Several people came to ask me about it in the past few days ... and several of my customers in the Tour de France 2010 were also wondering about the same question ... How come Mark Cavendish (HTC-Columbia) wins 5 stages in a sprint (the small rider from the Isle of Man seems to have found back his sprinters legs he was looking for since the start of the season) while he didn't win the green jersey of best sprinter?

Indeed, Alessandro Petacchi (Lampre-Farnese Vini) took - almost a week ago already - home the precious green tissue. How could Ale-Jet (who won "only" 2 stages) beat Cav like this?

The answer to this question could be very short and simple: simply because the Italian rider has shown a more regular performance than the British sprinter. Since I saw this question popping up several times however, I decided to give you a more detailed explanation!

The system of points for the points classification

Despite what many people think, the green jersey is not a recognition of the best sprinter at the finish of each of the stages, but the jersey which correponds to the leader of the points classification. It is therefore important to first understand how these points are awarded to the riders: points are awarded both at the stage finish and at the intermediate sprints according to the definition which figured in the official regulations of the race and which was as follows:

• at the stage finish:
  - for the stages in line which are referenced as flat: 35 - 30 - 26 - 24 - 22 - 20 - 19 - 18 - 17 - 16 - 15 - 14 - 13 - 12 - 11 - 10 - 9 - 8 - 7 - 6 - 5 - 4 - 3 - 2 - 1 points for the 25 first riders (in the Tour de France 2010 this concerned the stages 1 to 6, 11 to 13, 18 and 20)
  - for the stages in line which are referenced as medium mountain: 25 - 22 - 20 - 18 - 16 - 15 - 14 - 13 - 12 - 11 - 10 - 9 - 8 - 7 - 6 - 5 - 4 - 3 - 2 - 1 points for the 20 first riders (in the Tour de France 2010 this concerned only stages 7 and 10)
  - for the stages in line which are referenced as high mountain: 20 - 17 - 15 - 13 - 12 - 10 - 9 - 8 - 7 - 6 - 5 - 4 - 3 - 2 - 1 points for the 15 first riders (in the Tour de France 2010 this concerned the stages 8, 9 and 14 to 17)
  - for the prologue and the individual time trial (the 19th stage): 15 - 12 - 10 - 8 - 6 - 5 - 4 - 3 - 2 - 1 points for the 10 first riders
• for the intermediate sprints: the 3 first riders received respectively 6, 4 and 2 points

The points which were awarded to the favourites of the points classification of the 2010 Tour de France

In the 97th Tour de France, 3 riders have dominated the points classification: Thor Hushovd (Cervélo TestTeam), Mark Cavendish (HTC-Columbia) and Alessandro Petacchi (Lampre-Farnese Vini). However, besides Fabian Cancellara (Team Saxo Bank) after the prologue and Sylvain Chavanel (Quick Step) after his stage win in the 2nd stage, only Thor Hushovd and Alessandro Petacchi have worn the green jersey:
- Thor Hushovd after 11 stages (3 to 10, 12 and 16 and 17)
- Alessandro Petacchi after 8 stages (right from the first stage and after the 11th, the 13th to 15th and 18th to 20th and last stage)

When we look at how these 3 riders have obtained the points for the classification which is often referenced to as the sprinters classification, we see the regular performance of Alessandro Petacchi who took points for this classification in 9 stages, each time taking in between 17 and 35 points in these stages (for an average of 27 points in these stages) against 9 stages with 1 to 35 points for Mark Cavendish (an average of 25.78) and 13 stages with 6 to 35 points for Thor Hushovd (an average of 17.08):

• Mark Cavendish:
  > P/ 0 points (127th place)
  > 1/ 0 points (178th place)
  > 2/ 0 points (148th ; leading group continued until the finish)
  > 3/ 1 point (25th ; no points in intermediate sprints; points were distributed among the riders of the leading group)
  > 4/ 14 points (12th ; no points in intermediate sprints; points were distributed among the riders of the leading group)
  > 5/ 35 points (stage win ; no points in intermediate sprints; points were distributed among the riders of the leading group)
  > 6/ 35 points (stage win ; no points in intermediate sprints; points were distributed among the riders of the leading group)
  > 7/ 0 points (161st ; no points in intermediate sprints; points were distributed among the riders of the leading group)
  > 8/ 0 points (174th ; no points in intermediate sprints; points were distributed among the riders of the leading group)
  > 9/ 0 points (144th ; no points in intermediate sprints; points were distributed among the riders of the leading group)
  > 10/ 12 points (9th)
  > 11/ 35 points (stage win ; no points in intermediate sprints; points were distributed among the riders of the leading group)
  > 12/ 0 points (162nd)
  > 13/ 30 points (2nd ; no points in intermediate sprints; points were distributed among the riders of the leading group)
  > 14/ 0 points (161st ; no points in intermediate sprints; points were distributed among the riders of the leading group)
  > 15/ 0 points (113th ; no points in intermediate sprints; points were distributed among the riders of the leading group)
  > 16/ 0 points (115th ; no points in intermediate sprints; points were distributed among the riders of the leading group)
  > 17/ 0 points (165th ; no points in intermediate sprints; points were distributed among the riders of the leading group)
  > 18/ 35 points (stage win ; no points in intermediate sprints; points were distributed among the riders of the leading group)
  > 19/ 0 points (86th)
  > 20/ 35 points (stage win ; no points in intermediate sprints; points were distributed among the riders of the leading group)
  
  This gives a total of 232 points, which gives him the 2nd place in the points classification.
• Alessandro Petacchi:
  P/ 0 points (39th place)
  1/ 35 points (stage win / no points in intermediate sprints; points were distributed among the riders of the leading group)
  2/ 0 points (157th ; leading group continued until the finish)
  3/ 0 points (28th ; no points in intermediate sprints; points were distributed among the riders of the leading group)
  4/ 35 points (stage win ; no points in intermediate sprints; points were distributed among the riders of the leading group)
  5/ 18 points (8th ; no points in intermediate sprints; points were distributed among the riders of the leading group)
  6/ 26 points (3rd ; no points in intermediate sprints; points were distributed among the riders of the leading group)
  7/ 0 points (111th ; no points in intermediate sprints; points were distributed among the riders of the leading group)
  8/ 0 points (157th ; no points in intermediate sprints; points were distributed among the riders of the leading group)
  9/ 0 points (139th ; no points in intermediate sprints; points were distributed among the riders of the leading group)
  10/ 6 + 11 = 17 points (10th + first intermediate sprint)
  11/ 30 points (2nd ; no points in intermediate sprints; points were distributed among the riders of the leading group)
  12/ 0 points (108th)
  13/ 26 points (3rd ; no points in intermediate sprints; points were distributed among the riders of the leading group))
  14/ 0 points (122nd ; no points in intermediate sprints; points were distributed among the riders of the leading group)
  15/ 0 points (115th ; no points in intermediate sprints; points were distributed among the riders of the leading group)
  16/ 0 points (91st ; no points in intermediate sprints; points were distributed among the riders of the leading group)
  17/ 0 points (169th ; no points in intermediate sprints; points were distributed among the riders of the leading group)
  18/ 26 points (3rd ; no points in intermediate sprints; points were distributed among the riders of the leading group)
  19/ 0 points (60th)
  20/ 30 points (2nd ; no points in intermediate sprints; points were distributed among the riders of the leading group)
  
  This gives him a total of 243 points, which leads to the first place in the points classification.
• Thor Hushovd :
  P/ 0 points (157th place)
  1/ 26 points (3rd place ; no points in intermediate sprints; points were distributed among the riders of the leading group)
  2/ 0 points (7th ; leading group continued until the finish)
  3/ 35 points (stage win ; no points in intermediate sprints; points were distributed among the riders of the leading group)
  4/ 19 points (9th ; no points in intermediate sprints; points were distributed among the riders of the leading group)
  5/ 22 points (5th ; no points in intermediate sprints; points were distributed among the riders of the leading group)
  6/ 16 points (10th ; no points in intermediate sprints; points were distributed among the riders of the leading group)
  7/ 0 points (179th ; no points in intermediate sprints; points were distributed among the riders of the leading group)
  8/ 0 points (181st ; no points in intermediate sprints; points were distributed among the riders of the leading group)
  9/ 6 points (159th ; points pris lors du premier sprint intermédiaire)
  10/ 4+10 = 14 points (11th + premier sprint intermédiaire)
  11/ 19 points (7th ; no points in intermediate sprints; points were distributed among the riders of the leading group)
  12/ 4 + 6 = 10 points (147th ; points pris aux sprints intermédiaires)
  13/ 18 points (8th ; no points in intermediate sprints; points were distributed among the riders of the leading group)
  14/ 0 points (166th ; no points in intermediate sprints; points were distributed among the riders of the leading group)
  15/ 0 points (160th ; no points in intermediate sprints; points were distributed among the riders of the leading group)
  16/ 6 points (10th ; no points in intermediate sprints; points were distributed among the riders of the leading group)
  17/ 0 points (136th ; no points in intermediate sprints; points were distributed among the riders of the leading group)
  18/ 12 points (14th ; no points in intermediate sprints; points were distributed among the riders of the leading group)
  19/ 0 points (124th)
  20/ 19 points (7th ; no points in intermediate sprints; points were distributed among the riders of the leading group)
  
  This gives him a total of 222 points, which leads to the 3th place in the points classification.

We thus see that Alessandro Petacchi had a very regular performance by taking a high number of points in the 9 stages where the sprinters had their word to say. We also see that Thor Hushovd, successfully, tried to grab some points in the intermediate sprints, but this hasn't been enough to allow him to win this classification. Thanks to these points he is however the rider who wore the green jersey in the highest number of stages in this Tour de France 2010.

From a financial point of view, Alessandro Petacchi is the winner when we only look at the prizes which were awarded based on this points classification, while Thor Hushovd ends ahead of Mark Cavendish thanks to the high number of stages in which he got to wear the green jersey and thanks to the intermediate sprints:
- Alessandro Petacchi wins 7 x 300€ (for the days on which he wore the green jersey) + 800€ (for the intermediate sprint he won in the 10th stage) + 25.000€ = 27.900€
- Thor Hushovd wins 11 x 300€ + 2x800€ (2 intermediate sprints he won in the 9th & 12th stages) + 2x450€ (2 times 2nd in the intermediate sprint in the 10th & 12th stages) + 10.000€ = 15.800€
- Mark Cavendish wins 15.000€ for his second place in the final points classification

door Thomas Vergouwen
Vond u dit artikel interessant? Laat het uw vrienden op Facebook weten door op de buttons hieronder te klikken!

3 comments | 3957 views

this publication is published in: Tour de France | Tour de France 2010

Leave a comment

Your name
*
Your e-mail address
*
[this will never be published and is only used to allow me to contact you if necessary and potentially to receive notifications of new comments]
Be informed about new comments
Check this box if you want to receive an e-mail when new comments are posted to this article (please make sure your e-mail address above is correct to make sure you'll receive those notifications!)
Your comment


Attention!! In order to fight spam you need to answer the simple question below. The answer needs to be given as a number between 2 and 100. If your answer is not correct the other input in this form will be ignored.

What is the result of six times six ?


Publish reply