# Unwritten Rules of Cycling



## TehYoyo (Sep 16, 2012)

What are some unwritten rules of pro and amateur cycling?

I got to thinking about this after seeing an old scene from 2010 TDF - Contador passing Schleck after his chain came off. I didn't think it was that bad - Schleck ran into some bad luck and Contador took advantage of it. But I guess it's wrong.

What are some more unwritten rules?


----------



## woodys737 (Dec 31, 2005)

Here's a good link posted by creakyknees some time ago. Not all rules per se but you get the idea: http://www.cyclingtips.com.au/cycling-tips/


----------



## foto (Feb 7, 2005)

if you attack out of a select group at a critical part of a climb, the race is on.

If you _then_ drop your chain, that's just too bad. See above, the race is on...


----------



## onefascruzan (Dec 28, 2006)

If you're in a break and don't do any work then you will (and should) be attacked.


----------



## Creakyknees (Sep 21, 2003)

If we tell you the unwritten rules in an online forum, then they would become written, wouldn't they? 

Can't have that. Omerta.


----------



## LostViking (Jul 18, 2008)

woodys737 said:


> Here's a good link posted by creakyknees some time ago. Not all rules per se but you get the idea: http://www.cyclingtips.com.au/cycling-tips/


Lots of good stuff here, but no direct answer to the OPs question that I can see.

The problem with unwritten rules is that following them is a matter of will - respect for tradition as well as situational reasoning (and available information) - many of the "un-written" rules are actually more like traditions. As is common with traditions, they often bare more wieght with the older population than the younger.

For example, "Chaingate" or other simulare situations in which the race leader has a mechanical or is involved in a crash (Valverde in this year's Veulta). The un-written rule is that you slow down and effectivly "neutralize" the race until the leader's jersey rejoins the group. In recent years, I have seen this widely ignored - riders now see this as an racing opprutunity, not a sportsmanship obligation.

So, whatever one cites as the "unwritten rules" may already be outdated and no longer relevent to today's racing.


----------



## pr0230 (Jun 4, 2004)

*No sharing dirty Needles*

When doing EPO, do not share dirty needles!

The taking of cycling enhancing drugs should be done in private and not in group sessions

Always deny for many years to get a 6 month suspension. 

Sorry could not help myself.


----------



## tlg (May 11, 2011)

What's your phone number?

How do you expect us to write down unwritten rules?


----------



## thehook (Mar 14, 2006)

foto said:


> if you attack out of a select group at a critical part of a climb, the race is on.
> 
> If you _then_ drop your chain, that's just too bad. See above, the race is on...


BINGO!!!!! We have a winner! Thank You>>>> Someone who actually gets it!


----------



## foto (Feb 7, 2005)

I feel like it was the same with Valverde at the Vuelta. It was go time, no waiting because of a crash.

However, movistar attacking after the group getting split up by a train, that was bogus.


----------



## LostViking (Jul 18, 2008)

I kinda like the old way - seems more sportsmanlike - but the times have changed I guess, all that matters these days is winning.

Not a good thing or a bad thing really, just the way things are.


----------



## foto (Feb 7, 2005)

I'm curios, GC guys always waited for each other in the old days, no matter what?

There was some waiting around this year too, with the tack thing...


----------



## LostViking (Jul 18, 2008)

foto said:


> I'm curios, GC guys always waited for each other in the old days, no matter what?
> 
> There was some waiting around this year too, with the tack thing...


Agreed, but it was very inconsistant.

I suspect the waiting was due to the fact that a lot of guys from different teams got "tacked" so teams waited for thier own get get back in to it - even them, some of those "tacking" victims never regained the group - but they went on anyway.

Don't think you can slow down for everyone or everything, but there should be some respect for the top three in the GC - so a mechanical or a crash doesn't decide the race - it should be decided by who is the most fit, not the luckiest (or least sportsmanlike).

I'm sure there were historical cases of GC contenders not waiting (I'll leave those details to the historians here), thus breaking the unwritten rules of the group, but I would imagine the others would chastise the offender in some way.


----------



## GDeAngelo (Aug 9, 2009)

I've always liked the gentlemen's way. There are situations tho where it does suck. Look at 09's Tour de France. When every GC went down on that oil slick. Chavanel had already attacked from the front where Cancellara and the remaining front went neutral until the fallen GCs were attached. As far as the Schleck Contador issue, Andy had started the attack. I don't think it was wrong for Alberto not to wait. Had it happened when they were both neutral, then sure. But the gate had already been lifted.


----------



## davidka (Dec 12, 2001)

onefascruzan said:


> If you're in a break and don't do any work then you will (and should) be attacked.


??? 

Race tactics, even in amateur racing is more complicated then that. If I make it into a break with two riders from another team, and my team's best sprinter is back in the group, I'm not pulling, not even a little bit. Attack all you want, it'll kill your progress. If you don't drop me, the move is doomed, which is fine with me because you just burned two men and my sprinter is still fresh. 

If you're one of the two guys above and you recognize that my sprinter is the best in the race, then you're working the break to 1. benefit from the odds that your majority in the break presents, 2. avoid having to race against my superior sprinter at the end. You still have to deal with me but I am by far the lesser of two evils. If 2nd and 3rd is the best you can get out of it, that's not bad. How hard would you ride to defend those positions if you were alone on the road? 

If my sprinter or other team mates are dropped in a tough course and I know I'm the best chance for a result, then I work if I can. If I'm hanging on for dear life, it'll be obvious to the others in the break. 

Bottom line, being present in a break is not an obligation to work in it. That's how lots of riders get dropped, not long after they've helped the winning break establish a gap that cannot be closed.

The rules of cycling are written on the road as the race commences.


----------



## jspharmd (May 24, 2006)

davidka said:


> ???
> 
> Race tactics, even in amateur racing is more complicated then that. If I make it into a break with two riders from another team, and my team's best sprinter is back in the group, I'm not pulling, not even a little bit. Attack all you want, it'll kill your progress. If you don't drop me, the move is doomed, which is fine with me because you just burned two men and my sprinter is still fresh.
> 
> ...


This happened to me in one of my first Cat 4 races. A teammate and I had just bridged up to a break. The moment we get there, guys start yelling at us that we need to be working since we have two in the break. I was pretty tired and my teammate was still huffing and puffing. I saw he was struggling, so I went to the front and pulled (I thought it was a "rule" that we had to work since we had two in the break). I promptly got dropped right after my pull. Fortunately, my teammate was able to rest, recover, and stay in the break. 

Now my work in a break totally depends on the situation and not on some "rule".


----------



## Creakyknees (Sep 21, 2003)

here's an unwritten rule:

"HOLD YOUR LINE!!!!!111!!!!!!"


----------



## fredbiker (Sep 14, 2010)

Actually, the rules are all written down here: The Rules


----------



## Creakyknees (Sep 21, 2003)

fredbiker said:


> Actually, the rules are all written down here: The Rules


Those guys are a bunch of twee wankers. Anybody who thinks those are the "real rules" is a sucker.


----------



## LostViking (Jul 18, 2008)

davidka said:


> The rules of cycling are written on the road as the race commences.


This I suspect is the current reality - like it or not.


----------



## mmoose (Apr 2, 2004)

Rule 1, you do not talk about the unwritten rules of Cycling
Rule 2, you do not talk about the unwritten rules of Cycling
...

(some gentlemanly riding that I've seen... It's not always a race, sometimes it is a show for the spectators and the "winner" can be pre-arranged. Folks sometimes negotiate the finish, especially in breaks...(If I win, you get the prize money -or- work with me in the break and I'll get time, you get the stage win etc)...a pro gets to win their last race before retiring, even if their home town has to create a race. If you attack in a feed zone, I'll have one of my riders flick you into a ditch...that's why these are gentlemen's rules. If you ride like a d!ck, everyone will start crashing in front of you and things get ugly.)


----------



## davidka (Dec 12, 2001)

jspharmd said:


> This happened to me in one of my first Cat 4 races. A teammate and I had just bridged up to a break. The moment we get there, guys start yelling at us that we need to be working since we have two in the break. I was pretty tired and my teammate was still huffing and puffing. I saw he was struggling, so I went to the front and pulled (I thought it was a "rule" that we had to work since we had two in the break). I promptly got dropped right after my pull. Fortunately, my teammate was able to rest, recover, and stay in the break.
> 
> Now my work in a break totally depends on the situation and not on some "rule".


We could write this unwritten rule as follows:

Never pull/work if it doesn't directly benefit you or your team's purposes.


----------



## jorgy (Oct 21, 2005)

TehYoyo said:


> What are some unwritten rules of pro and amateur cycling?
> 
> I got to thinking about this after seeing an old scene from 2010 TDF - Contador passing Schleck after his chain came off. I didn't think it was that bad - Schleck ran into some bad luck and Contador took advantage of it. But I guess it's wrong.
> 
> What are some more unwritten rules?


Schleck didn't have a mechanical. He attacked and then didn't shift properly. It wasn't bad luck, it was Schleck not knowing how to use his bike.

Contador responded to his attack and then kept going, and IMO he didn't break an unwritten rule doing it.


----------



## jorgy (Oct 21, 2005)

onefascruzan said:


> If you're in a break and don't do any work then you will (and should) be attacked.


Sometimes when you're in a break, you're not supposed to do any work. That's racing.


----------



## LostViking (Jul 18, 2008)

fredbiker said:


> Actually, the rules are all written down here: The Rules


Love those rules - true humour always needs a touch of truth to make it more engageing. "The Rules" are a good mix of humour and a somewhat actuall reflection of "Roadie" biases. Always good for a laugh. (I must admit I am out of compliance with a few :blush2: )

My all time fav is of course Rule #5 - which seems to be a catch-all - most of the other rules seem less than in my eyes.

Question: Are unwritten rules "unwritten" because they are not official or because they are actually unwritten in the most absolute form of the word?


----------



## LostViking (Jul 18, 2008)

jorgy said:


> Schleck didn't have a mechanical. He attacked and then didn't shift properly. It wasn't bad luck, it was Schleck not knowing how to use his bike.
> 
> Contador responded to his attack and then kept going, and IMO he didn't break an unwritten rule doing it.


As it is an "unwritten" rule not to attack the leaders jersey when its been in an accident or suffered a mechanical (unwritten - so not sure if "user error" apllies here) - I'm undecided on this one - but I'm leaning towards your argument: If the problem is self-inflicted - it's on!

This favours the skill of the rider operating his equiptment - and shouldn't the jersey go to the most skilled and talented rider?

But if we extend this argument, what if a leader gets into an accident that is "self-inflicted" due to his or her poor bike handling skills? If the other rider's know "it's his/her own damn fault!" - shouldn't it be fair to attack?


----------



## foto (Feb 7, 2005)

This is kind of not really the story though. Schleck attacked first, Contador followed, bringin Vino and Menchov with him, and then Schleck dropped his chain.

The race is totally on.

Its not like Schleck got a flat, the DS radio'd to Contador, who then dropped the hammer. That would have been bad form for sure.

its here.






Never mind the titles...


----------



## LostViking (Jul 18, 2008)

foto said:


> This is kind of not really the story though. Schleck attacked first, Contador followed, bringin Vino and Menchov with him, and then Schleck dropped his chain.
> 
> The race is totally on.
> 
> Its not like Schleck got a flat, the DS radio'd to Contador, who then dropped the hammer. That would have been bad form for sure.


Yeah, that's the way I'm seeing it as well. Schleck started the attack - then he messed-up with his gear shift - Conti was within his rights to respond to the attack and blow Andy out of the water - though this was much critized back in the day as "Chaingate" when lots of people here professed a dislike of Conti. Probably colored their perception of the event. 

Had Conti messed his shift when Andy attacked and Andy had taken advantage and ridden off into the sunset, I'm suspecting we would have heard another tune entirely.

Edit: @Foto - just able to see (and hear) that clip, I can speak Danish so the commentary was interesting. 
The commentary reminded me that for the commentators, just like the rest of us who watched this "live", it looked like a mech problem and there was no way anyone could have known at the time that it was self-inflected due to poor shifting. 
How would Vino or Conti have been able to tell the difference? If they don't know that, perhaps it did violate the unwritten rule (even if Andy was attacking at the time)?


----------



## TehYoyo (Sep 16, 2012)

And then not being able to get a chain back on? I guess I'm siding w/ you guys now.


----------



## JasonLopez (Aug 19, 2012)

Rule # 1 : Don't be an @$$hole.

Rule # 2 : Don't be a nice guy


----------



## Fireform (Dec 15, 2005)

The Velominati rules are the written ones. Pay attention.


----------



## LostViking (Jul 18, 2008)

Fireform said:


> The Velominati rules are the written ones. Pay attention.


All hail the Keepers of the Cog!


----------



## LostViking (Jul 18, 2008)

JasonLopez said:


> Rule # 1 : Don't be an @$$hole.
> 
> Rule # 2 : Don't be a nice guy


Whoa! That's a no-win situation...oh.

Rules suck.


----------



## JasonLopez (Aug 19, 2012)

LostViking said:


> Whoa! That's a no-win situation...oh.
> 
> Rules suck.


----------



## gubber12345 (Aug 30, 2012)

i like that "rule 5"


----------



## foto (Feb 7, 2005)

LostViking said:


> Yeah, that's the way I'm seeing it as well. Schleck started the attack - then he messed-up with his gear shift - Conti was within his rights to respond to the attack and blow Andy out of the water - though this was much critized back in the day as "Chaingate" when lots of people here professed a dislike of Conti. Probably colored their perception of the event.
> 
> Had Conti messed his shift when Andy attacked and Andy had taken advantage and ridden off into the sunset, I'm suspecting we would have heard another tune entirely.
> 
> ...


I really don't think it matters if it is his fault or not. He opened up the race.

Notice that Cadel didn't complain when he had problems on the way to Alpe D'huez in 2011 and everyone dropped the hammer on him.


----------



## Teo (Aug 10, 2004)

The idea of why these unwritten rules exist is funny to me. So they are “gentlemen’s agreements” there to preserve integrity, fairness and to make sure the better athlete wins instead of the most lucky one. Now let’s examine the sport, it’s full of cheats who use performance enhancing drugs to win at any cost. Armstrong, Rasmussen, Contador and Landis all recent winners have been suspended for doping. Just about every win in recent history has now been nullified. These rules are meaningless.


----------



## kmunny19 (Aug 13, 2008)

Has anyone considered that perhaps they are just the "Thus far, unwritten rules?" c'mon, write em all down.


----------



## tednugent (Apr 26, 2010)

Did someone write anything about "celebrating" like you just won a race (or a stage), even though you just finished a charity ride?

A guy in front of me did that last weekend and almost crashed into me.... had to yell at him that he didn't win a race.


----------



## Ripton (Apr 21, 2011)

tednugent said:


> Did someone write anything about "celebrating" like you just won a race (or a stage), even though you just finished a charity ride?
> 
> A guy in front of me did that last weekend and almost crashed into me.... had to yell at him that he didn't win a race.


Have you considered that he may have been celebrating something that meant more to him than winning a race? Raising a large amount of cash for the charity? His first long ride?


----------



## pretender (Sep 18, 2007)

Teo said:


> The idea of why these unwritten rules exist is funny to me. So they are “gentlemen’s agreements” there to preserve integrity, fairness and to make sure the better athlete wins instead of the most lucky one. Now let’s examine the sport, it’s full of cheats who use performance enhancing drugs to win at any cost. Armstrong, Rasmussen, Contador and Landis all recent winners have been suspended for doping. Just about every win in recent history has now been nullified. These rules are meaningless.


Honor among thieves.

I prefer watching cyclocross and the northern classics, where a mechanical or flat is seen as an opportunity to attack. Having your gear together is part of the game.


----------



## tednugent (Apr 26, 2010)

Ripton said:


> Have you considered that he may have been celebrating something that meant more to him than winning a race? Raising a large amount of cash for the charity? His first long ride?


He told me in a thick italian accent.... he does this at every opportunity

Plus, if he raised a large amount of cash for charity (in this case, Bike MS)... he would have gotten a special bib that signifies it.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

Is dropping your chain because you're cross chained really a mechanical?


----------



## vismitananda (Jan 16, 2011)

spade2you said:


> Is dropping your chain because you're cross chained really a mechanical?


I see it more of a "user error" rather than mechanical error.


----------



## ziscwg (Apr 19, 2010)

fredbiker said:


> Actually, the rules are all written down here: The Rules


I openly and intentionally break those rules. 

the worst is the dork visor cap on under the helmet. I just put my detachable visor that came with my helmet back on and my head still stays nice and cool.

the 2nd worst is the 91, no eating under 4 hours. what crap. I start on a gu just after an hour.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

isaacoomber said:


> Chaingate" or other simulare situations in which the race leader has a mechanical or is involved in a crash . The un-written rule is that you slow down and effectivly "neutralize" the race until the leader's jersey rejoins the group.
> 
> waterton.ca/Cycling.cfm


So, if it were Contadork who dropped his chain after cross chaining and attacking, we should have waited for him?

In the Tour de Suisse TT when Andy dropped his chain right in front of the camera and for the same reason, should they have given him 30 seconds?


----------



## LostViking (Jul 18, 2008)

Teo said:


> Armstrong, Rasmussen, Contador and Landis all recent winners have been suspended for doping.


Understand your point. Just to clarify - Rasmussen did not win the Tour - he was pulled before the conclusion of the Tour due to questions about his whereabouts - claimed to be training in Mexico when he was actually in Italy. Rasmussen took Rabobank to court for this in Holland and won reperations. It was his failure to comply with the whereabouts provisions - lying about where he was - that led to his suspension. Although, technically, you could refer to this as a doping-related suspension, he did not test positive for doping.


----------



## LostViking (Jul 18, 2008)

Ripton said:


> Have you considered that he may have been celebrating something that meant more to him than winning a race? Raising a large amount of cash for the charity? His first long ride?


I see this on occassion as well - this is why I alway try to reach the finish with no-one in front of me. 

If some one is in front of me, I take a new line not directly behind the person or prepare to slow down because riders will often apply the brakes as they cross the line and begin to ride erratically - I'm always trying to think ahead and I don't assume that the person in front of me is doing the same.


----------



## LostViking (Jul 18, 2008)

spade2you said:


> So, if it were Contadork who dropped his chain after cross chaining and attacking, we should have waited for him?
> 
> In the Tour de Suisse TT when Andy dropped his chain right in front of the camera and for the same reason, should they have given him 30 seconds?


Exactly, if Conti had messed-up his shift, I doubt we would have had the conversation we did around "chaingate" - at the time, Andy was a media and fan darling and that altered how we saw it. Conti was very unpopulare due to his spat with Armstrong and Bruynell, so it was easy to villify him for taking adavntage of Andy's "mechanical".

Still - if you slow for a true mechanical but not for user-error - how do you, in the moment and in a race situation, tell the difference between the two?


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

LostViking said:


> Still - if you slow for a true mechanical but not for user-error - how do you, in the moment and in a race situation, tell the difference between the two?


Yeah, you'd be handing the race to Sammy Sanchez and Menchov who also didn't wait.


----------



## LostViking (Jul 18, 2008)

I get that others didn't wait either.

But even if they were inclined to wait for the Yellow Jersey - how do you know when you "should" wait?
A mechanical and user-error can look very much the same.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

LostViking said:


> I get that others didn't wait either.
> 
> But even if they were inclined to wait for the Yellow Jersey - how do you know when you "should" wait?
> A mechanical and user-error can look very much the same.


When someone attacks, you respond. If you drop them you keep going. Four rival riders on four rival teams all trying to win the race. 

Cadel had horrible luck with a poorly timed flat in the '09 Vuelta. Nobody seemed to care that it basically cost him the race.


----------



## davidka (Dec 12, 2001)

'Bert wasn't going to wait. It was clear that he didn't choose to attack until he saw Andy drop his chain. The other's weren't going to sit up and let 'Bert get the time for free.

It was a risky attack on Andy's part, regardless of the chain-drop. He was probably hoping to drop Vino and isolate Conti but he did so without any backup in place for himself. Pretty gutsy really...


----------



## LostViking (Jul 18, 2008)

Andy attacked - it fizzeled - he paid the price - okay, got it.

Same situation - except Andy does not attack - but does drop his chain - now what?


----------



## Oasisbill (Jan 15, 2011)

What about 1989 (I think) when Greg LeMond beat Laurent Fignon in the final stage into Paris. I thought that was an unwritten rule (that is now written...) to leave he last stage sacred....


----------



## Fireform (Dec 15, 2005)

Not if its a freaking time trial.


----------



## foto (Feb 7, 2005)

Fireform said:


> Not if its a freaking time trial.


No, that's a good point. Lemond should have waited...


----------



## foto (Feb 7, 2005)

How come no one waited for Contador in 2011 TdF after he crashed in stage 1? How come no one through a hissy fit and screamed about how unfair it was?


----------



## LostViking (Jul 18, 2008)

foto said:


> How come no one waited for Contador in 2011 TdF after he crashed in stage 1? How come no one through a hissy fit and screamed about how unfair it was?


What position was he on GC at the time of that crash? I honestly don't recall.


----------



## foto (Feb 7, 2005)

LostViking said:


> What position was he on GC at the time of that crash? I honestly don't recall.


hmmm...on Stage 1? he was right up there...


----------



## LostViking (Jul 18, 2008)

LOL - I mean after the Prologue - unless you are refering to that as Stage One?

If it's the Prolougue - no reason for anyone to wait is there?


----------



## foto (Feb 7, 2005)

I don't think there was a prologue last year...was there?


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

Never get high on your own supply.


----------



## LostViking (Jul 18, 2008)

foto said:


> I don't think there was a prologue last year...was there?


Don't recall sorry. In any event, you crash during the Prologue - usually a time trial - no waiting - goes without saying. Can't really wait on a TT. (Besides: Top Three go last right?  )
Otherwise, I think you should wait for the top three on GC in any subsequent (non-TT ofcourse) stage.

You don't attack the Yellow jersey on the final stage of the TdF. 
Yellow crashes during the final stage to Paris - must wait.


----------



## vismitananda (Jan 16, 2011)

Oasisbill said:


> What about 1989 (I think) when Greg LeMond beat Laurent Fignon in the final stage into Paris. I thought that was an unwritten rule (that is now written...) to leave he last stage sacred....


I thought that "Unwritten" turned to "Written" rule only applies to a long last stage?

The '89 Tour was a different story, It was a time trial and I suppose that rule doesn't apply anymore, remember this year's Giro?


----------



## vismitananda (Jan 16, 2011)

Mate it wasn't a Prologue last year. 2011 Giro has a TTT for an opening and HTC nicked it.


----------

