How do you determine the strength of opponents? Why are some riders ranked higher than expected? And how does the system relate to the UCI World Ranking? In this comprehensive Q&A, we answer questions about how our new ranking system works. From the technical background to practical examples: here you’ll find answers to fully understand the Cyclingflash Ranking.
❓ How exactly does the Cyclingflash Ranking work? Instead of awarding points based on where you race, we look at whom you race against. If you beat a strong rider, you gain more "credit" than if you beat a weaker rider. The system continuously calculates the relative strength of all riders and adjusts rankings accordingly.
❓ How do you determine who is "stronger" than whom? This happens dynamically. If rider A beats rider B, and rider B is strong (because they beat many others), then A’s rating increases more than if B were weak.
❓ Why is this better than the UCI ranking? The UCI ranking primarily rewards collecting points regardless of the quality of opponents. We reward performances against strong competition. A 6th place against world-class riders counts more for us than a win in a weakly contested race.
❓ Why not just look at wins? Because not all wins are equal. Winning against Pogačar and Vingegaard in a mountain stage is much more impressive than winning a race they don’t start. Also, many riders don’t win but definitely have their qualities.
❓ Can teams "game" your system like with UCI points? Much harder. You can’t strategically choose weak races for points. You have to race against whoever starts. Therefore, our system rewards pure sporting performance.
❓ Why six separate rankings? Why not one overall? Cycling is too diverse for a single ranking. Wout van Aert and Tadej Pogačar are both world-class but in completely different disciplines. By keeping specialisms separate, we can fairly assess each rider where they excel best.
❓ How do you determine which specialism a race belongs to? We analyze the route, history of winners, and the type of finish. A mountain stage in the Tour is clearly "MOUNTAIN," a bunch sprint is "SPRINT."
❓ Can a rider rank highly in multiple specialisms? Absolutely! Mathieu van der Poel, for example, ranks high in both SPRINT and HILLY. This showcases his versatility.
❓ How do you handle different routes within the same specialism? Is every mountain stage the same? Good question! A short punchy climb differs from a long alpine pass. In the future, we might create sub-categories, but for now, we group similar finishes together.
❓ Will there be more specialisms added? That is very likely. CYCLOCROSS is definitely on the wishlist. But first, we aim to perfect the current six.
❓ Are past races also taken into account? Yes, the rating is updated after every race based on the results. This ensures all races collectively influence the ranking, with recent races having more impact.
❓ How often is the rating updated? The rating is updated daily. If a race relevant to the specialism takes place, your rating changes significantly depending on the result; if there’s no race, your rating might still shift slightly due to uncertainty from inactivity.
❓ Are all races included? All professional road races are included. A local fun race does not count, but a UCI 1.2 race does.
❓ What happens if there are errors in results? We follow official UCI results. If those get corrected later, we update them accordingly.
❓ What if a top rider deliberately avoids smaller races? Is he "punished" for that? No, quite the opposite. If a rider only competes in the toughest races against the strongest opponents, he can rank higher with fewer races than someone winning many weaker events. Quality trumps quantity.
❓ How do you deal with riders who "give up" or don't fully contest a result? We only look at official results. Whether someone abandons for tactical reasons or due to real problems, we can’t distinguish. We assume every participation is taken seriously.
❓ A rider finishes second behind his teammate who "gets" the win. How is that factored in? The system sees only the official result. Team tactics are part of the sport. If both riders are strong, they both get credit for their positions against strong opponents.
❓ What if a "weak" rider suddenly beats a strong rider? Does their rating explode? It has an impact, but the system is designed to avoid extremes. One good day doesn’t make you a top rider, but it is still rewarded appropriately.
❓ How do you handle different seasons/periods? The system accounts for natural form peaks. A rider strong in July (Tour period) is not "penalized" for performing less in February.
❓ Do different seasons weigh equally? Or is a Tour win "worth more" than a February win? A race counts more when the field is stronger. This way, each race is valued fairly.
❓ What about riders sidelined for a while due to injury or illness? How do you keep measuring their "true" level? Their rating gradually declines from inactivity, which makes sense as form needs proving. Upon return, they can quickly rise again if they perform. This reflects reality: you are only as good as your latest races.
❓ Can we finally say who the "best rider in the world" is? We can say who is currently strongest against top opponents within each specialism. Additionally, with our Overall ranking, we combine all specialisms to show who the best riders in the world are. This can be a climber but also a sprinter.
❓ How do your rankings relate to the UCI World Ranking? Our ranking is completely independent of the UCI system. A rider can rank high with us even if their team has few UCI points, simply because they beat strong opponents.
❓ How do your rankings compare to the "feel" of cycling fans? Does it match what we see? We hope so! If our ranking doesn’t correspond at all with what experts and fans observe, our system is flawed. We do expect some surprises that make people think.
❓ What’s in it for fans? You get a far better idea of who is truly in form. No more confusion about why rider X ranks higher than rider Y when everyone sees Y riding stronger.
❓ Why would teams look at your ranking? For scouting and transfers. Our ranking shows which riders consistently perform well against strong opponents, even if they don’t race in points-heavy events.
❓ What does this mean for the media? Better storylines. Instead of dry UCI points lists, you can discuss who really is the best climber, sprinter, or time trialist at the moment.
❓ How do you prevent your ranking from influencing rider/team race selection? That risk exists but is smaller than with UCI points. You can’t choose "easy" races; you have to race whoever starts. Moreover, if our system helps teams make better choices, that’s not a bad thing! The system rewards performing against strong opposition, so if it leads to seeing the best riders in the world compete more against each other, we can only applaud that!
❓ Is the data public/transparent? We share our methodology and explain how rankings are generated. The exact algorithms remain internal, but the logic is clear.
❓ Can riders dispute their ranking? The ranking is based on official results, so there’s little room for debate. They can, however, ask questions about the methodology.
❓ Will there be more features on the website? Definitely! We’re considering historical comparisons, prediction models, and deeper rider analyses. Available on both Wielerflits and Cyclingflash.com
Missing a question? Send it in (via info@wielerflits.nl) and we will add it to this list!
