# Cycling Braces for More Turmoil in Equipment Crackdown



## jorgy (Oct 21, 2005)

Story today in the NY Times about equipment crackdowns. I don't really think the TT bike is going anywhere, but if it did it would be a boon for triathletes. They probably buy most TT bikes and are largely stuck with selections that are designed around the UCI's criteria.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/06/sports/othersports/06cycling.html?hpw

Excerpts:

Professional cycling finds itself in a particularly heated struggle between its governing body, its teams and the companies that manufacture high-end equipment to determine what is a legal racing bike. The International Cycling Union abruptly alerted teams at the start of this season that it intends to clarify and reinterpret its often oblique rules governing bicycle design through increased equipment inspections.
.
.
.
Some riders say they would like to see not just stricter enforcement but more restrictive rules for time trial bikes.

Marco Pinotti, the current Italian national time trialing champion who rides for Team Columbia High Road, acknowledges the special equipment has benefitted him, but he also believes that it gives an unfair advantage to teams with large budgets for wind tunnel testing and sophisticated equipment. He favors forcing riders to use conventional bicycles without aerodynamic handlebars or wheels for time trials. That is unlikely to find favor with bike makers, who rely on time trail bicycles to generate publicity.

“The time trial bike amplifies differences between the teams,” Pinotti said. “The best thing would be for every rider to use a road bike without anything special.”

Pinotti’s American team mate, Craig Lewis, agreed, saying in an e-mail, “It was first named ‘the race of truth’ for a reason. Now it’s just a race between the biggest budgets.”


----------



## stevesbike (Jun 3, 2002)

I don't believe that - if anything the time gaps in time trials have gotten smaller. GC riders can no longer put many minutes into climbers and then ride defensively in the mountains (the way Indurain Hinault etc used to do it). So-called climbers have narrowed the gap in time trial performance - Contador beat Wiggens this year. Their equipment didn't decide it - if anything Wiggens had the better equipment. Besides, what matters most is fit and a few hours in a wind tunnel is cheaper than a decent set of aero wheels...


----------



## rook (Apr 5, 2009)

stevesbike said:


> I don't believe that - if anything the time gaps in time trials have gotten smaller. GC riders can no longer put many minutes into climbers and then ride defensively in the mountains (the way Indurain Hinault etc used to do it). So-called climbers have narrowed the gap in time trial performance - Contador beat Wiggens this year. Their equipment didn't decide it - if anything Wiggens had the better equipment. Besides, what matters most is fit and a few hours in a wind tunnel is cheaper than a decent set of aero wheels...



Good point, but I don't agree. Wiggens may not be the best example. His TT position is horrendous compared to the other pros. Contador is a rare eagle in that he is one of the pure climbers that has actually gotten decent as a TTer in the last couple years. He isn't a pure TTer, but he'll be able to limit his losses against the best.

I agree with Marco Pinotti's statement that the teams with the big budgets can afford the best equipment and access to wind tunnel testing. At the same time though, I don't think that what the UCi is doing by being more restrictive is good for the sport though.


----------



## gray8110 (Dec 11, 2001)

rook said:


> Wiggens may not be the best example. His TT position is horrendous compared to the other pros.


???

No, I'd say his TT position is pretty damned good - for both his pursuit position on the track and on the TT bike on the road

https://worldwidecycles.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/wiggins.jpg?w=490&h=326
https://cyclinginfo.co.uk/cyclists/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/bradley_wiggins.jpg
https://www.bobkestrut.com/images/wiggins_pursuit.jpg

The whole Contador beating Wiggins thing was totally blown out of proportion, Contador had beaten Wiggins in the PN prologue every year that they had competed... the only difference this year was that Contador won the prologue whereas in previous years he'd been top-5 to top-10.

Regarding the article, whatever the UCI may think, bikes and equipment testing aren't making a significant difference in race results at the professional level. Certainly the cat 3 or masters rider with a tricked out TT bike will have an advantage over an equally talented rider on his road bike with aerobars, but this isn't an issue at the pro level. Every pro team has access to equipment that isn't going to be a disadvantage for them on any discernible scale.

The UCI may think that a team may get an advantage for a short time because their sponsor develops some super wind cheating aparatus that no one else has and I concede that this may create a marginally unfair playing field. Really though, since when is that innovation a bad thing for the sport? The Bike manufacturers play a much bigger role in the viability of the sport than the UCI seems to realize. While I don't believe the UCI could irrevocably damage a big player like Trek or Specialized, but this sort of tinkering with the rulebook could kill a smaller manufacturer like Cervelo.


----------



## jorgy (Oct 21, 2005)

gray8110 said:


> The Bike manufacturers play a much bigger role in the viability of the sport than the UCI seems to realize. While I don't believe the UCI could irrevocably damage a big player like Trek or Specialized, but this sort of tinkering with the rulebook could kill a smaller manufacturer like Cervelo.


That's exactly what occurred to me. How are bike manufacturers going to advertise these generic, UCI-friendly designs? Because let's face it, support for a cycling team is part of an advertising plan.


----------



## uzziefly (Jul 15, 2006)

I've said it once, twice, oh so many times but I'll say it again : Eff you, UCI. 

Like a TTX is really the machine that makes Levi so darned good on the bike vs. say, George Hincapie on his Scott. 

I'm SUREEE it's all about the bike.

Let's make a standard road bike now with standard weights and equipment. That would make things fair now won't it? Those damn Ridley Noahs and Cervelo aero frames have made their riders that much faster!!! Oh no!!!


----------



## rook (Apr 5, 2009)

gray8110 said:


> ???
> 
> No, I'd say his TT position is pretty damned good - for both his pursuit position on the track and on the TT bike on the road
> 
> ...



Oh wait a minute. Sorry. Yes. You and Steve are right. I was thinking of a different rider. Wiggins is a great TTer. His speed is on the track though and it hasn't translated all that well in the long time trials on the road. Perhaps, he's not as well-suited in the long tours and his TT ability is sapped in a stage race.


----------



## JohnStonebarger (Jan 22, 2004)

Keep in mind:

1) The UCI's rules haven't changed, they just may be enforced. Meanwhile, manufacturers have had the rules in black and white all along, and companies like Cervelo have been careful to follow them to the letter.

2) If innovation was really so wonderful -- and was unrestricted -- we'd all be TTing on recumbants by now.


----------



## wim (Feb 28, 2005)

JohnStonebarger said:


> Keep in mind:
> 
> 1) The UCI's rules haven't changed, they just may be enforced. Meanwhile, manufacturers have had the rules in black and white all along, and companies like Cervelo have been careful to follow them to the letter.
> 
> 2) If innovation was really so wonderful -- and was unrestricted -- we'd all be TTing on recumbants by now.


Agree, and kudos to the UCI for keeping the sport from becoming a tinkerer's side-show. The only people who watch recumbent races are other recumbent riders and perhaps their families.


----------



## JohnStonebarger (Jan 22, 2004)

wim said:


> Agree, and kudos to the UCI...


Uh oh...Now you've done it...I think uzziefly's head might just explode!


----------



## Gnarly 928 (Nov 19, 2005)

Hey, I got me one-a them Noahs, and it don't make me no faster...

Seriously though, the officials brought along a 'rule/template' tool to a big stage race here in the NW last year and some of the bikes that NRC TTers were using were found to be illegal. Real contenders (Jeanne Longo, for one) were penalized and told they were "out" until they changed into rule compliance. Riders like Longo, they should know better than to bring a bike that isn't legal and then whine when they are penalized for it.. If you look around at any 'local' TT, you'll see many bikes that aren't legal to the UCI.. If the rule exists, it should be enforced..

As for big teams having an advantage because they can spend the bucks on their TT rigs in the wind tunnel, etc etc...Well sure, but they'd do the same if we all were riding 'regular bikes' for TTs anyhow. They'd just spend the money on streamlining shoes, or dimpled clothing, or whatever...Wait, they already do that...

In the real world, I'd say there isn't a way to 'rule-out' the advantage of having unlimited budgets for your professional teams...The $-advantage is not much, but it will always exist in sports..

I do agree with uzzie about the UCI being a bit....whatever ..
Don Hanson


----------



## uzziefly (Jul 15, 2006)

Gnarly 928 said:


> Hey, I got me one-a them Noahs, and it don't make me no faster...
> 
> Seriously though, the officials brought along a 'rule/template' tool to a big stage race here in the NW last year and some of the bikes that NRC TTers were using were found to be illegal. Real contenders (Jeanne Longo, for one) were penalized and told they were "out" until they changed into rule compliance. Riders like Longo, they should know better than to bring a bike that isn't legal and then whine when they are penalized for it.. If you look around at any 'local' TT, you'll see many bikes that aren't legal to the UCI.. If the rule exists, it should be enforced..
> 
> ...


If they really want to curb development, then curb the budget spent on research like F1 is doing.

Even then, teams can still find a way to go around that - the bike manufacturers can do their own tests with individual riders etc.

If this is the case, have a weight category like boxing.

Then, to make it fair, everyone rides a wooden bike, naked and barefoot.

That should even things out. Oh wait, maybe not. 

It's getting too trivial IMO and they just want to mess around to appear like they're doing something rather than sitting on their asses and shaking their legs while ogling the nice bikes that are made.


----------



## Uprwstsdr (Jul 17, 2002)

The unfair advantage that teams with bigger budgets have is that they can afford better riders.


----------



## bas (Jul 30, 2004)

Uprwstsdr said:


> The unfair advantage that teams with bigger budgets have is that they can afford better riders.


ouch.


----------



## mendo (Apr 18, 2007)

A relatively small company, Cervelo, is generally considered to produce one of the best, if not the best, TT bike on the planet. Better than massive companies like Trek, Specialized, etc. I don't know if that's objectively true. It probably isn't as big a gap as some people might think, but that's the perception.

Is Fly V at a huge disadvantage because they're sponsored by Parlee, a comparatively tiny operation? I'm not an engineer or an expert by any means, but I don't think so.

The size of the budget doesn't yield a proportionally better bike. It can be an advantage, but I don't think there's an uneven playing field for the pros.

I like the fact that the UCI keeps bikes looking like bikes. I personally like the fact that they're not on seat-tubeless designs. I like the fact that they're not piloting recumbent torpedos on flat stages. Tradition's important in a sport with such a long history. That should be a focus for them.

One other thing. Don't announce changes mid-season, or rather, don't crack-down and enforce everything, so teams and sponsors have to scramble. Give some lead time.


----------



## alexb618 (Aug 24, 2006)

mendo said:


> A relatively small company, Cervelo, is generally considered to produce one of the best, if not the best, TT bike on the planet.


walser...


----------



## culdeus (May 5, 2005)

mendo said:


> A relatively small company, Cervelo, is generally considered to produce one of the best, if not the best, TT bike on the planet. Better than massive companies like Trek, Specialized, etc. I don't know if that's objectively true. It probably isn't as big a gap as some people might think, but that's the perception.


You must not have watched the tour last year with the benefit of tivo.


----------



## Sasquatch (Feb 3, 2004)

the quickest solution to this is just to air the weekend Cat 4 races.


----------



## California L33 (Jan 20, 2006)

I'd say don't get rid of TT bikes. They're eye candy that draws attention, and if manufacturers can sell more bikes by making the coolest looking TT bikes it helps cycling. The TTT seems gone from major tours, another spectacle that grabbed attention. 'Serious' cycling fans will always watch, but you've got to do something to get the casual fans interested, and if that's fancy bikes, why not? I know they're expensive, but I don't think that's the expense that separates the good from the also ran teams- like all other motor sports, it's not the chassis that's expensive, it's the motors.


----------

