Important news for Tom Pidcock and Julian Alaphilippe? ProTeams push for rule changes to secure more Grand Tour spots in 2025
Cycling
As the 2025 cycling season approaches, several ProTeams are lobbying the UCI to revise its regulations for Grand Tours, seeking an increase in the number of teams allowed to participate in these marquee events. Spanish newspaper Marca reports that ProTeams are calling for 23 teams, rather than the current 22, to be granted entry to the Giro d’Italia, Tour de France, and Vuelta a España.
Why are grand tours so important?
For ProTeams, Grand Tours are a financial and promotional lifeline. These events are the crown jewels of professional cycling, offering unparalleled global exposure to sponsors. With millions of fans watching on TV and attending in person, the Giro, Tour, and Vuelta provide a rare chance for smaller teams to show their talent and attract more lucrative sponsorship deals. A strong performance or stage win at a Grand Tour can significantly boost a team’s visibility and financial stability, which is crucial for survival in the fiercely competitive world of professional cycling.
Currently, all 18 UCI WorldTeams automatically qualify for the three-week races. Additionally, the top two ProTeams from the previous season, Lotto and Israel-Premier Tech, are guaranteed entry through the UCI’s promotion system. The race organisers then award two wildcard invitations to other ProTeams, leaving a limited window for smaller squads to earn a coveted spot. ProTeams are now pushing for a third wildcard to increase their chances of competing on cycling’s grandest stage.
The call for an additional wildcard has gained momentum following high-profile transfers of marquee riders to ProTeams this winter. Julian Alaphilippe has joined Tudor Pro Cycling, while Tom Pidcock has moved from INEOS Grenadiers to Q36.5 Pro Cycling. Both riders are stars of the sport and are key assets for their new teams, but without a Grand Tour wildcard, their ability to perform on the biggest stage and generate exposure for their squads could be limited. ProTeams argue that their inclusion would enrich the races and ensure top talent is on display for fans.
Expanding the number of teams in Grand Tours would bring challenges. If an additional ProTeam is allowed, the peloton size would increase from the current maximum of 176 riders to 184. While this is still smaller than the 198-rider fields seen before 2018, when the UCI reduced team sizes from nine riders to eight to enhance rider safety, it would represent a logistical and financial burden for race organisers. Accommodating more teams requires additional resources, from hotel rooms to race convoy vehicles, and raises concerns about safety and road congestion during the race.
Just in
Popular news
Latest comments
- no kidding. i remember when the pro peloton had the really edgy, nasty tone to it. many will want to blame armstrong for that but it went back WAAAYYYY before him. hinault presided over a culture like that, too, and others before him. it really sucked because amateur racers would emulate the pros and when i got into the sport i remember thinking “wow, bicycle racers are the biggest a**holes on the planet.” i’m not sure what caused the pro culture to change, but that change has been cemented by the greats of the sport — pogacar, van der poel, van aert, on and on — being great SPORTSMEN who are much more inclined to congratulate than hate each other. some may miss the old “get your hate on” days. i do not.OCexile12-01-2025
- Honestly, it's not just ProTeams that are arguing this: so are fans like me. I'd love to see more feisty teams struggling for points going at it against each other. I'd love to see a Cancellara team and a Contador team (what happened to them?!) up against the biggies. I'd love to see more wins like Castrillo in the Vuelta (his first was fun, his second was great!). But I also recognize that the two tier system requires that some teams fear a loss of benefit, and others seek a gain of benefit. If everyone has the benefit, is it as important to compete for it? Cycling is weird, that's my conclusion.RidesHills12-01-2025
- To summarize many things: the peloton is often separated by mere centimeters through all sorts of terrain, road furniture, and turns (the point of saving energy is to be in the slipstream), the speeds are high from the start in every race and every stage (the points system requires points for the non-dominant teams), riders are more professional these days (there is no personal training, anymore, the team determines the workout regimen, etc.), everyone is stronger (see previous point), and younger folks are more exuberant (I have kids without fully developed frontal lobes, this is my positive spin on the situation). Asking individual riders to be safer is honestly plain old BS. What people are asking for is a change in the culture, and the culture is driven by the dividends: points and wins. Rider safety only exists within systems that honor it, and the points and wins system does not. Then again, it does in the way that some teams try for a bunch of top 10s without contesting the win, and fans hate that, which means... wins more than points... and who determines the culture? fans. My biggest gripe about putting responsibility and agency on riders is that it's a peloton, it's a team sport, it's a blob of a slipstream, and you individually cannot control what happens in front of you, you just can't. Tell me how to avoid a bunch sprint crash when you're in the wrong place at the wrong time - and nobody has an answer.RidesHills12-01-2025
- Pretty much true but then again it’s far too early, they need at least 5 years of meetings, travel and lunches to talk it through ;-) Besides, it would be near impossible to create rules and punishment for going too fast, who would decide how and when and for which rider(s)?Mistermaumau12-01-2025
- Yeah, that would be funny, as long as it doesn’t backfire and we have to wait 20 years to read about it in someone’s autobiography ;-) At least they’re not having a public go at each other like so often in the 100m sprint in athletics or Kerr and Ingebrigtsen.Mistermaumau12-01-2025
- This narrative of blaming the rider or the bicycle setup needs to stop. The issue is that the UCI has done nothing to improve the safety of the courses or punish the race organisers for the poor setup of course routes. Instead, the UCI has encouraged this alternative narrative of blaming others - need proof? UCI did nothing to punish the race organisers after the devastating crash at Itzulia Basque Country. Need more proof? UCI did nothing to improve the safety of sprint finishes after the life-changing crash of Fabio Jakobsen in Poland.Pogboom12-01-2025
- for all i know Merlier and Wout are besties and Tim just thought it would be really funny to needle his buddy — “OMG, he’s so much faster than Wout its crazy!” WTF do any of us ever know, really.OCexile12-01-2025
- But no-one is interested in slower, many would like safer so unless they can show that e.g. youth races are safer, it IS useless. It’d be more efficient to electronically limit everyone’s power output at steep gradients (down of course) or specified sections, am sure technically it isn’t that complicated or expensive but there’d be an outcry so forget it.Mistermaumau12-01-2025
- Agreed, as said here and has been superficially discussed before, it is the whole peleton and race that has gotten faster, the very best like these three, are still only winning by the same margins as elsewhere in history, they haven’t discovered any new distinguishing product. I mean, if an ageing Cavendish, Thomas and others can still deliver sometimes, nothing much can be going on.Mistermaumau12-01-2025
- Yes, but then again, unlike some, they are not presented with a list of questions to prepare answers and journalists keep the prerogative to reassemble quotes in whatever order makes a story so in many cases we have no context of in which situation/relation he said it. I think, as I’ve implied before, people should revert to taking more time to try and get the feel of what or why someone is saying to get the broad view as opposed to focusing on a detail. I know people love the short and cool statements found on SM but they rarely lead to constructive discussion, reflection or understanding, just impulsive reactions which is great for revealing someone’s feelings but says little about the background that created them.Mistermaumau12-01-2025