot in the History Books as having been the
man who Fucked bike racing.
--
Le vent à Dos
Davey Crockett [No 4Q to reply]
The News that CNN doesn't show
http://azurservers.com:8080
|
| | |
Date: 23 Feb 2007 16:27:01
From: Tom Kunich
Subject: Re: UCI bans teams from racing Paris-Nice
|
"Davey Crockett" <daveycrockett4Q@azurservers.com > wrote in message
news:87hctde4dh.fsf@azurservers.com...
>
> P-N will go ahead. Listen to Uncle Davey.
>
> But this may be the end of the UCI and their dictatorial
> commandments.
>
> But it might even be not the end, but the beginning of the end, of
> Cycling as a major international sport
If I were you Davey I wouldn't bet any money on this. What I expect to
happen is that the promoters will force the present moronic UCI
administration out.
Just look at the mess - SURE we want control on drugs. And cycling has done
more than other sports up front. But what the blithering idiots at the UCI
are doing is destroying cycling from the inside.
Explain how anyone could justify the treatment of the riders under Operation
Puerto. Apparently under the UCI all it takes to disqualify a rider is a
rumor. And the release of the information on Floyd before he was even made
aware of it himself! That's so far out of whack that the very act should
have disqualified the evidence since everything seems to be an open book
that can be tampered with by any number of people.
Pound should have been fired the very first time he opened his mouth
inappropriately.
There is going to be professional bicycle racing so it is the management of
it that is in question and little else.
|
| | | |
Date: 23 Feb 2007 22:23:40
From: Davey Crockett
Subject: Re: UCI bans teams from racing Paris-Nice
|
"Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com > writes:
> If I were you Davey I wouldn't bet any money on this. What I expect to
> happen is that the promoters will force the present moronic UCI
> administration out.
Force them out? I looked at that option, but whilst it is
theoretically possible, in practice it's next best thing to
impossible.
I ranted before on it. Perhaps you remember the post? But the
procedure is so cumbersome as to be almost impossible given that you
need sufficient votes from the delegates
I analysed the delegates by region and decided that even should you be
able to get a motion to impeach McBoggy on the table, you wouldn't get
enough votes to succeed.
Like the Québecer said; Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité == SEPARATION
Start a new Federation - Sure it wouldn't have IOC recognition, but
the Olympic Follies only come around once every four years, and
rememeber, Dick Pound doesn't love the UCI either, so Olympic
recognition for a new governing body might even be a possibility in
the near term too
Hmmm; Yes, if I built a castle, fixed it up real good, looked after it
over the years, made it into a world famous place, a credit to the
nation, I sure as Hell wouldn't let some Jumped Up Nobody from the Bogs
of Wherever tell me who I could invite for Dinner.........
--
Le vent à Dos
Davey Crockett [No 4Q to reply]
|
| | | | |
Date: 23 Feb 2007 21:57:03
From: Tom Kunich
Subject: Re: UCI bans teams from racing Paris-Nice
|
"Davey Crockett" <daveycrockett4Q@azurservers.com > wrote in message
news:87r6sgeffn.fsf@azurservers.com...
> "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> writes:
>
>> If I were you Davey I wouldn't bet any money on this. What I expect to
>> happen is that the promoters will force the present moronic UCI
>> administration out.
>
> Hmmm; Yes, if I built a castle, fixed it up real good, looked after it
> over the years, made it into a world famous place, a credit to the
> nation, I sure as Hell wouldn't let some Jumped Up Nobody from the Bogs
> of Wherever tell me who I could invite for Dinner.........
I think that we're in agreement. The question is - will the UCI change or
will they go down?
|
| |
Date: 22 Feb 2007 14:27:17
From: ilan
Subject: Re: UCI bans teams from racing Paris-Nice
|
tispectrum wrote:
>
> The UCI said Thursday it had sent letters to all 20 ProTour
> teams reminding them that Paris-Nice is now a national event and under
> ProTour rules teams are forbidden from competing in the event scheduled for
> ch 11-18.
That proves that the UCI is incompetent: only 19 letters were
required.
-ilan
|
| | |
Date: 23 Feb 2007 08:49:45
From: Donald Munro
Subject: Re: UCI bans teams from racing Paris-Nice
|
tispectrum wrote:
>> The UCI said Thursday it had sent letters to all 20 ProTour
>> teams reminding them that Paris-Nice is now a national event and under
>> ProTour rules teams are forbidden from competing in the event scheduled for
>> ch 11-18.
ilan wrote:
> That proves that the UCI is incompetent: only 19 letters were
> required.
Apart from which, they haven't exactly been enforcing that ban at some
continental races where continental teams have been complaining that the
number of pro-tour teams has exceeded the number allowed.
|
| | |
Date: 22 Feb 2007 21:33:50
From: Fred Fredburger
Subject: Re: UCI bans teams from racing Paris-Nice
|
ilan wrote:
> tispectrum wrote:
>> The UCI said Thursday it had sent letters to all 20 ProTour
>> teams reminding them that Paris-Nice is now a national event and under
>> ProTour rules teams are forbidden from competing in the event scheduled for
>> ch 11-18.
>
> That proves that the UCI is incompetent: only 19 letters were
> required.
>
Maybe it proves that they strive to exceed your expectations.
|
|
