UCI saves cycling once again
03-21-12, 05:04 PM
#26
Elite Fred
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Edge City
Posts: 10,945
Bikes: 2009 Spooky (cracked frame), 2006 Curtlo, 2002 Lemond (current race bike) Zurich, 1987 Serotta Colorado, 1986 Cannondale for commuting, a 1984 Cannondale on loan to my son
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 60 Post(s)
Liked 42 Times
in
19 Posts
03-21-12, 05:40 PM
#28
Elite Fred
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Edge City
Posts: 10,945
Bikes: 2009 Spooky (cracked frame), 2006 Curtlo, 2002 Lemond (current race bike) Zurich, 1987 Serotta Colorado, 1986 Cannondale for commuting, a 1984 Cannondale on loan to my son
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 60 Post(s)
Liked 42 Times
in
19 Posts
03-21-12, 06:51 PM
#32
meow
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Hint: check out my BF name
Posts: 5,831
Bikes: 2016 Parlee Altum, 2013 Cannondale Super Six Evo Hi Mod Di2 only, 2011 Cannondale Super Six, Dura Ace 7800, 2007 Cannondale System Six Dura Ace 7800, 1992 Bridgestone RB-1, MB-2, MB-3, MB-5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked 3 Times
in
2 Posts
Great, I just bought lots of expensive 17" socks. What a pain it will be in every lap of a crit to roll them down as I am approaching the line and then pull them back up as I hit the backstretch.
03-21-12, 08:54 PM
#34
Making a kilometer blurry
I guess this means I'll have to wash my bike for UCI events. I'll also need a list of UCI approved frame pumps I can race with.
Are we still allowed to not shave our legs?
Do I need a TUE for my appendectomy?
It would be pretty funny for someone to get calf implants for a cam back profile. They're not bike parts, you know.
Are we still allowed to not shave our legs?
Do I need a TUE for my appendectomy?
It would be pretty funny for someone to get calf implants for a cam back profile. They're not bike parts, you know.
03-21-12, 09:19 PM
#36
I'm in shape! A round one
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lake View, AL
Posts: 131
Bikes: Konas: Jake the Snake-Fire Mountain-Zing Supreme, Surly Long Haul Trucker, Santana Arriva tandem, Montagues: Paratrooper-Fit, Trek 1200, Bianchi Ocelot, and an old Bridgestone 200 I rebuilt as a singlespeed.
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
1 Post
So, who's gonna save cycling from the UCI again? 
03-22-12, 07:46 AM
#38
Writin' stuff
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Durango, CO
Posts: 3,784
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 19 Times
in
4 Posts
I just read to the bottom
"... If the rule is enforced this year, team mechanics will have to put new forks on their race bikes that include the stock tabs. To retain fast wheel changes, they may have to resort to redesigned quick releases that open far enough to clear the tabs...."
Which renders the tabs useless !!
Then the UCI will mandate bigger tabs ....
Then teams will get wider skewers .....
"... If the rule is enforced this year, team mechanics will have to put new forks on their race bikes that include the stock tabs. To retain fast wheel changes, they may have to resort to redesigned quick releases that open far enough to clear the tabs...."
Which renders the tabs useless !!
Then the UCI will mandate bigger tabs ....
Then teams will get wider skewers .....
The rules forbid modification, rather than require lawyer tabs. Since all forks these days come with the tabs, the two are essentially the same, except that with the way the rule is written a wider quick release would solve the problem while staying within the rules.
I don't understand the UCI. If they made these changes public on their own, with a press release explaining the motives, they would be much better received. But they do not, and so I have to go find the stuff, and it's not my job to explain their motives for them (even if they do sometimes make sense).
The sock thing, for example. It sounds utterly absurd, until you realize that there are already rules against compression gear and this is just an extension of those. But I'm not going to go out of my way to make them seem less absurd when they won't put the effort into doing so themselves.
Their media relations is just terrible. Honestly, Julien Carron is an intelligent guy and the path they are taking is, in many ways, good for the sport. But they don't bother to explain the motives and rationale behind any of it, so we just get these seemingly idiotic puzzle pieces that the public can't fit together because they have no concept of the bigger picture.
Caley
03-22-12, 07:56 AM
#39
out walking the earth
The rules forbid modification, rather than require lawyer tabs. Since all forks these days come with the tabs, the two are essentially the same, except that with the way the rule is written a wider quick release would solve the problem while staying within the rules.
I don't understand the UCI. If they made these changes public on their own, with a press release explaining the motives, they would be much better received. But they do not, and so I have to go find the stuff, and it's not my job to explain their motives for them (even if they do sometimes make sense).
The sock thing, for example. It sounds utterly absurd, until you realize that there are already rules against compression gear and this is just an extension of those. But I'm not going to go out of my way to make them seem less absurd when they won't put the effort into doing so themselves.
Their media relations is just terrible. Honestly, Julien Carron is an intelligent guy and the path they are taking is, in many ways, good for the sport. But they don't bother to explain the motives and rationale behind any of it, so we just get these seemingly idiotic puzzle pieces that the public can't fit together because they have no concept of the bigger picture.
Caley
I don't understand the UCI. If they made these changes public on their own, with a press release explaining the motives, they would be much better received. But they do not, and so I have to go find the stuff, and it's not my job to explain their motives for them (even if they do sometimes make sense).
The sock thing, for example. It sounds utterly absurd, until you realize that there are already rules against compression gear and this is just an extension of those. But I'm not going to go out of my way to make them seem less absurd when they won't put the effort into doing so themselves.
Their media relations is just terrible. Honestly, Julien Carron is an intelligent guy and the path they are taking is, in many ways, good for the sport. But they don't bother to explain the motives and rationale behind any of it, so we just get these seemingly idiotic puzzle pieces that the public can't fit together because they have no concept of the bigger picture.
Caley
03-22-12, 08:01 AM
#40
Writin' stuff
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Durango, CO
Posts: 3,784
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 19 Times
in
4 Posts
No idea why, but it's been that way for a while. The rules basically state that clothing's only purpose is to cover you up and keep you warm, if necessary. Anything that provides further advantage (compression gear, the weird Pearl bat suit thing from '10, etc) is illegal.
It's probably just so we don't look like triathletes/idiots, though.
And no, no bans. They just won't let you start, and I imagine they could nullify results afterwards if they really wanted to.
It's probably just so we don't look like triathletes/idiots, though.
And no, no bans. They just won't let you start, and I imagine they could nullify results afterwards if they really wanted to.
03-22-12, 08:03 AM
#41
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: TX
Posts: 2,620
Bikes: Orbea Orca Trek 5500 Trek Equinox
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Define compression gear? What if I get some really tight socks and bib shorts? Is that compression gear? My skinsuit is crazy tight, probably just as much as any compression gear....is it illegal now? Are they going to measure the denier of socks before races now, right after they check for level saddles?
03-22-12, 08:11 AM
#43
Writin' stuff
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Durango, CO
Posts: 3,784
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 19 Times
in
4 Posts
Define compression gear? What if I get some really tight socks and bib shorts? Is that compression gear? My skinsuit is crazy tight, probably just as much as any compression gear....is it illegal now? Are they going to measure the denier of socks before races now, right after they check for level saddles?
As far as I know, they enforce it like this: jersey, bibs, you're good, unless they say "compression" on them or are marketed as compression wear. To use leg warmers and arm warmers, it needs to be cold, otherwise they assume you're wearing compression gear. So for most of the season, it's irrelevant — you simply can't wear anything on your legs for most of the summer.
But to be honest, unless you line up with your skinz on at nationals, nobody is going to give a frack.
And Gary, a rulebook won't help you, it's too obtuse. Look around for the PDF that I wrote the story on, which is intended to inform commissaires. It goes into a bit more detail.
Last edited by ZeCanon; 03-22-12 at 08:19 AM.
03-22-12, 08:19 AM
#44
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: TX
Posts: 2,620
Bikes: Orbea Orca Trek 5500 Trek Equinox
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Last year we had some guys from the Canadian track team in the tunnel and one guy had a few pairs of custom shoe covers, of different fabric to test. Some of them were worse than no covers at, all.. But they were all very tall, which I remarked on. He mentioned that there was a rule about how high covers/socks can be. I figured it was so that guys didn't find an aero fabric and cover their entire legs in them, not compression gear.
03-22-12, 08:20 AM
#45
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: TX
Posts: 2,620
Bikes: Orbea Orca Trek 5500 Trek Equinox
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
This is how easy it is to punch holes in the rules, and why they just set sock height rather than try to define lower-leg compression gear.
As far as I know, they enforce it like this: jersey, bibs, you're good, unless they say "compression" on them or are marketed as compression wear. To use leg warmers and arm warmers, it needs to be cold, otherwise they assume you're wearing compression gear. So for most of the season, it's irrelevant — you simply can't wear anything on your legs for most of the summer.
But to be honest, unless you line up with your skinz on at nationals, nobody is going to give a frack.
And Gary, a rulebook won't help you, it's too obtuse. Look around for the PDF that I wrote the story on, which is intended to inform commissaires, so it goes into a bit more detail.
As far as I know, they enforce it like this: jersey, bibs, you're good, unless they say "compression" on them or are marketed as compression wear. To use leg warmers and arm warmers, it needs to be cold, otherwise they assume you're wearing compression gear. So for most of the season, it's irrelevant — you simply can't wear anything on your legs for most of the summer.
But to be honest, unless you line up with your skinz on at nationals, nobody is going to give a frack.
And Gary, a rulebook won't help you, it's too obtuse. Look around for the PDF that I wrote the story on, which is intended to inform commissaires, so it goes into a bit more detail.
03-22-12, 09:48 AM
#46
Does Not Exist
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Voltairia
Posts: 2,094
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
No idea why, but it's been that way for a while. The rules basically state that clothing's only purpose is to cover you up and keep you warm, if necessary. Anything that provides further advantage (compression gear, the weird Pearl bat suit thing from '10, etc) is illegal.
It's probably just so we don't look like triathletes/idiots, though.
And no, no bans. They just won't let you start, and I imagine they could nullify results afterwards if they really wanted to.
It's probably just so we don't look like triathletes/idiots, though.
And no, no bans. They just won't let you start, and I imagine they could nullify results afterwards if they really wanted to.
03-22-12, 11:36 AM
#48
Resident Alien
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Location, location.
Posts: 13,089
Mentioned: 158 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 349 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 10 Times
in
6 Posts
Ze, if you can explain how rules stifling innovation that benefits all of us is a good thing, please do.
They are making rules about style? REALLY? Guess what, style changes. As do fabrics and design. If Lance wore high knee socks you'd see them all over the place. That's not their role. Why no compression gear? There's zero practical reason. None. So is their next step to approve colors and design of the various kits? Because some of them look way worse than high socks.
And we all know that this "UCI approved" sticker thing is nothing more than a money grab. They can't point to a single incident where someone crashed due to a wheel failure, or frame failure, or any other part over the last year that would have been prevented by this new system. The sticker system will actually drive up costs for the poorer teams because small vendors can't afford the testing costs and won't be able to supply wheels or frames or any other parts. They'll be forced to buy "approved" stuff at retail, or if they are lucky they'll get a price break.
I'd like to race at master's worlds this year. Before last year that meant I needed to be a top finisher at Nationals. Now I either I race a qualifier or beg for one of the few wildcard spots the UCI will give USA Cycling. Find me a qualifier in North America. There isn't one because the UCI wants $20,000 for the rights. You know how many races in the US make $20k? I had a discussion with their representative they had sent over to collect the check at one event. She told me that they couldn't have a criterium world championship because Europe was very crowded and they can't shut down city centers for a bike race.
I'll just leave you with that.
The UCI is being run by a guy who is banned for life by his own country's federation from competing in the Olympics. Then he meets with the Olympic committee to decide what cycling events will be in the Olympics. Seems perfectly reasonable to me.
Thankfully, this iteration of the UCI wasn't around in the 1800's, otherwise we'd still be here:
They are making rules about style? REALLY? Guess what, style changes. As do fabrics and design. If Lance wore high knee socks you'd see them all over the place. That's not their role. Why no compression gear? There's zero practical reason. None. So is their next step to approve colors and design of the various kits? Because some of them look way worse than high socks.
And we all know that this "UCI approved" sticker thing is nothing more than a money grab. They can't point to a single incident where someone crashed due to a wheel failure, or frame failure, or any other part over the last year that would have been prevented by this new system. The sticker system will actually drive up costs for the poorer teams because small vendors can't afford the testing costs and won't be able to supply wheels or frames or any other parts. They'll be forced to buy "approved" stuff at retail, or if they are lucky they'll get a price break.
I'd like to race at master's worlds this year. Before last year that meant I needed to be a top finisher at Nationals. Now I either I race a qualifier or beg for one of the few wildcard spots the UCI will give USA Cycling. Find me a qualifier in North America. There isn't one because the UCI wants $20,000 for the rights. You know how many races in the US make $20k? I had a discussion with their representative they had sent over to collect the check at one event. She told me that they couldn't have a criterium world championship because Europe was very crowded and they can't shut down city centers for a bike race.
I'll just leave you with that.
The UCI is being run by a guy who is banned for life by his own country's federation from competing in the Olympics. Then he meets with the Olympic committee to decide what cycling events will be in the Olympics. Seems perfectly reasonable to me.
Thankfully, this iteration of the UCI wasn't around in the 1800's, otherwise we'd still be here:
Last edited by Racer Ex; 03-22-12 at 11:43 AM.
03-22-12, 11:58 AM
#49
out walking the earth
I'm getting to the point that my Bethel jersey will have as much meaning to me as a national championship. Between USAC and the UCI it doesn't seem to make sense to me to take on the expenses and aggravation of getting to these big name events. Just jacking around with the jig at track nats and seeing guys passed then failed without touching anything on their bikes is ponderous enough. To go to masters track nats would cost me a few grand. Likewise masters track worlds. Regional crits and sleeping in my own bed more and more seems like the way to go. Or I can do the gran fondo and qualify for a uci world championship. How utterly ridiculous. Do a bike tour and qualify for a rainbow jersey.
03-22-12, 11:58 AM
#50
coffee-stained punk
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 6,632
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
1 Post
Define compression gear? What if I get some really tight socks and bib shorts? Is that compression gear? My skinsuit is crazy tight, probably just as much as any compression gear....is it illegal now? Are they going to measure the denier of socks before races now, right after they check for level saddles?