So, Peaty is World Champ as we know, but how does that relate to this

1 (1) Samuel HILL Australia 25 1,653
2 (2) Steve PEAT Great Britain 36 1,642
3 (3) Greg MINNAAR South Africa 29 1,604

I gather there is a World Cup and a World Championship, how do these titles relate to each other? Do some races only count towards one or the other?

cheers

ps – going to Fort William again this year, so really ought to understand this stuff…!

World championships is a stand alone, one off event.
The world cup has 5 races this year. Last year, Sam Hill was the overall world cup champion, hence the points. Steve Peat won the World Championship, which is the more highly regarded crown of the two

So is the World Championship a one off race? Canberra last year??

Cant see how a one off race is more highly regarded than a 5 race league, but not complaining if it gives us a champion.

I'll put it in terms you can understand.

Winning the downhill world cup is like winning the premier league.
Wining the world championships is like winning the european cup.

get it?

They're different crowns really and while everyone wants to debate which is the more prestige, they represent different things.

The world championships is a one off race. You get one shot, one run and if you make the slightest mistake then that's more or less your chances of securing the title over. Consequently the race favours the rider who can keep the coolest head and is genuinely fast. You could have a world champ because they are so far ahead of everyone else that they can ride at 95% and still beat everyone else (Sam Hill at Rotorua) or you can have a rider who is just supremely good at focusing on that one run, not making any mistakes and dealing with the pressure that comes with the title – Fabien Barrell at Les Gets, where Peaty binned it – sad but that's the worlds and that's the effect of pressure; Gee Atherton in Italy when Sam Hill binned it on the last corner, when he really should have backed off the gas a little and still won by several seconds.

The World Cup on the other had rewards consistency and adaptability; you have to be good over a range of courses, you have to be consistent and you have to be able to adapt your riding style to suit. You can afford to make mistakes, like Sam Hill at Andora where he binned it big time, but still win the overall because you make up for it by winning other races and placing well.

I personally can see that the World Champs may have a little more prestige associated, just because the rainbow stripes have always been so highly regarded in cycling in general, but I think IMO, that the World Cup shows who the best rider really is.

Nope, still struggling with your metaphor. I'm not really a football fan as you seem to imply, but I do know the European cup is played over 10 or more games if you get to the final. Certaibnly not a one off event.

Is it more like winning the London marathon?

I think the whole thing is probably simpler than I thought, maybe as simple as you Dasnut? Cheers.

kitz_chris, 6 round this year, not 5. still too short though IMO

you are correct, it is more simple that you thought, and more than likely as simple as me. I am quite a simple person at heart.

Hows about this:
Winning the downhill world cup is like winning the premier league.
Winning the world championships is like winning the fa cup final (without having to qualify, although you do need to be nominated by your local cycling governing body)

I am not a football fan either, however I know the principles of the premier league and fa cup.

cheers
also, its a simile, not a metaphor
any better?

I think everyone failed to point out (sorry if someone did), in the world champs, you are racing for your country, in the world cup series, you are racing for your team.
So the football analogy would be playing for your country in the world cup and/or playing for your team in that world club competition that no ones interested in.