“Cycling is on a precipice”: One Cycling hits back after UCI snub

The battle over the future of professional cycling escalated recently as One Cycling, the Saudi-backed project seeking to revolutionise the sport, responded defiantly to the UCI’s decision to block their proposed races from entering the 2026 WorldTour calendar.

Backed by a €250 million investment from the Saudi Arabian SURJ Sports Investment Fund, One Cycling had aimed to introduce four new WorldTour-level races, in North and South America and Saudi Arabia, and create a new, commercially focused series of 22 events. But the UCI’s Management Committee dismissed the plan as “incompatible.”

There’s no doubt that cycling needs a shake up. This business model would allow for a more consistent revenue stream for the teams, who currently rely almost solely on sponsorships. But would One Cycling damage the essence of the sport? That is indeed the question.

Still, those behind One Cycling insist the project is not dead. Speaking to CyclingNews, a source close to the initiative warned that the sport faces a stark choice: evolve or risk irrelevance.

“Sports that are willing to transform and change are interesting to investors; those that aren't will get left behind. Pro cycling is on a precipice right now.”

The anonymous insider didn’t shy away from the stakes: “The consequence of burying your head in the sand could be the death of you. Cycling very much faces that risk.”

While the UCI has positioned itself publicly as open to external investment, President David Lappartient previously saying “We welcome our Saudi friends,” the governing body ultimately sided against granting One Cycling’s races top-tier status. Lappartient had been attempting to strike a delicate balance between embracing financial support and protecting the sport’s existing calendar, particularly the historical races organised by ASO.

ASO, the powerful group behind the Tour de France, remains the lone major entity opposed to One Cycling, with other top-tier teams, including Visma, Red Bull and Soudal – Quick-Step, reportedly supportive. One Cycling itself claims to have “95% of the best riders in the sport” involved in its plans.

Their argument is simple: the current business model of pro cycling is broken, and something needs to change.

“We've got a commercial proposition that we think works,” the same source said. “We think it's going to grow revenue for the sport. It's going to allow the teams and organisers that are all losing money to potentially make money.”

That logic, centralising commercial rights, revamping media packaging, and spreading races to new regions, is a sharp departure from cycling’s decentralised, tradition-heavy model. But with the UCI siding with ASO for now, the tension between modernisation and preservation is far from resolved.