Reforming Women's Cycling? Clásica Almería shows the cracks

When the Union Cycliste Internationale published its paper “Reform of Professional Cycling”, it called for stakeholder input on sustainability and structure. The aim is to “future-proof” the sport.

But in women’s cycling, the system has already sent its own warning signal; it is visible in the field at the Clásica de Almería Femenina. A 1.Pro race, designed as a bridge between the WorldTour and the rest of the sport, started with just 48 riders. Eight teams: a mix of WorldTour, ProTeam and Continental squads.

48 riders is not a minor inconvenience. It is a structural diagnosis. If a 1.Pro event cannot assemble a robust peloton, the ecosystem beneath the WorldTour is too narrow to absorb shocks.

The numbers make the problem clear. Since 2021, the number of women’s Continental teams has fallen by roughly 27%. Meanwhile, WorldTour rider numbers dropped from 268 in 2025 to 233 in 2026. And of 15 WorldTour licences, only 14 are currently filled, after two teams folded and one ProTeam stepped up.

Professionalisation, including minimum salaries, was necessary. But it is not the only driver of rising costs. The more important factor is simple supply and demand: the pool of genuinely elite riders is small, while every WorldTour and ProTeam wants results. Scarcity inflates salaries, pushing budgets upward artificially.

The consequence:

• Smaller rosters
• Fewer contracts at Continental and development levels
• Rising financial pressure on organisers and mid-tier teams

And yet, the base has not been strengthened. Growth has focused on the summit, leaving the pyramid fragile.

Development teams were intended to widen the base: provide age-appropriate race calendars, leadership opportunities and a structured path into elite racing.

In reality, many are increasingly used as reserves for WorldTour line-ups. With rosters averaging 16 riders and the full WT calendar mandatory, injuries, illness and overlapping events require reinforcement. Development riders are often inserted to meet numbers, not to progress naturally.

The sporting consequences are clear:

• Fewer race days at the appropriate level
• Limited leadership opportunities
• Experience gained through “making the numbers” rather than actually racing for a result 

Financially, running a proper development programme is expensive. Staff, vehicles, and logistics, all require budget. With top-level salaries rising due to scarcity at WorldTour level, development teams are squeezed.

This leads to a paradox: What is a salary without race days? Wages are meaningless if riders are not given the opportunity to compete. The Clásica Almería demonstrates this vividly. Despite professionalisation, there are fewer teams and less peloton depth.

The Cyclists’ Alliance has been pushing for Continental teams to pay riders fairly, something that rarely happens in men’s Continental teams. In some cases, female Continental and development riders earn more than male equivalents, yet still struggle for race days. Scarcity inflates salaries, but structural opportunities lag; a fundamental contradiction.

Even at the highest level, the model shows fragility. At the Tour Down Under Women, 14 mandatory WorldTour teams compete, yet the peloton is still relatively small.

If the goal is to copy men’s cycling or to achieve parity, the wrong steps are being taken. One cannot replicate the men’s model in five years by imposing tight rules and financial pressure without first building depth at every level. The system is being rushed, and Almería is the visual proof.

Women’s ProTeams effectively have a guaranteed route into the Tour de France Femmes. Sponsors are drawn to this visibility. But investment flows upward, leaving Continental teams weaker and development pathways constrained.

Reduced access for Continental squads has already led to sponsor withdrawals and team closures. A shrinking base cannot sustain the summit.

Budget constraints also push teams toward predominantly national rosters. Fewer flights, simpler visas, lower costs. These are rational financial choices, but they reduce international mobility and limit the development of globally competitive riders.

Logistics and budget realities interact with racing opportunities: too few riders, too many obligations, compressed calendars, inflated salaries and insufficient races for development.

To come back to Almería. Forty-eight riders. Development teams pressed into WorldTour service. A fragile Continental base. Rising salaries. Shrinking opportunities.

It is proof that the sport was built too fast, steps were skipped and the depth of the peloton suffers as a result. What I and others have forecasted for years is now visual: the cracks are visible.

The UCI’s reform paper asks how professional cycling should evolve. The more urgent task in women’s cycling is clear: rebalance the ecosystem before reinforcing the summit.

Because a pyramid does not fail at the top. It fails when the base cannot hold it.