ProTour Team Competition

Current standings after P-N, T-A, and M-SR:

Teams Pts
1 Discovery Channel Pro Cycling Team 52
2 Phonak Hearing Systems 49
3 Gerolsteiner 43

DiabloScott said:

What can the UCI ProTour do to make the team competition more meaningful?

Currently the ranking gets decided like this (copied from UCIPROTOUR.com

[FONT=Courier New]Team ranking

At the end of one-day races, points are awarded to the first 3 riders from each team. These points determine the team’s ranking in the race, which consequently determines the final number of points obtained by the team (see articles 2.10.004-2.10.007 of the UCI Regulations).

Teams may also earn points according to their position in the final classification of stage races (according to the format established in 2005). [/FONT]

So the competition is weighted against teams that (in any particular race) sacrifice some riders in support of a designated winner, and rewards teams that concentrate on multiple riders with high placings. This is very similar to the way the team competitions are decided for most stage races.

What exactly SHOULD the Team Competition be about and what algorithm should be used to decide it?

The eternal question, DS.

I think a midway has to be reached where a team gets rewarded in equal measure - by both providing the winner andby having highly placed finishers simultaneously.

What is there at present isn't perfect under ProTour rules but it is a start.

Under Formula1 rules, teams and drivers get compensated for both individual placing and team placing.

My quess is that the points for individual placings, should be aggregated in to the team points competition.

limerickman said:

The eternal question, DS.

I think a midway has to be reached where a team gets rewarded in equal measure - by both providing the winner andby having highly placed finishers simultaneously.

What is there at present isn't perfect under ProTour rules but it is a start.

Under Formula1 rules, teams and drivers get compensated for both individual placing and team placing.

My quess is that the points for individual placings, should be aggregated in to the team points competition.

You're trying to come up with the algorithm before you've decided what you really want to figure out. What should the competition BE ABOUT? I think right now it does reward mediocrity and it's just another reason to take some photos to send home to the sponsors.

I think the best team should be the one that has the best TEAMWORK.

If Team Alpha has a guy in the break, a guy in the chase, and a sprinter in the peloton - that's about the best thing you can accomplish as a team tactically.

If Team Beta surrounds their GC leader with riders who fall on their swords for him to ensure the win - that's deserving also.

And if Team Gamma throws down from Doha to Worlds and every race in between and multiple continents as well then they're an awesome team.

So tell me what you think DEFINES the best team and then we'll figure out how to quantify that with numbers after.

DiabloScott said:

You're trying to come up with the algorithm before you've decided what you really want to figure out. What should the competition BE ABOUT? I think right now it does reward mediocrity and it's just another reason to take some photos to send home to the sponsors.

I think the best team should be the one that has the best TEAMWORK.

If Team Alpha has a guy in the break, a guy in the chase, and a sprinter in the peloton - that's about the best thing you can accomplish as a team tactically.

If Team Beta surrounds their GC leader with riders who fall on their swords for him to ensure the win - that's deserving also.

And if Team Gamma throws down from Doha to Worlds and every race in between and multiple continents as well then they're an awesome team.

So tell me what you think DEFINES the best team and then we'll figure out how to quantify that with numbers after.

What defines the best team?
In simplistic terms, the best team is the team that has the highest number of highest placed finishers on GC.
I think that this is the most fair measurement of the best team.

Team Alpha has 5 riders : rider 1 wins the race and receives 10 points for finishing first.
Rider 2 finishes in 3rd place and gets 8 points.
Rider 3 finishes in 6th place and gets gets 5 points.
Rider 4 finishes in 9th place and gets 2 points
Rider 5 finishes in 10th place and gets 1 point.
Teams total points = 26pts.

Team Beta :
Rider 1 finishes in second place and gets 9 points
Rider 2 finishes in fourth place and gets 7 points
Rider 3 finishes in 5th place and gets 6 points
Rider 4 finishes in 7th place and gets 4 points
Rider 5 finishes in 8th place and gets 3 points.
Team's total points = 29 pts.

The weakness of this proposition is that team Alpha could have spared it's riders to ensure a win for rider 1, but we have no method of apportioning a weight to that proposition.

The strength of this simplistic algorithm is that in absolute terms, placings mean points and the more higher placings per man per team, is rewarded.
The weakness is that no recognition is taken of the fact that Team Beta did not provide the overall winner to the race whereas Team Alpha did provide the winner and perhaps ought to be rewarded more for doing so.

This throws up some interesting issues : should we apply a measure to
tactics ? I am not sure that we can.

While your question is simple, the solution to reflect the result and effort of a team is more complex.
Let me ponder some more on this.