Pro Tour stillborn

Jeff Jones said:

I should have quoted Robert Chung too.

One day he walked into the ASO office and whispered in the lovely
secretary's ear: "Ce plan-ci n'est pas mis au point très bien."

"Jeff Jones" <jeff@cyclingnews-punt-com> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2004/sep04/sep25news2

I should have quoted Robert Chung too.

Jeff

Is this their wooden stake?

TM said:

"Jeff Jones" <jeff@cyclingnews-punt-com> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2004/sep04/sep25news2

I should have quoted Robert Chung too.

Jeff

Is this their wooden stake?

Appears so, and salvation for all the teams which would have been shut
out of this monopolistic enterprise.

Jeff Jones said:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2004/sep04/sep25news2

I should have quoted Robert Chung too.

Jeff

Is this turning into something like all the different pro circuses in the
U.S. NFL, NHL and all whatever they are called with at least two leagues in
every sport? I used to love when the two baseball league champs met for the
world series 😉)) I don't know if it's still like that, but when I was a kid
they did.

--
Perre

You have to be smarter than a robot to reply.

"Per Elmsäter" <[email hidden]> a écrit dans le message de
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Jeff Jones said:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2004/sep04/sep25news2

I should have quoted Robert Chung too.

Jeff

Is this turning into something like all the different pro circuses in the
U.S. NFL, NHL and all whatever they are called with at least two leagues

in

Quoted message said:

every sport? I used to love when the two baseball league champs met for

the

Quoted message said:

world series 😉)) I don't know if it's still like that, but when I was a

kid

Quoted message said:

they did.

--
Perre

Nah, it's not like that any more. Now it's just the champs of the National
League that are chosen to play the Yankees. (Nod to Gary Lineker)

Ewoud Dronkert said:

Jeff Jones said:

I should have quoted Robert Chung too.

One day he walked into the ASO office and whispered in the lovely
secretary's ear: "Ce plan-ci n'est pas mis au point très bien."

He probably showed her a graph or too as well.

"Richard Adams" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Is this their wooden stake?

Appears so, and salvation for all the teams which would have been shut
out of this monopolistic enterprise.

OK, I don't like the specifics of the Pro Tour, but "monolithic" is (or
should not be in this case) used as a pejorative term. It is not as if the
objectives are a bad idea, it is the details where it falls apart. The
Hockey, Soccer, and many other international sports have "monolithic"
structures that enable a wider fan base to understand the sport and to
clarify the season objectives of the athletes or the teams. Personally, I
love the unstructured nature of cycling but I can't even explain it to my
brother before he loses interest. Something can be done to undo the damage
that has occurred since the "mondialization" started way back in 1987 and
even a bit prior. The World Cup was a great idea, but its execution has
always been terrible. What made anyone think that the same people trying to
do the same thing (The Pro Tour) but on a scope that is completely
unprecedented in this sport (but not many others) could be accomplished by
the same organization and leader that FUBAR'ed the sport since establishing
the World Cup (and changed the calendar to try to devalue the Tour)?

Cycling needs to decide (and that includes all of the organizations, not
solely the UCI) just how coherent it needs to be and then it can establish a
plan that has reasonable and measurable objectives that can be phased in.
With the most recent news, new credibility of the UCI has to be at an all
time low. The real objectives of the Pro Tour were nothing less than a power
grab that was additionally designed to take the focus off of drugs but
mainly was meant to take virtually all of the power away from the organizers
and the teams. It would have completely turned this sport 180 degrees within
one season (actually, in the passing of one day since it would have suddenly
kicked in from the start of next year). *If* that was what was needed, then
that would be acceptable if it had any chance to accomplish that.. The fact
is that the UCI did not demonstrate that the Pro Tour would have solved any
problem that it was intended to.

I have never been more disgusted with the UCI. As I said, I understand and
agree with some of the stated issues they set out to resolve, but I would no
more expect the UCI to pull it off then I would expect the Keystone Cops to
take care of security. The only saving grace is the fact that cycling really
is so decentralized that I doubt any single entity could ever kill it off
completely. If the sport can survive the tenure of Heinz Verbruggen, it can
survive literally anything.

< the champs of the National league are chosen to play the Yankees > as
a total novice rider (who recently got his first decent bike) and a
resident in the Boston area, this is what turned me off of Postal. An
article I read compared them to the Yankees. It mentioned some rider who
was a threat to Armstrong and that rider was soon with the Postal team.
After watching Steinbrenner loading his team picking up who he wants to
so much, to put it simply, it just dont seem fair. I don't know much of
the racing world but is it correct comparing Postal to the N Y Yankees?

Quoted message said:

< the champs of the National league are chosen to play the Yankees > as
a total novice rider (who recently got his first decent bike) and a
resident in the Boston area, this is what turned me off of Postal. An
article I read compared them to the Yankees. It mentioned some rider who
was a threat to Armstrong and that rider was soon with the Postal team.
After watching Steinbrenner loading his team picking up who he wants to
so much, to put it simply, it just dont seem fair. I don't know much of
the racing world but is it correct comparing Postal to the N Y Yankees?

Not really. Maybe if your sphere encompasses the Tour de France only, a
a parallel may seem reasonable.

Keep in mind, though, that the last to times the Yanks went to the
Whirled Series they were spanked by expansion teams.

Prior to Postal you'd have to look at Mapei as the Super Team, maybe
without the prestigious TdF trophy, but they ruled races for years.

Quoted message said:

< the champs of the National league are chosen to play the Yankees > as
a total novice rider (who recently got his first decent bike) and a
resident in the Boston area, this is what turned me off of Postal. An
article I read compared them to the Yankees. It mentioned some rider who
was a threat to Armstrong and that rider was soon with the Postal team.
After watching Steinbrenner loading his team picking up who he wants to
so much, to put it simply, it just dont seem fair. I don't know much of
the racing world but is it correct comparing Postal to the N Y Yankees?

Let me put it this way: They tried to sign Ivan Basso last year.
Fortunately Bjarne won out. Imagine if he hadn't - the 2004 TdF would
have been even more of a foregone conclusion than it already was.

-Sonarrat.

In article <[email hidden]>,

Stewart Fleming said:

Ewoud Dronkert said:

Jeff Jones said:

I should have quoted Robert Chung too.

One day he walked into the ASO office and whispered in the lovely
secretary's ear: "Ce plan-ci n'est pas mis au point très bien."

He probably showed her a graph or too as well.

What?!??! Are you telling me that "Robert Chung" is a psuedonym for Ross
Perot?

--
tanx,
Howard

A billion + 2 followups...

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?

In article <[email hidden]>,

Quoted message said:

< the champs of the National league are chosen to play the Yankees > as
a total novice rider (who recently got his first decent bike) and a
resident in the Boston area, this is what turned me off of Postal. An
article I read compared them to the Yankees. It mentioned some rider who
was a threat to Armstrong and that rider was soon with the Postal team.
After watching Steinbrenner loading his team picking up who he wants to
so much, to put it simply, it just dont seem fair. I don't know much of
the racing world but is it correct comparing Postal to the N Y Yankees?

No, all the big teams do this at some time or other.

--
tanx,
Howard

A billion + 2 followups...

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?

<Sonarrat> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

< the champs of the National league are chosen to play the Yankees > as
a total novice rider (who recently got his first decent bike) and a
resident in the Boston area, this is what turned me off of Postal. An
article I read compared them to the Yankees. It mentioned some rider who
was a threat to Armstrong and that rider was soon with the Postal team.
After watching Steinbrenner loading his team picking up who he wants to
so much, to put it simply, it just dont seem fair. I don't know much of
the racing world but is it correct comparing Postal to the N Y Yankees?

Let me put it this way: They tried to sign Ivan Basso last year.
Fortunately Bjarne won out. Imagine if he hadn't - the 2004 TdF would
have been even more of a foregone conclusion than it already was.

-Sonarrat.

I disagree. As a support rider riding a program prior to the Tour, Bass
would not bery likely have been as well prepared and would have remained on
the list of guys "with potential". Even if he did make it with the same
form, it would have been hard to place on the podium when you have to lead
the back over early climbs. Those guys also drop off the back on the last
climg to be in the best position to do well the next time they are called
on. Lance's lead would have been lower too since Basso efectively rode as
Armstrong's 10th man for at least 2 big days in the mountains. IF Basso was
on USPS, he would have forced another guy off the team and therefore would
have been forced to pick up that rider's work load. The only changes would
have been Ullrich would have been on the podium and Lance would have won
another stage. He had a better chance at winning those 2 stages with solo
breaks but his GC time would have been lower.

Chris said:

IF Basso was on USPS, he would
have forced another guy off the team and therefore would have been
forced to pick up that rider's work load.

I can't see Basso crashing Mayo, but I guess anything's possible.

Chris said:

Cycling needs to decide (and that includes all of the organizations, not
solely the UCI

You are hopeless, so much you don't get it.
UCI is not one of the cycling organizations, UCI is the cycling world
governing body. If the UCI decides that one particular race (even the TdF)
from next year is not UCI sanctioned and worth nothing and the rider who
would eventually partecipate in it are not allowed to partecipate to any
other race, that's it.
The UCI controls each and any National federation. If the UCI orders to all
the national federations to expell riders who boycott the Pro Tour and take
part to races by "rebel" organizers, the National federations can't refuse
to do so.

Hein just has to decide whether he really wants to go on and create a
cycling civil war or not, but if he wants there's really nothing that can
stop him. Legally, he is the head of the cycling world.

"Chris" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Hockey, Soccer, and many other international sports have "monolithic"
structures that enable a wider fan base to understand the sport and to
clarify the season objectives of the athletes or the teams. Personally, I
love the unstructured nature of cycling but I can't even explain it to my
brother before he loses interest.

Why do tou think cycling is unstructured? Since the UCI started to
devide races in categories (WC, 1.HC, ...) more than a decade ago, i
believe things have approved a lot for people new to the sport.
Another thing: the race calendar always stays the same when it comes
to the main races. The date sometimes changes a week, but from a
relative view, those races are always organised in the same order.
Let's say one of the biggest changes the last decade was placing the
Vuelta and the Worlds in september. Swapping LBL with the Gold race,
or the worlds with paris-Nice is not a factor that makes cycling
completely unstructured and not understandable.

Quoted message said:

Something can be done to undo the damage
that has occurred since the "mondialization" started way back in 1987 and
even a bit prior. The World Cup was a great idea, but its execution has
always been terrible. What made anyone think that the same people trying to
do the same thing (The Pro Tour) but on a scope that is completely
unprecedented in this sport (but not many others) could be accomplished by
the same organization and leader that FUBAR'ed the sport since establishing
the World Cup (and changed the calendar to try to devalue the Tour)?

The execution of the World Cup terrible?? Based on what? I thought it
was a great idea to have the season divided in 3 world cup sessions.
Which makes the riders who are interested in the WC, race the whole
season. And i believe that is one of the things people love to see.

Personnaly i think the protour sucks, but i truely believe the
objective of it is not devaluating the tour but upgrading other main
events, so cycling stands on more than one leg. Only by achieving
this, more sponsors and other commercial revenues are assured. The
idea seems attractive, but over several years, it will only result in
a further polarization of the protour and this "continental" calendar.
The reasons for organizing the protour are plentiful, but the
reasons for organising this continental calendar hardly exist. For
the UCI, the continental calendar is only a necesarry harm which comes
with the existance of the protour.

In comparison with european soccer, the protour is the Champion's
League and the continental calendar is the UEFA cup. But who cares
about the uefa cup these days. I can't even remember who was in the
final last year. The Champion's League swallows everything. But the
thing in soccer is: the champion's league and the uefa cup are rewards
for teams based on how well they did in their national competitions
the previous year. When it comes to cycling, many teams will ONLY
have the less important continental calendar. And that's where
Verbruggen looses contact with cycling and only thinks as a commercial
manager of a big multinational.

But bottom line: the protour sucks. And even though abortion is still
very controversial, it's the only solution for not letting this sick
child be born.

Kenny (my 2 eurocents)

Stewart Fleming said:

Ewoud Dronkert said:

Jeff Jones said:

I should have quoted Robert Chung too.

One day he walked into the ASO office and whispered in the lovely
secretary's ear: "Ce plan-ci n'est pas mis au point très bien."

He probably showed her a graph or too as well.

"Hey baby, voulez-vous voir mes graphs chez moi ce soir?"

Jeff Jones said:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2004/sep04/sep25news2

I should have quoted Robert Chung too.

Jeff

From http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2004/sep04/sep26news:

"It is expected that negotiations between the race organisers and the UCI
will continue before and at next week's World Championships and UCI
Congress in Verona, Italy. But with the depth of feeling to the effect
that the Pro Tour and its affects just haven't been thought out"

and

"what is clear is that there are many that think the UCI Pro Tour cannot
proceed without a fully thought out plan."

"Robert Chung" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"what is clear is that there are many that think the UCI Pro Tour cannot
proceed without a fully thought out plan."

That was Martin, who afaik doesn't read RBR :-)

Jeff