Page 1012 of 1889

Re: "PRO" Cycling Discussion

Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2013 7:45 pm
by erty65
pastronef wrote:"Bell" Air attack helmet for Bos

http://twitpic.com/c40rfw" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
And a narrow handlebar?

Re: "PRO" Cycling Discussion

Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2013 8:16 pm
by HammerTime2
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/cas-orders-worldtour-licence-for-katusha wrote:
The UCI has stated that it is still evaluating the situation, however a look at the UCI's own regulations doesn’t clarify the situation. According to Article 2.15.009, “A maximum of 18 UCI WorldTour team licences may be issued....”, and the UCI now faces a WorldTour with 19 teams.

The rules seem to require that the WorldTour licences awarded this year be re-awarded. “Every licence shall be granted subject to a possible redistribution of the licences following a decision of the CAS cancelling a refusal to grant a licence pursuant to Article 2.15.241,” according to Article 2.15.026 of the UCI's regulations.

That later article directly addresses what is to happen if a Licensing Committee decision is annulled. In that situation, “the case shall be returned to the licence commission. After consulting the parties, the commission may, if it considers that it is in possession of adequate information, renounce any further documentary submissions and/or hearings. The case shall then be adjudged on the basis of the licence application documentation as submitted to the commission on the occasion of its initial decision.”

That leaves the situation unclear as to what decision the Commission is able to take. In this particular instance, the CAS has said that Katusha must be given the WorldTour licence.
Well, can the UCI now do a redistribution in which Katusha is eliminated (despite what CAS ruled)? UCI could claim that Katusha got the license, but did not hold on to it in the redistribution.

Re: "PRO" Cycling Discussion

Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2013 8:16 pm
by Weenie

Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓    Broad Selection ✓    Worldwide Delivery ✓

www.starbike.com



Re: "PRO" Cycling Discussion

Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2013 9:52 pm
by UpFromOne
under the circumstances, why doesn't UCI just open it up to 19 teams, even on a "temporary" basis, and be done with it?

UCI can take all their stupid arbitrary rules and shove 'em where the sun don't shine...

Re: "PRO" Cycling Discussion

Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2013 10:09 pm
by prendrefeu
Because 19 is a prime number. Duh.

Re: "PRO" Cycling Discussion

Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2013 10:27 pm
by HammerTime2
O.k. Well, then the Giro has nothing to worry about, because they were planning to have 18 WorldTour Teams plus 4 wildcards, for a total of 22. But if Katusha expands the number of WorldTour teams to 19 and the Giro keeps the 4 wildcards already invited, then that would be a total of 23, which is o.k., because e^pi rounds to 23. Alright, I know what you're thinking, pi^e rounds to 22, and whose to say that pi^e does not carry the day over e^pi, but it turns out that e^pi is what matters, as any student of grand tour mathematics knows.

Re: "PRO" Cycling Discussion

Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2013 10:35 pm
by Pharmstrong
I would rather more division 1 teams with less riders... and budget caps.

Re: "PRO" Cycling Discussion

Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2013 9:58 am
by euan
GT teams have 8 riders instead of 9. Simples.

Re: "PRO" Cycling Discussion

Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2013 10:20 am
by Kjetil
An extra team is more than just the riders, though.
But 8 riders on a team also for GTs is something I would welcome.

Re: "PRO" Cycling Discussion

Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2013 11:27 am
by micky
As you said I think the main problem wouldnt be, for example, the 8 riders per team in a GT but what goes around a team in a GT.

Re: "PRO" Cycling Discussion

Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2013 12:01 pm
by Tinea Pedis
euan wrote:GT teams have 8 riders instead of 9. Simples.

Looks like a 'bait and switch' to me.

18 other teams paid all that money for a WT licence based on 9 men GT teams. To go and pull one man out because of a situation like this, especially to accommodate another GC rider, is not something teams like Sky, Saxo or BMC will throw their arms open wide to co-operate with.

"PRO" Cycling Discussion

Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2013 2:25 pm
by ultyguy
Contador in the hot seat as I believe Saxo was lowest ranked in the 'quantitative' part of the uci's goalpost moving pro tour process.

Re: "PRO" Cycling Discussion

Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2013 2:33 pm
by djconnel
HammerTime2 wrote:Alright, I know what you're thinking, pi^e rounds to 22, and whose to say that pi^e does not carry the day over e^pi.

 π
e   ? Oh! You're being irrational.

Maybe they should just allow

  πi
 e

Re: "PRO" Cycling Discussion

Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2013 9:56 pm
by micky
Hushovd back to victory.
Thats a shocking news! :shock: :mrgreen:

Re: "PRO" Cycling Discussion

Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2013 11:17 pm
by cerro
Not just shocking, good news. Norway on top! :)

Re: "PRO" Cycling Discussion

Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2013 11:17 pm
by Weenie

Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓    Broad Selection ✓    Worldwide Delivery ✓

www.starbike.com



Re: "PRO" Cycling Discussion

Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2013 11:21 pm
by HammerTime2
cerro wrote:Norway on top! :)
Norway? ... or Monte Carlo?