world championship

[gavroche]

Correct me if I am wrong but is the world championship race decided over just one day, one race?
If it is, in my eyes it is meaningless. Let me explain: a world champion should be a racer who has the ability to cycle in all domains. If, for example, Cavendish was to win at the sprint, does that make him a world champion, considering that he is useless at climbing?
A better way would be to collect points for certain races right through the year, a bit like formula one.
Your views please as I may be wrong.

 

[Angelfishsolo]

Correct me if I am wrong but is the world championship race decided over just one day, one race?
If it is, in my eyes it is meaningless. Let me explain: a world champion should be a racer who has the ability to cycle in all domains. If, for example, Cavendish was to win at the sprint, does that make him a world champion, considering that he is useless at climbing?
A better way would be to collect points for certain races right through the year, a bit like formula one.
Your views please as I may be wrong.

You appear to be correct.

 

[gavroche]

in that case, to me, this is meaningless.

 

[Angelfishsolo]

in that case, to me, this is meaningless.

I am in agreement.

 

[Pottsy]

Yes but it's a bit like saying the Football World Champions should be the best over the year playing in a variety of conditions in different continents, not the team that wins the World Cup.

The very nature of the World Championships has always been the slight 'lottery' element of a single day race, the complex politics of national teams, the different course each year favouring different riders etc.

You may well be correct in that the winner isn't the best all-rounder in the world of cycling but it isn't pretending to do that. You have a ranking system for that.

 

[raindog]

Correct me if I am wrong but is the world championship race decided over just one day, one race?
If it is, in my eyes it is meaningless. Let me explain: a world champion should be a racer who has the ability to cycle in all domains. If, for example, Cavendish was to win at the sprint, does that make him a world champion, considering that he is useless at climbing?
A better way would be to collect points for certain races right through the year, a bit like formula one.
Your views please as I may be wrong.

We already have both systems. We have the world championships for road and TT and also the UCI World Tour Rankings which decides the best overall rider of the season. Here's the current top three.
1 Cadel Evans - 574pts
2 Philipe Gilbert - 482pts
3 Alberto Contador - 471pts

 

[monnet]

No more meaningless than any other race.

Paris-Roubaix meaningless? Paris-Nice? Tour of Flanders? TdeF? Giro?

It might not measure consistency over the season but meaningless it is not, otherwise no one would be bothered to ride and the rainbow jersey would not be held in such high esteem. The winner of the World's is usually the strongest and most tactically astute rider on the day, and is almost always a worthy winner - look down that list of winners on the Wiki link, it's a who's who of cycling (granted with the odd omission eg, Kelly).

Any attempt to have a season long competition has not lasted (Pernod Super Prestige, World Cup...)

 

[Smokin Joe]

No more meaningless than any other race.

Paris-Roubaix meaningless? Paris-Nice? Tour of Flanders? TdeF? Giro?

It might not measure consistency over the season but meaningless it is not, otherwise no one would be bothered to ride and the rainbow jersey would not be held in such high esteem. The winner of the World's is usually the strongest and most tactically astute rider on the day, and is almost always a worthy winner - look down that list of winners on the Wiki link, it's a who's who of cycling (granted with the odd omission eg, Kelly).

Any attempt to have a season long competition has not lasted (Pernod Super Prestige, World Cup...)

+1

Season long competitions are pants, they take away the historical significance of the one day classics which are important enough to stand alone as worthy events.

 

[raindog]

(granted with the odd omission eg, Kelly).

Also the odd guy where you think WTF?

 

[gavroche]

No more meaningless than any other race.

Paris-Roubaix meaningless? Paris-Nice? Tour of Flanders? TdeF? Giro?

It might not measure consistency over the season but meaningless it is not, otherwise no one would be bothered to ride and the rainbow jersey would not be held in such high esteem. The winner of the World's is usually the strongest and most tactically astute rider on the day, and is almost always a worthy winner - look down that list of winners on the Wiki link, it's a who's who of cycling (granted with the odd omission eg, Kelly).

Any attempt to have a season long competition has not lasted (Pernod Super Prestige, World Cup...)

the world championship race is just another one day race with a different name. The meaningless side of it is its name and title world champion. Other classic one day races could qualify just as well but are called differently. All races involve tactics and being astute. The WCR is no different than Paris- Roubaix which itself is very tough, Milan-San Remo, Liege-Bastognes-Lieges etc... but carries a world title.
The TDF and Giro are a lot more involved and require racing in all weather conditions and terrains. They mean something. In my eyes, a winner of the TDF or Giro is a lot more worthy than a world champion over one race.
Like I said earlier, would you rate Cavendish as world champion the same as Anquetil, Mercks, Hinault,Indurain, Bobet and all other TDF winners? I dont think so and rest my case.

 

[montage]

the world championship race is just another one day race with a different name. The meaningless side of it is its name and title world champion. Other classic one day races could qualify just as well but are called differently. All races involve tactics and being astute. The WCR is no different than Paris- Roubaix which itself is very tough, Milan-San Remo, Liege-Bastognes-Lieges etc... but carries a world title.
The TDF and Giro are a lot more involved and require racing in all weather conditions and terrains. They mean something. In my eyes, a winner of the TDF or Giro is a lot more worthy than a world champion over one race.
Like I said earlier, would you rate Cavendish as world champion the same as Anquetil, Mercks, Hinault,Indurain, Bobet and all other TDF winners? I dont think so and rest my case.

Usain Bolt running the hundred metres sprint in the olympics is the same as Usain Bolt running the hundred metres down at his local track on a wednesday night....

 

[rich p]

It's not the world stage race champs it's the world ROAD RACE championship. One of the differences in the race is that it's usually very long, it has all the top riders in it unlike even the grand tours or the great classics.

You'll get Cadel Evans, Nibali etc in it as well as Gilbert, Cancellara and other classics specilialists. The tactics on the day decide which kind of rider wins it.

Another major difference is that the teams are not trade teams but national ones which adds a whole different and fascinating dimension. Old rivalries put aside in the national cause (or not - see Charlie Wegelius for instance!)

 

[Pottsy]

Gavroche, you can choose to rest your case but it was you who asked the question.

The World Champs are part of the rich, complex and fascinating history of continental road racing. Perhaps if you study and understand some more of that you'll have a less dismissive attitude to one of the great traditions. It's not as simple as just thinking about races with different distances, stages and terrain and which type of rider wins.

 

[gavroche]

Gavroche, you can choose to rest your case but it was you who asked the question.

The World Champs are part of the rich, complex and fascinating history of continental road racing. Perhaps if you study and understand some more of that you'll have a less dismissive attitude to one of the great traditions. It's not as simple as just thinking about races with different distances, stages and terrain and which type of rider wins.

May be I have a simple view of what racing is about but I was always under the impression that True Champions are people who can win races in all circumstances throughout their racing career. That's why I have very high respect for TDF winners over any other race. I am not implicating that other races are not so relevant of course, but somehow, it is to a lesser degree.
This is just my own, humble view and I stick to it.

 

[beastie]

Your views please as I may be wrong.

You opened the debate, but now you consider your argument proved. You are wrong though, the worlds are not meaningless!