uci world tour rankings relegation

UCI World Tour Promotion and Relegation Weekly

The weekly look at the UCI promotion and relegation standings. With Alpecin-Fenix and Arkéa-Samsic high on the tables and all but assured promotion, the story is all about which teams face the drop. It’s becoming very tight because relegation candidates Lotto-Soudal are closing in on EF Education and BikeExchange.

What’s Changed Since Last Week?

• Unchanged since March, Lotto-Soudal and Israel are the two teams facing relegation but the news is that it’s getting very close. BikeExchange slip to 18th place and have just 230 points over Lotto-Soudal; Education First rise to 17th but there’s little comfort as they’re only 341 points above Lotto-Soudal. The chart below shows just how close things are getting, today’s three-way fight to avoid 19th place can turn into a five-way scrap, watch those lines converge:

• As things stand the automatic invites for the 2023 grand tours would go Lotto-Soudal and TotalEnergies
• Jumbo-Visma hit the jackpot thanks to a 1-2 on GC in the Dauphiné, plus all those stage wins and placings to get 1580 points, next were Bahrain with 503 and Alpecin-Fenix with 430
• Lotto-Soudal got 343 points, EF Education 250, Movistar 140, Israel 71
• At the foot of the weekly table was DSM with 15 points, Bike Exchange got 3 and Trek-Segafredo none

Two points to note this week…

First a cropped screengrab of the commissaire report from from Stage 6 of the Dauphiné, it shows fines for punching and littering, both cash and UCI points, visible a reminder that points can be won by results… and forfeited by breaking the rules.

Valverde is going to Florida Second, Movistar’s Eusebio Unzue is the latest to lament the points scale . He’s wisely calling for reform for the next set of years, and not going on a rant because his team faces the drop. What this and more shows is that for years few people, team owners and fans alike, ever paid attention to the rankings, let alone how they were composed. We probably weren’t supposed to either, to find the points tables you had to root around the UCI website, find the right 280 PDF document, scroll to page-whatever.

But the importance of points for World Tour and ambitious Pro Conti teams isn’t new, the three year promotion/relegation system was announced in 2018 . Sure it’s a hot topic which is why you’re reading this weekly update. But from a structural perspective it’s a bit like a US Presidential candidate clocking that their voting system uses an electoral college derived from absolute majorities on a state-by-state basis, and so campaigning in swing states, especially those that supply many electors, could be a good idea. Given we’re halfway through the third and final year, it’s the equivalent of October in a US campaign and a bit late to remark some races, like US states, have more points than others. Just as politicians flock to “battleground states” like Pennsylvania or Florida, we’re now beginning to see several teams pay very close attention to the races that offer plenty of points. Today’s Mont Ventoux Dénivelé Challenge is a case in point, and a chance for teams with climbers to score points.

Animated bar chart race

Background info If you’re new to the story of promotion and relegation this year and want it explained then click here .

To see how many points are available in each race or category, click here .

38 thoughts on “UCI World Tour Promotion and Relegation Weekly”

You consider the relegation race will go between 6 teams? – Israel – Lotto-Soudal – BikeExchange – EducationFirst – Movistar – Cofidis All those teams have less than 1.000 points more than Lotto.

Personally, I see 7 teams in the relegation battle. – Astana seem safe and also Arkea, with the way they are scoring and the extra points gap. – With the way they are scoring, DSM is not out of the woods yet. They only have 1334 points more than Lotto-Soudal.

If DSM doesn’t get a good classification with Bardet in Tour De France and Ewan starts winning, that gap can rapidly close. Certainly as DSM does not do that many point-rich-races so far this season.

In your scenario, it’s not just between Lotto and DSM, though. EF, BEX, Movistar and Cofidis would also have to finish above DSM for them to be in danger…

Good point. It’s still feasible though. I wouldn’t bet any money on a DSM relegation, but they’re still “in play”. They’ve only scored 2175 points so far this season, which is pretty low.

I think Movistar and Cofidis will end above DSM in the final standings. They have so much more potential and races and the gap is small.

So we’ll have to see how Lotto, BikeExchange and EducationFirst score compared to DSM. But again, DSM is not out of the woods yet. DSM does not start in many point-rich races, so we will have to see how Bardet scores this Tour de France for example.

These are weekly updates, so no need to get too far ahead but more teams can get sucked in, yes. DSM have a good cushion from the past but are struggling to score.

It could be like a track elimination race where a team can keep lurking at the back but pip past the others at the end. It’s hard to know the calendar until the end of the year, eg who can see the Tour of Guangxi happening?

You can get a good idea of what’s remaining via this link: https://www.procyclingstats.com/races.php?nation=&category=1&continent=&pro=0&pro=1&name=&pname=contains&limit=100&filter=Filter&s=upcoming-races

I don’t think the Tour of Guanxi will make that much of a difference.

Quickly added the European races to Excel. – 29 1.1-races remaining – 11 1.Pro-races – 4 1.UWT-races – 11 2.1 races – 9 2.Pro-races – 4 2.UWT-races: Tour de Suisse, Tour de France, Tour de Pologne & Vuelta

Next to that, there are the national championships, the world championships and: Asian races 27.08 – 28.08 Tour of Almaty 2.1 28.08 – 01.09 Tour de Taiwan 2.1 28.09 – 03.10 Tour of Iran (Azarbaijan) 2.1 11.10 – 18.10 Le Tour de Langkawi 2.Pro 13.10 – 18.10 Gree-Tour of Guangxi 2.UWT 16.10 Japan Cup Cycle Road Race 1.Pro

American races: 04.09 Maryland Cycling Classic 1.Pro 09.09 Grand Prix Cycliste de Québec 1.UWT 11.09 Grand Prix Cycliste de Montréal 1.UWT

I see Bike Exchange and Israel in the most trouble – they’re both going backwards (Israel’s 37 year-old stage winner notwithstanding). Bike Exchange, interestingly enough came second on that stage, but should have won that – Matthews blew the sprint.

It’ll be a very interesting battle as the season progresses, thanks to Inrng for highlighting it here. Every time you see Lotto go on a raid or Matthews/Impey trying to make a mid-mountain stage difficult for the sprinters you’ll know this is the motivation.

Regarding: “As things stand the automatic invites for the 2023 grand tours would go Lotto-Soudal and TotalEnergies”

It could be interesting to create another ranking “points scored this season” for the 7 relegation teams. Because if Lotto moves to a safe place, things start to get interesting for that story.

Certainly the race between BikeExchange and Israel for the most points this season. Israel needs to catch up 333 points there. They also need to stay ahead of EducationFirst, although the gap is big there with 823 points.

Overview – Cofidis 4893 points – Lotto 4374 points – Total 3696 points – Movistar 3497 points – BikeExchange 2867 points – Israel 2534 points – DSM 2175 points – EducationFirst 1711 points

You’re very much right. If Lotto and BEX manage to over EF and get a WT license, EF will have to rely on the wild cards based on 2022 points. And as things currently stand, they would lose out to Total Energies and Israel (and not very far ahead of Uno-X). So as 3rd ranked pro-tour team, they will still get automatic wild cards to WT 1-day races, but not to the WT stage races.

This may not be the best news for Carapaz …

According to the UCI, grabbing another rider and then hitting them in a fast moving peloton, followed up by hitting them again 10km further on after the finish line is only worth 4 x (in points and CHF) the penalty for passing a bidon to a spectator (Barguil). Not sure the UCI has really thought through its logic? Mind you, only ten points for coming third on a stage (Barguil again) also seems off, even before deducting the bidon fine. As for Molano, he really needs to be banned.

Has any action been taken against Hugo Page?

According to Molano, his anger was the result of a second instance of dangerous riding by Page that could have caused a huge crash. I presume Page wasn’t censured because there’s no fault attached to being punched, and sudden changes of direction go unpunished unless during a sprint. But maybe the commissaires should have taken a look.

The way Intermarche are going they could afford to lose a few points for offences. We wouldn’t have expected that at the start of the year.

Hugo Page is French in a French race and there is no camera footage on social media. That also plays.

I don’t see how it changes anything… UCI commissaires are not french (and Bardet was DQ in one Paris-Nice without any problems, though he was one of the best french hope).

I think the main thing is that there is no clear footage of whatever Hugo Page allegedly did (would be hard to capture something like that in the middle of the peloton, unless there is a helicopter or drone overhead at exactly the right time).

We’re going to see lots of teams riding to get top tens in grand tours rather than trying to win, as well as seeing a flood of riders to lesser one day races.

Is that beneficial to cycling?

I also wonder how lower division teams and riders feel about big teams snatching results in ‘their’ races. Discouraged?

If there was no promotion/relegation system people would decry Alpecin and Arkéa being in the lower tier while potentially worse teams above them have World Tour status and some would ask if this was good for cycling. As Unzué says, the points system probably needs revising for next time around, but it’s not easy to get the balance right, good luck to the committee doing that.

It might be interesting to check post hoc if this happens to a large extent. With PCS stats it wouldn’t be that hard to sort out. Of course you probably wouldn’t want to compare this year to the last two, since there was a huge amount of disruption to the schedule due to COVID in 2020 and 2021. PCS does stats on the strength of the start lists of the races, and if there’s a significant increase in the quality of the start lists of 1.1 and 1.2 races, and perhaps a decrease in the quality for 1.WT races, then it would be a strong argument for the points system skewing things.

I’m not sure how you notice teams going for top 10’s instead of wins in GTs, or even if that’s a sound strategy – it already seems like that’s a common goal for teams that have little chance for a GT podium to go for a top 10, since there’s a fair bit of prestige there, and the gulf between podium and the lesser places is usually wide. But it’s also a risky strategy, putting the best rider on a weak team in a GT hoping to finish 8th or 9th, when we all know when there’s a big problem such a rider can plummet right out of the top 10 and even end up a DNF late into the race. The sounder points strategy would seem to be to save those riders for 2.Pro or 2.2 races that they can’t do when they’re focused on the GTs.

Riders often ride GTs to protect their top ten – I just think they might be even more risk-averse now. Maybe they won’t try to go up the top ten list, instead not risking their 8th place.

An example of conservatism, I think, was seen in Hugh Carthy in the last two stages of the Giro. He didn’t go for stage wins, instead protecting his top ten position by riding with the favourites. That he was able to ride with the favourites suggested he probably was good enough to go for a stage win.

EF, to continue using them as an example, have a number of riders – e.g., Carthy, Uran, Chaves – who are much better suited for gaining GT top tens than results at one day races (been a long time since Uran and Chaves were doing that, and Carthy never has).

Hugh Carthy has won a single GT stage so far I think (Vuelta 2020), and I believe only a single stage in a WT level shorter stage race. He’s consistently climbing with the best, but very rarely winning. He just doesn’t seem to be that kind of rider. Last year he took 8th in the Giro, this year 9th, three years ago 11th, so I’m not sure how much he was protecting his place, and how much he was riding to his expected maximum GC placing. With his lack of a finishing kick, I’m not sure what else he should be doing.

As for one-day races, today EF took first and second in the Mt. Ventoux Challenge, netting a handy 210 UCI points and notching only their forth win of the season. Even though it’s a lowly 1.1 race, it’s had some excellent podiums in it’s short history. It doesn’t seem like a bad thing at all for teams like EF to take a shot at more of these races.

There are many instances of rides ‘a la Zubeldia’ achieving a lower top ten result through steady defensive efforts, but I don’t think Carthy in the Giro is one. After a poor start to the race, shipping a hatful of time, he switched to stage hunting and was away in the breaks on multiple occasions but each time came up short of the win. However the time he gained and the fading of those above him punted him back into top ten GC contention. So he had a choice to make at the end; switch back to GC or keep rolling the dice for the stage win. Given his evident fatigue after his considerable attacking efforts in the second half of the race I was surprised he was still able to hang with the best climbers on those last two stages.

You can’t really judge that from 1 year of PCS statistics, especially as earlier in the season some races had lots of riders dropping out because of COVID & other sickness issues, etc.

there have always been lots of riders looking for a top ten in a grand tour. It might change one or 2 riders approach at worst. The teams in question don’t have many top ten riders to start with.

My tips for relegated teams are EF and Israel. EF declared that they don’t want to go to second/third tier races which does not seem to be a good strategy. This year they have only 1.7% of the total points of top 24 teams, while in season 2021 it was much higher, 3.2%. (and in 2020 4.8%!). My other prediction: top ProTeams (with automatic wildcards) in 2023 will be Totalenergies and Israel.

This is no criticism of this excellent regular feature. But what does this actually change in racing? Lots of teams – all but one in the end – have always ridden for top 10 GT placings. Prize money has always made racing a little bit more than ‘win or nothing’, though there could be more emphasis on lead-out guys staying in for the points instead of dropping out the way.

Isn’t the biggest deciding factor always which teams, and how many can continue to get funding? Sure, the funding might go if a team looks like falling out the top tier but commercial realities can and do bite way harder and faster than this 3 yr rolling tally.

It doesn’t change too much with the racing but it can heighten the interest, seeing riders sprinting for some 1.1 like the Grote Prijs van der Kanaal, or attacking in the Giro del Campanilismo now comes with an extra layer of significance but for cycling insiders who follow these things. Otherwise there’s not much change in the racing, the Tour de France this summer will still be all the big teams going for it. But it will be doubly stressful for those struggling, a secondary/tertiary story.

Yes, this is exactly how I look at it. It adds an extra layer of intrigue and complexity and competition, especially for people in the know.

UCI points for intermediate sprints could guarantee a decent breakaway on those boring flat stages.

If Education First drops, they might still get one of the free wild cards next season, but at the end of that season there is a high chance they stop, as the contracts of all their racers (and sponsors?) stops.

IIRC, EF is signed on as their main sponsor for at least one more year, so I don’t think they’d fold immediately. They have a women’s WT team as well now, and given the fast growing nature of that side of the sport, sponsors might not look at just the men’s side of things when investing. EF are a unique team. They were very important in navigating the conversation in the immediate aftermath of Lance etc, and they continue to be an interesting team. I really question their decision not to race the x.1 / x.pro race circuit, though. They have some young riders who really need the race experience, and they obviously need the points. The ironic thing is that the first 1.1 race they entered this season, they went one – two on the podium!!

One question about the relegation system; is “18 teams” an absolutely set-in-stone number? I’ve read a number of articles recently that skirt around the issue by saying “if the UCI decides on 18 teams…” Is it possible the UCI could go with, say, 20 teams in the end? Or increase the number of teams that get automatic invites? I really think they need to institute a “parachute” system for relegated teams (like the Premier League in football, for example) that will insure that relegation is not a death sentence for a team. Many teams are on precarious footing as it stands, and not every team has a petrochemical conglomerate or ethically dubious sultanate as their sponsor…

For now it is 18 teams, rule 2.15.011 a spells this out “The 18 top-ranked teams… having applied for a UCI WorldTour licence” so as long as everyone has their paperwork in (there are different deadlines to renew vs to apply for promotion) then it’s 18 for 2023-2025 as things stand.

There is a parachute system of sorts as the relegated WT teams have a head start in the race for automatic wild cards given their places in every WT race the previous season.

And they have the same advantage during the 3 years where they are part of the WT, so if they get relegated it’s probably already at least partially their own fault they didn’t perform well enough… (if we rule out some extreme case of bad luck).

What does the top team get at the end? Do they get something on their jersey for next year?

Does inrng think the top team will celebrate and make a big show of being top. Do JV, QS or Ineos talk of the ranking or is it only a discussion point for teams in the relegation zone?

I thought the season points (noy the 3 year poins) determine the starting order of the cars behind the peloton?

For the rest just bragging rights i guess.

There’s a prize for topping the annual rankings and Jumbo-Visma lead this and the three year rankings now (just). Being number one is a good marketing thing but for most teams, sponsors and riders it’s more how you won these points that mattered, the races you won and all that. As said here over the years, the rankings don’t really tell us who is the best rider or the best team, they reflect what a committee is trying to say about the relative importance of different races.

EducationFirst does a super deal in Mont Ventoux.

Guerreiro and Chaves on 1 and 2. They take 213 points on Lotto/BikeExchange and 208 on Israel.

Education First now have 554 points on Lotto-Soudal and 324 on BikeExhange.

Gap with Israel (only important in case of relegation) closes from 823 to 615.

EF should be automatically relegated for that awful hat and sunnies combo Chaves was wearing the other day on the Dauphine

Cyril Guimard has been studying the Inner Ring blog! In a quiet interlude during his Equipe 21 Tour de Suisse commentary we have been treated to a long and detailed study of promotion/relegation question. He’s a keen supporter of the broad principle.

Not sure he’s a reader but he’s a shrewd pundit.

I imagine most would support the broad principle, the differences come from the details.

Comments are closed.

What is going on with relegation and UCI points and why does everyone care now?

We are moving past squeaky bum time and heading for the drop

• Sign up to our newsletter Newsletter

What's going on with relegation and UCI points?

Relegation from the WorldTour is back in the news, after bubbling away for most of this year in the background, we have almost reached the point of no return for some teams, with opportunities to gain points dwindling.

After the Vuelta a España - for which points do not get awarded until all racing is done - there are just three WorldTour events left this year, all one-day races, 15 .Pro races, 21 .1 races, and the World Championships.

That means 7,783 UCI points are still on offer for the winners of all these races, and the individual stages contained therein, plus thousands more for podium finishes and more minor placings. However, these are unlikely to go to the select few teams who need them most, those that are struggling at the bottom of the UCI's table. 

At present, both Lotto Soudal and Israel-Premier Tech, two current WorldTour teams, face relegation, while Alpecin-Deceuninck and Arkéa Samsic would be promoted to cycling's top table. Lotto can take comfort from the fact that, as things stand, they would still gain access to the Grand Tours next year, but Israel would not, with TotalEnergies occupying this second spot.

There are currently only 619 points between Movistar, BikeExchange, EF Education-EasyPost and Cofidis in the four spots above relegation; Movistar are 288 points ahead of Lotto Soudal, who currently are in the red zone.

Suddenly, things are looking awfully tight at the bottom, and both racing and non-racing decisions are affecting the rankings.

For example, Simon Yates' withdrawal from the Vuelta (because of Covid) has deprived his BikeExchange team of potentially hundreds of crucial points that they would stand to gain from a high finish on general classification.

Get The Leadout Newsletter

The latest race content, interviews, features, reviews and expert buying guides, direct to your inbox!

While the Australian team bounced back with a stage win on Wednesday, through Kaden Groves , the 100 points gained here will do little to quell fears of the drop.

With more and more riders dropping out of the Vuelta after catching the virus, in a year when illness has seemingly had more of an impact than usual, it is points that are being lost, not just results.

This was seemingly what Tao Geoghegan Hart (Ineos Grenadiers) was getting at in a hastily deleted tweet sent on Wednesday morning: "How can we have a relegation system, risking the future of decade old teams, during these unprecedented times of sickness. Sport is not fair, granted. But this just doesn’t seem right, not now and not like this. I would like to see solidarity between all riders, of all teams."

Solidarity is a tricky concept in the peloton, with the official union, the CPA, famously unloved, and little binding riders together across teams, nationalities, ages, goals and more. This is what made Geoghegan Hart's intervention interesting; his lack of dog in the fight, as Ineos are hardly one of those threatened with relegation.

What those in the teams striving for promotion to the top table, like Alpecin and Arkéa, make of this call for solidarity is a different matter. The relegation system might threaten the future of "decade old teams" but to not have a system would threaten new investment in the sport.

The boss of ProTeam Uno-X, Vegar Kulset, tweeted: "Imagine a Premier League club that, at the end of the season and close to relegation, complains that due to injuries and covid, the relegation system is unfair. And the final argument - we are an old club and do not deserve this."

Away from sickness, Arkéa's push to the WorldTour has been threatened by Nairo Quintana's positive test for tramadol at the Tour de France , which has deprived the French team of 400 UCI points after he was disqualified from the race. His sixth place therefore no longer exists. He has appealed to the Court of Arbitration for Sport, with the potential for court rulings affecting the final UCI points table.

There are squads who have reportedly asked their riders not to attend the World Championships in Australia in order to concentrate on gaining points at smaller races, while tactics to boost point totals - and possibly not risk everything by going for the win - are clear to see.

There are even reports that riders will leave the Vuelta early to target other races for UCI points, which seems to undermine the whole point of competition at the highest level; the system is leading to weird decisions.

As a sport, cycling often struggles to present an overarching narrative, especially to the casual viewer. Individual events mean a lot more than any kind of structure to the season - the Tour de France, Paris-Roubaix and the World Championships are big events across the whole year - while any kind of structure is at best noticed at the end of the year, at worst ignored altogether.

To the casual viewer, as most are, any kind of thinking beyond a single race or a series of events like the cobbled Classics, is alien. Yet for many years there has been a unified attempt at some kind of system or league across the season, to link things up, to make Dwars door Vlaanderen connect with the Tour of Poland, or the UAE Tour with the GP de Quebec.

The current system for men’s cycling, devised by the UCI, the sport’s governing body, is the WorldTour, with the ProSeries sitting below it, the successors to the Super Prestige Pernod and UCI Road World Cup. There are 18 WorldTour teams, the ones you have heard of, and they get to automatically go to the WorldTour races, the ones you have heard of. Below that, there is the ProSeries, of 17 teams, which you have probably heard of, who go to races that you probably know, and sometimes, confusingly, to the races you definitely know. Below this again are Continental teams, who mostly go to the races you don’t really pay attention to.

Understand?

Since the inauguration of the WorldTour, 13 long seasons ago, there has been an end of season ranking, which is normally, rightfully, ignored; it is often either superfluous or odd (Tadej Pogačar and Deceuninck Quick-Step won last year).

Still, the ranking exists. 

This league table matters more than ever this year, because the 18 slots for teams who will form the WorldTour for the next three seasons are up for grabs. Some squads who are currently at the top table face relegation, while ProTeams below eye up their spots, and therefore automatic invites to the biggest races.

All races have UCI points and riders score points based on their finishing positions, this is how the league table is set, although it is only the top ten scorers in a team who actually contribute to the overall total. It is the points total across 2020, 2021 and 2022 that counts.

Points do not just go to winners, they go to top finishers, up to the top 25 in certain races.

If all of this is not confusing enough, different races have different points. You win 1,000 points for winning the Tour de France, for example - lucky Jumbo-Visma - and 125 points for winning the Volta Limburg Classic, as Arnaud de Lie did for Lotto Soudal.

There is one more layer of added complexity, which is that the two teams with the highest points total this year - and this year only - get invites to the Grand Tours for next year, and do not have to hope they get in through a wildcard.

All of this is why team decisions have appeared weird this year, as those squads in danger have become alert to the situation they have found themselves in and kicked into gear. Big name riders have been sent to smaller races to garner points, or multiple riders on one team have finished high up at an inconsequential event.

While the concept of relegation and promotion from the WorldTour makes sense, teams have been left scratching their heads at a system which sees more points awarded for victory in a 1.1 race - the Marcel Kint Classic for example - than a Grand Tour stage win.

Throw the chaos of real life into the mix, and a pandemic, plus the confusing points system, and it has been a messy year.

Thank you for reading 20 articles this month* Join now for unlimited access

Enjoy your first month for just £1 / $1 / €1

*Read 5 free articles per month without a subscription

Join now for unlimited access

Try first month for just £1 / $1 / €1

Adam is Cycling Weekly ’s news editor – his greatest love is road racing but as long as he is cycling on tarmac, he's happy. Before joining Cycling Weekly he spent two years writing for Procycling, where he interviewed riders and wrote about racing, speaking to people as varied as Demi Vollering to Philippe Gilbert. Before cycling took over his professional life, he covered ecclesiastical matters at the world’s largest Anglican newspaper and politics at Business Insider. Don't ask how that is related to cycling.

At Sarah Swallow's Ruta del Jefe bikes come second to education

By Emily Schaldach Published 3 April 24

My reasons for riding have shifted and I don't care to pore over the data anymore

By Joe Baker Published 3 April 24

Useful links

• Tour de France
• Giro d'Italia
• Vuelta a España

Buyer's Guides

• Best road bikes
• Best gravel bikes
• Best smart turbo trainers
• Best cycling computers
• Editor's Choice
• Bike Reviews
• Component Reviews
• Clothing Reviews
• Contact Future's experts
• Terms and conditions
• Privacy policy
• Cookies policy
• Advertise with us

Cycling Weekly is part of Future plc, an international media group and leading digital publisher. Visit our corporate site . © Future Publishing Limited Quay House, The Ambury, Bath BA1 1UA. All rights reserved. England and Wales company registration number 2008885.