# UCI to require lawyer tabs, dictate sock height... etc



## Creakyknees (Sep 21, 2003)

Oh. God. Somebody get these people a date, or something to distract them from further pointless meddling.

UCI to require lawyer tabs, dictate Camelbak placement and sock length

“The rule is clear and was created to improve the safety of the riders,” Carron explained. “Moreover, removing the tabs cancels the warranty of the fork in case of crash. The enforcement of this rule will follow after an information and transition period.”

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."

hmmm...


----------



## rcharrette (Mar 27, 2007)

Agreed, they need to get over themselves! Lawyer tabs are for idiot's not pro riders and pro mechanics. If the UCI were involved in F1 racing they would probably require them to have airbags in the car!
Besides, is it not part of a teams job to test new prototype equipment? I'd say their is more risk in that than their mechanic not tightening the skewer correctly.
Yet more pointless BS so the UCI can make themselves feel important.


----------



## kbwh (May 28, 2010)

Remember lawyer tabs were invented so the wheel should not come out of the fork end if the quick release accidentally opened? A wider opening qr will thus require wider lawyer tabs...

Unfukcingbelievable rule...




A sock length rule is good though. Should have been enforced the first time LA showed up in black halfway to the knee socks, anyway. And ban Camelbacks, thank you.


----------



## ZoSoSwiM (Mar 7, 2008)

Wow... The UCI must sit up at night dreaming up ideas to further pi$$ off everyone.


----------



## JackDaniels (Oct 4, 2011)

The tab thing is stupid. I think they can actually be more dangerous as I've seen qr's actually get clamped onto the tab during a quick wheel change.

The sock thing makes sense I guess, but if people want to wear compression on their legs, they could still wear tights couldn't they?

And yes, ban all hydration that is not comprised of a bottle attached to your bike.


----------



## kbwh (May 28, 2010)

ZoSoSwiM said:


> Why ban hydration off the bike?


Because it's MTB.


----------



## ZoSoSwiM (Mar 7, 2008)

Why ban hydration off the bike? Not having to reach down to take a bottle is safer and faster. Hydration packs are widely available so it's not like the pros have an unfair advantage here.


----------



## TerminatorX91 (Mar 27, 2011)

Wait, what? April Fool's Day is a week and a half way.


----------



## Creakyknees (Sep 21, 2003)

Clarification: they are not banning Camelbacks. They are banning water pouches worn on the belly/chest.


----------



## kbwh (May 28, 2010)

What? No more schlecky hydrobellies?


----------



## allison (Apr 19, 2006)

TerminatorX91 said:


> Wait, what? April Fool's Day is a week and a half way.


I have thought this TWICE today.

The sock rule is dumb, and MTB'ers don't wear Camelbaks on their stomach.


----------



## gordy748 (Feb 11, 2007)

Has to be a joke. Seems the Ides of March is the new April Fool's Day...


----------



## Wadl (Oct 8, 2011)

"Moreover, removing the tabs cancels the warranty of the fork in case of crash"

wait... WHAT ?!?!?!


----------



## Coolhand (Jul 28, 2002)

When I make the ProTour my compression socks will need to be shorter. Good to know.

UCI=morons.


----------



## gamara (May 20, 2002)

Why don't the UCI just come out & make it clear that they want everyone back to wearing wool jerseys, leather chamois shorts, toe clips & down tube shifters! Sheez, these guys get paid to come up with this kinda stuff???


----------



## MikeBiker (Mar 9, 2003)

Advance photo of 2012 UCI approved TDF peloton.


----------



## KenS (Jan 28, 2004)

So what is the big concern about compression socks?


----------



## DrSmile (Jul 22, 2006)

Was there some sort of incident that prompted the tab rule? Maybe a wheel came flying off causing a massive crash?


----------



## kbwh (May 28, 2010)

American lawyers prompted it...


----------



## nate (Jun 20, 2004)

KenS said:


> So what is the big concern about compression socks?


And is the wording really that specific? Wouldn't it mean a compression sleeve over the calf is okay as long as it is not a sock? What about knee warmers? Folded down knee warmers? What about plain old socks that have the feet cut off but go to the knee? Aren't most expensive bib shorts essentially compression shorts to some degree? Et cetera.

The UCI officials should just admit they don't like the style of long socks and get it over with.


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

DrSmile said:


> Was there some sort of incident that prompted the tab rule?


As a matter of fact yes. The French teams were complaining that French law prohibited them from removing the tabs and they were at a disadvantage changing wheels compared to other teams. This just applies the French law to all UCI teams.


----------



## Creakyknees (Sep 21, 2003)

sure... blame the French....


----------



## dougydee (Feb 15, 2005)

Creakyknees said:


> “The rule is clear and was created to improve the safety of the riders,” Carron explained. “Moreover, removing the tabs cancels the warranty of the fork in case of crash. The enforcement of this rule will follow after an information and transition period.”


How often does a pro team send something back for warranty replacement?


----------



## Creakyknees (Sep 21, 2003)

dougydee said:


> How often does a pro team send something back for warranty replacement?


,,,and which manufacturers provide warranty protection for crash damage?


----------



## kbiker3111 (Nov 7, 2006)

The UCI is entirely made up of incompetent jackasses who couldn't run a Dunkin Donuts, let alone an international sporting body, buuuuuuut......

I like the lawyer tabs thing. Hopefully,it will result in an ingenious solution that will enable the public to enjoy the benefits of quick wheel changes without the need to take a grinder to each newly purchased fork.


----------



## My Own Private Idaho (Aug 14, 2007)

Does this also prohibit cutting the steer tube?


----------



## Ventruck (Mar 9, 2009)

Ridiculous stuff. The Camelbak rule somewhat has a point, but at the same time it's like the previous aero water bottle regulation: whats to it if there's nothing against a more aero frame and other more aero components?

Socks rule is just plain stupid. Whentf will a bike race be decided by ****ing socks? It hardly pertains to any sense of etiquette.

Laywer tabs....wait warranty? For pro teams? I wouldn't want to sound ignorant over what is meant by that, but regardless it's functionally not a forward idea/rule.


----------



## BigTex_BMC (Dec 30, 2011)

Could a bike manufacture provide a factory made fork without lawyer tabs, so no modifications have to made, therefor circumventing the rules?


----------



## kbwh (May 28, 2010)

I would hope so. I do not know if lawyer tabs are actually mandatory in the EU.
Wikipedia only mentions the USA of "several countries": Dropout (bicycle part) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## SolidSnake03 (Jun 22, 2011)

Someone needs to get laid...*looks at overly-temperamental/whiny UCI* 

Any RBR member's willing to take one for the team?


----------



## Stockli Boy (Jun 17, 2002)

Thankfully, I only ride for fun. UCI makes themselves look like idiots regularly. I love to watch races, both local and Pro Tour, but with an organizational body in disarray like this one, I just can't see competing and maintaining even a modicum of sanity. My son loves cycling as well, but with the insipid rules and inconsistent applications, I just can't encourage his involvement in any races.

It's a shame that the sport's organizing body has declared war on its participants. I guess the only thing I can say is that they make ski racing and FIS look like a paragon of sport.


----------



## weltyed (Feb 6, 2004)

well, it does say the rule goes into effect april 1st...

the tape thing makes me chuckle. no tape on holes or screws. i imagine they mean boltheads as well. except on the lavle cover of disc wheels.

although, as mentioned, a manufacturer may be able to mold/build some forks without the lawyer tabs. those bikes would not be violation of the "modify" rule. but the country make a law about it.

uci is getting close to the nfl. they already have some uniform rules.


----------



## Tugboat (Jul 17, 2006)

"It is forbidden to wear items designed to influence the performance of a rider such as reducing air resistance or modifying the body of the rider (compression, stretching, support)."

So, the UCI has effectively banned women riders from wearing bras. Is that all bad?


----------



## qatarbhoy (Aug 17, 2009)

I can't believe so many people are defending those vile knee-length compression socks - let alone wearing Camelbaks _on one's belly_. :nonod:

Admittedly the lawyer tabs rule is a dumb one, but if it weren't for the UCI upholding The Rules, cycling would have gone the way of cricket, whose classic cricket whites have been replaced with horrible pastel pyjamas. Every pro cylist would become a belly-slung Camelbak-rocking, knee-high compression-socking ueber-Fred. :yikes:


----------



## waldo425 (Sep 22, 2008)

http://www.rad-net.de/html/bdr/beka...0309_equipment-and-position-controls-2012.pdf

I wasn't sure if it was a joke or not. This is just ridiculous. 


I think that my new skinsuit just got banned. F-it; I'm wearing it to the line at Nat's and will just wait for the UCI to ask for me to strip. Good thing I didn't purchase any shoe covers too. 
You may hear come October, about my banishment or massive fine from the UCI


----------



## frankdatank1337 (Jul 25, 2010)

:thumbsup:


----------



## tricycletalent (Apr 2, 2005)

Ventruck said:


> Socks rule is just plain stupid. Whentf will a bike race be decided by ****ing socks? It hardly pertains to any sense of etiquette.


Improved preload due to less venous pooling?


----------



## Derf (Jul 1, 2003)

Looked at the UCI's powerpoint and I still cannot determine if Cav's helmet cover was A OK. I do not think it was...


----------



## Dynastar (Jun 8, 2007)

The lawyer tab requirement does seem a bit asinine on its own. But from my readings elsewhere, it may be a hint that discs are coming soon. A little known secret is that if not properly tighten - and sometimes even if they are - breaking with discs can cause QR skewers to come loose.


----------



## DrSmile (Jul 22, 2006)

Adding fuel to the fire... these things seem arbitrary and petty, the UCI should focus on banning things that are more clearly against the "rules" of cycling, like electronic shifting!


----------



## Tswifty (Mar 22, 2012)

UCI make up some pretty crazy rules. Why they no innovate the sport?? Instead of making it silly? I mean Sock height really? Socks dont win races, riders win races.


----------



## den bakker (Nov 13, 2004)

DrSmile said:


> Adding fuel to the fire... these things seem arbitrary and petty, the UCI should focus on banning things that are more clearly against the "rules" of cycling, like electronic shifting!


you mean gears surely? or are we very specific in which old school stuff is good and which is bad? (set by the current preference of the person with the opinion perhaps).


----------



## Gnarly 928 (Nov 19, 2005)

UCI is just taking a few pages from the USA Cycling book. "stupid stuff to make it really difficult to race your bikes without doing what WE say"

Like USA Cycling telling you you must have a "permission letter" for each event you race out of the US. Or asking for proof of citizenship for Masters Nationals....the day of the race... "Yah, sure, just a second, I got my passport right here in my jersey pocket....no, wait a minute, I left it home.....clear across the United States! You didn't say anything about needing THAT to race...."...


----------



## DrSmile (Jul 22, 2006)

den bakker said:


> you mean gears surely? or are we very specific in which old school stuff is good and which is bad? (set by the current preference of the person with the opinion perhaps).


I haven't seen any battery powered gears. One can easily argue that it takes energy to shift and therefore electronic shifting is electric assistance. Specifically:

1.3.010 "The bicycle shall be propelled solely, through a chainset, by the legs (inferior muscular chain) moving in a circular movement, without electric *or other assistance*."


----------

