Ranking vs Rating: The Difference That Explains It All on Cyclingflash

Rating and Ranking. Two words that sound similar but make a world of difference in how we evaluate cyclists. To truly understand the Cyclingflash Rankings, you need to grasp this distinction.

Rating: The strength number behind the scenes

A rating is the underlying figure that reflects a rider’s current strength. Think of it as a strength score: top riders around 1000 points, less strong riders significantly lower. This rating is updated daily.

Perform strongly against tough opponents? Your rating rises. Disappoint against weaker competition? Your rating falls.

The system is ruthlessly fair. The beauty: this rating accounts for all results since 2018. A rider who has dominated for years retains a high rating longer than someone with just one good month. But if you’re inactive for a while, your rating gradually drops due to uncertainty about your current form.

Ranking: The order everyone sees

A ranking is simply the order from highest to lowest, based on the ratings. The rider with the highest rating is first, the rider with the second highest rating is second, and so on...

The ranking is what you see; the rating explains why someone is placed there.

How ratings are calculated

Behind every rating lies a complex system that constantly evaluates:

How strong was the competition? A sprint including Tim Merlier, Olav Kooij, and Jonathan Milan counts more than one without top sprinters. Makes sense... Stronger competition makes your performance more valuable.

Consistency over time: The rating takes into account your entire history. A rider with years of top performances earns more trust than a one-hit wonder.

The difference in practice

Example: Lorena Wiebes has a high Sprint Rating thanks to her consistent dominance in bunch sprints. That high rating clearly places her first in the Cyclingflash Sprint Ranking. Without that strong rating, no high ranking.

The gap with the competition is also clear in the big difference in ratings.