This short article is part of a new series of posts and articles that I’m calling “Recess” posts. Each “Recess” will be a quick write about a topic that might not relate to anything pertinent or incisive, but should be a fun, short read. It’s time to lean into the grade school themes of The Geek Locker.
Every new year, the whole world waits for UCI (the Union Cycliste Internationale) pro teams to release their new kit designs. And every year, we are wowed, disappointed, disgusted, shocked, and awed by the design choices that are made by the team and their sponsors. Designs range from simple and clean to crowded and gross. Color choices sometimes seem to be made by throwing darts at a color wheel, and the patterns and shapes seem to defy seemingly any logic. (It is definitely worth noting that many cycling teams are very strapped for cash and sponsorship, which can lead to inherent design challenges)
As a result, professional cycling kit is great to rank, which I have done personally below (with help from this tier maker). My ranking is a nebulous combination of:
-
Color palette (complimentary colors, blending, layering, etc.)
-
Design consistency (sponsor’s logo matches other jersey features, consistent line weight, aesthetic unity, visual clarity, clear design intent, etc.)
-
Salience (ability for the jersey to stand out in the peloton, combined with uniqueness)
-
Human factors (will this look ugly on a sweaty person, out in the rain, covered in mud, etc.)
I may provide some justification for select rankings after the tier list if I don’t spend too much time tinkering with the rankings. Within each tier, the jerseys are loosely ranked left-to-right from best-to-worst, and there is some bias based on my understanding of how they look on an actual human, not just as a PNG file. Essentially, the rules are made up and the points don’t matter, but I stand by this ranking nonetheless.
… I spent way too much time tinkering with the rankings. I hope this sparked some fun family dinner conversation.
Recess 007