Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
The philosophy behind the UCI's fight against the "advent of a technocratic form of cycling" (among other fears).
Quote | Reply
Since I learned --the hard way, that the discretionary implementation of the UCI rules by a commissair, could pull a rider out of the most important race of his life at last minute, I have spent a good amount of time studying this very complex matter.

My impression is, that most riders racing under UCI rules have not read them, and that small fraction of these riders that have read the rules, are not aware of the way the UCI implements them.

For those interested in understanding the stance of the UCI regarding this matter, it is very important to read first the Lugano Charter.

I am sure that at least a few here have read the document, but I am aware of only two other posters mentioning explicitly the Lugano Charter in this forum before. I can imagine that there is a lot of people that have never read it.

I hope this helps,

Sergio


The Lugano Charter
Tuesday 8th October 1996

Being aware of the potential dangers and problems posed by a loss of control over the technical aspects of cycling, the UCI Management Committee has today, Tuesday 8th October, taken a number of measures here in Lugano.

In doing so, the UCI wishes to recall that the real meaning of cycle sport is to bring riders together to compete on an equal footing and thereby decide which of them is physically the best.

The features which have contributed to the world-wide development and spread of the bicycle are its extraordinary simplicity, cost-effectiveness and ease of use. From a sociological point of view, as a utilitarian and recreational means of transport, the bicycle has given its users a sense of freedom and helped create a movement which has led to the considerable renown and popular success which cycle sport enjoys. The bicycle serves to express the effort of the cyclist, but there is more to it than that. The bicycle is also a historical phenomenon, and it is this history which underpins the whole culture behind the technical object.

If we forget that the technology used is subordinate to the project itself, and not the reverse, we cross the line beyond which technology takes hold of the system and seeks to impose its own logic. That is the situation facing us today. New prototypes can be developed because they do not have to take into account constraints such as safety, a comfortable riding position, accessibility of the controls, manoeuvrability of the machine, etc. The bicycle is losing its user-friendliness" and distancing itself from a reality which can be grasped and understood. Priority is increasingly given to form. The performance achieved depends more on the form of the man-machine ensemble than the physical qualities of the rider, and this goes against the very meaning of cycle sport.

The many effects of this rush to extremes risk damaging the sport of cycling. These include spiralling costs, unequal access to technology, radical innovations prepared in secret, a 'fait accompli' policy, damage to the image of cycle sport and the credibility of performances and the advent of a technocratic form of cycling where power is concentrated in the hands of a few powerful players, to the detriment of the universality of the sport on which its future and continued development depend.

The original document can be found here: http://www.uci.ch/Modules/BUILTIN/getObject.asp?MenuId=&ObjTypeCode=FILE&type=FILE&id=MzQxMDc&LangId=1



-------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: English is not my first language. Please read this translated post considering that.


Quote Reply
Re: The philosophy behind the UCI's fight against the "advent of a technocratic form of cycling" (among other fears). [Sergio Escutia] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote Reply
Re: The philosophy behind the UCI's fight against the "advent of a technocratic form of cycling" (among other fears). [Sergio Escutia] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I guess the advent of shifting from the hoods was really a detriment to cycling.

Seriously though, the UCI is a mess not because of the advancement of materials and spiraling costs of reasearch and design, but the inability of the UCI itself to intrerpret and equally administer its own rules.

This is your life, and it's ending one minute at a time. - Fight Club
Industry Brat.
Quote Reply
Re: The philosophy behind the UCI's fight against the "advent of a technocratic form of cycling" (among other fears). [Ti T'war] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
no, that made cycling easier, safer, and more enjoyable and thus would be ok under their philosophy


In Reply To:
I guess the advent of shifting from the hoods was really a detriment to cycling.
.



Kat Hunter reports on the San Dimas Stage Race from inside the GC winning team
Aeroweenie.com -Compendium of Aero Data and Knowledge
Freelance sports & outdoors writer Kathryn Hunter
Quote Reply
Re: The philosophy behind the UCI's fight against the "advent of a technocratic form of cycling" (among other fears). [Ti T'war] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
>>Seriously though, the UCI is a mess not because of the advancement of materials and spiraling costs of research and design, but the inability of the UCI itself to interpret and equally administer its own rules.

Well said.

Quote Reply
Re: The philosophy behind the UCI's fight against the "advent of a technocratic form of cycling" (among other fears). [Sergio Escutia] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:

The features which have contributed to the world-wide development and spread of the bicycle are its extraordinary simplicity, cost-effectiveness and ease of use. From a sociological point of view, as a utilitarian and recreational means of transport, the bicycle has given its users a sense of freedom and helped create a movement which has led to the considerable renown and popular success which cycle sport enjoys. The bicycle serves to express the effort of the cyclist, but there is more to it than that. The bicycle is also a historical phenomenon, and it is this history which underpins the whole culture behind the technical object.

If we forget that the technology used is subordinate to the project itself, and not the reverse, we cross the line beyond which technology takes hold of the system and seeks to impose its own logic. That is the situation facing us today. New prototypes can be developed because they do not have to take into account constraints such as safety, a comfortable riding position, accessibility of the controls, manoeuvrability of the machine, etc. The bicycle is losing its user-friendliness" and distancing itself from a reality which can be grasped and understood. Priority is increasingly given to form. The performance achieved depends more on the form of the man-machine ensemble than the physical qualities of the rider, and this goes against the very meaning of cycle sport.

The many effects of this rush to extremes risk damaging the sport of cycling. These include spiralling costs, unequal access to technology, radical innovations prepared in secret, a 'fait accompli' policy, damage to the image of cycle sport and the credibility of performances and the advent of a technocratic form of cycling where power is concentrated in the hands of a few powerful players, to the detriment of the universality of the sport on which its future and continued development depend.

The original document can be found here: http://www.uci.ch/Modules/BUILTIN/getObject.asp?MenuId=&ObjTypeCode=FILE&type=FILE&id=MzQxMDc&LangId=1

Somehow when reading that statement, I envision this, being what they have in mind...



____________________________________________
I only believe what I read when I agree with it...
Quote Reply
Re: The philosophy behind the UCI's fight against the "advent of a technocratic form of cycling" (among other fears). [BrianLizard] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
In Reply To:

The features which have contributed to the world-wide development and spread of the bicycle are its extraordinary simplicity, cost-effectiveness and ease of use. From a sociological point of view, as a utilitarian and recreational means of transport, the bicycle has given its users a sense of freedom and helped create a movement which has led to the considerable renown and popular success which cycle sport enjoys. The bicycle serves to express the effort of the cyclist, but there is more to it than that. The bicycle is also a historical phenomenon, and it is this history which underpins the whole culture behind the technical object.

If we forget that the technology used is subordinate to the project itself, and not the reverse, we cross the line beyond which technology takes hold of the system and seeks to impose its own logic. That is the situation facing us today. New prototypes can be developed because they do not have to take into account constraints such as safety, a comfortable riding position, accessibility of the controls, manoeuvrability of the machine, etc. The bicycle is losing its user-friendliness" and distancing itself from a reality which can be grasped and understood. Priority is increasingly given to form. The performance achieved depends more on the form of the man-machine ensemble than the physical qualities of the rider, and this goes against the very meaning of cycle sport.

The many effects of this rush to extremes risk damaging the sport of cycling. These include spiralling costs, unequal access to technology, radical innovations prepared in secret, a 'fait accompli' policy, damage to the image of cycle sport and the credibility of performances and the advent of a technocratic form of cycling where power is concentrated in the hands of a few powerful players, to the detriment of the universality of the sport on which its future and continued development depend.

The original document can be found here: http://www.uci.ch/Modules/BUILTIN/getObject.asp?MenuId=&ObjTypeCode=FILE&type=FILE&id=MzQxMDc&LangId=1

Somehow when reading that statement, I envision this, being what they have in mind...


There appears to be an illegal rear wheel fairing on this bike....ILLEGAL!!! /pink
Quote Reply
Re: The philosophy behind the UCI's fight against the "advent of a technocratic form of cycling" (among other fears). [jackmott] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
if you can't come up with a coherent rationale that would allow the shiv but disbar a fully (or even partially) faired recumbent, then i suggest that "science" has already lost.

if people wanted to race on the fastest possible bikes, its absolutely obvious what they would ride. but they don't. so ... how to define what is allowed, and what isn't?
Quote Reply
Re: The philosophy behind the UCI's fight against the "advent of a technocratic form of cycling" (among other fears). [Ti T'war] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
Seriously though, the UCI is a mess not because of the advancement of materials and spiraling costs of reasearch and design, but the inability of the UCI itself to intrerpret and equally administer its own rules.

As much as I may disagree with portions of the sentiment expressed in that document (e.g. to me, bike racing - especially TTs - is ALL about the man/machine combination and the optimization of both for the task), if that's how they want to approach the sport, great. It's their prerogative given how the sport is currently set up.

But, I think you've hit the nail on the head here...the REAL problem is the total ineptitude in the rule making and implementation process. It's funny... a lot of people like to ascribe ill intent to some of the things that the UCI does...and in some cases that may be right...but, most likely not for everything.

As with many things in life, it's usually not necessary to ascribe evil intent to someone's actions when mere incompetence would suffice to explain things ;-)

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/
Quote Reply
Re: The philosophy behind the UCI's fight against the "advent of a technocratic form of cycling" (among other fears). [Tom A.] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
to me, bike racing - especially TTs - is ALL about the man/machine combination and the optimization of both for the task

glad to hear that you're now racing faired recumbents for TT's!
Quote Reply
Re: The philosophy behind the UCI's fight against the "advent of a technocratic form of cycling" (among other fears). [dawhead] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
to me, bike racing - especially TTs - is ALL about the man/machine combination and the optimization of both for the task

glad to hear that you're now racing faired recumbents for TT's!

OK,OK...I guess I left out the qualifier "within the stated rules" :-P

It would be fun to do a few runs in a faired recumbent though!

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/
Quote Reply
Re: The philosophy behind the UCI's fight against the "advent of a technocratic form of cycling" (among other fears). [Sergio Escutia] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The wording of the charter is easy to argue for. It's a romantic view of 'pure' cycling that I actually really agree with on some levels. Sport should be about human ability and effort and not about who can afford the best equipment (or be sponsored by the best equipment manufacturer).

The problem is in the execution. The UCI's insane last-minute changes and refusal to explicitly even say what's legal and what's not subverts the whole aim of the charter.
Quote Reply
Re: The philosophy behind the UCI's fight against the "advent of a technocratic form of cycling" (among other fears). [dawhead] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
head must be in front of ass?

In Reply To:
if you can't come up with a coherent rationale that would allow the shiv but disbar a fully (or even partially) faired recumbent, then i suggest that "science" has already lost.

if people wanted to race on the fastest possible bikes, its absolutely obvious what they would ride. but they don't. so ... how to define what is allowed, and what isn't?



Kat Hunter reports on the San Dimas Stage Race from inside the GC winning team
Aeroweenie.com -Compendium of Aero Data and Knowledge
Freelance sports & outdoors writer Kathryn Hunter
Quote Reply
Re: The philosophy behind the UCI's fight against the "advent of a technocratic form of cycling" (among other fears). [jackmott] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
head must be in front of ass?

i will grant that its coherent. that's about it. so much for science.
Quote Reply
Re: The philosophy behind the UCI's fight against the "advent of a technocratic form of cycling" (among other fears). [Sergio Escutia] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The truly ironic thing is at the time of the Lugano charter the UCI under the auspices of Heinz Verbruggen had its collective head up its collective arse over the rampant doping issue in the pro peleton. That far more than technology divided the have's and have nots. You could have purchased quite a few Lotus frames for the cost of a years supply of EPO. I would love to know the street value of the pharmacy they caught Willy Voit trying to sneak across the border with in the Festina affair.
I can actually sympathize with what they were trying to achieve, the issue is that the rules as written dont actually achieve them. If they were truly trying to achieve parity in cycling perhaps some rule that prohibits any tube or structure that is not symmetrical front to back ie it has to be round, square or oval and a 1:1 ratio of width to depth. Then we would see the return of steel!

Kevin
Quote Reply
Re: The philosophy behind the UCI's fight against the "advent of a technocratic form of cycling" (among other fears). [Sergio Escutia] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply


Holy S$#%!

The UCI is David Kazinsky (the Unibomber):

1. The Industrial Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster
for the human race. They have greatly increased the life-expectancy of
those of us who live in "advanced" countries, but they have
destabilized society, have made life unfulfilling, have subjected
human beings to indignities, have led to widespread psychological
suffering (in the Third World to physical suffering as well) and have
inflicted severe damage on the natural world. The continued
development of technology will worsen the situation.
It will certainly
subject human beings to greater indignities and inflict greater damage
on the natural world, it will probably lead to greater social
disruption and psychological suffering, and it may lead to increased
physical suffering even in "advanced" countries.

91. Also, science and technology constitute a mass power movement, and
many scientists gratify their need for power through identification
with this mass movement (see paragraph 83).

92. Thus science marches on blindly, without regard to the real
welfare of the human race or to any other standard, obedient only to
the psychological needs of the scientists and of the government
officials and corporation executives who provide the funds for
research.


http://cyber.eserver.org/unabom.txt

Want: 58cm Cervelo Soloist. PM me if you have one to sell

Vintage Cervelo: A Resource
Quote Reply
Re: The philosophy behind the UCI's fight against the "advent of a technocratic form of cycling" (among other fears). [Sergio Escutia] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
One of the issues here is that the UCI has focused on TT frames in order to try and level the playing field. But the field already isn't level - think about Lance's F1 team, which designed a new bike, wheels, skinsuit, helmet, sunglasses, etc. How fair is that? How many pro tour teams have a $20 million budget to afford that level of detail? And what about last year's Astana dream (or nightmare) team with AC, LA, Levi, and Kloden -you call that fair?

Take a look at a race like TdU or ToC and it's easy to see the financial disparity. The big teams - in most cases, at least - have better bikes, wheels, support cars, support staff, etc, etc, etc. than the small regional ones.

They can place limitations upon technical aspects all they want, but the "equal footing" boat left the harbor a long time ago.
Quote Reply
Re: The philosophy behind the UCI's fight against the "advent of a technocratic form of cycling" (among other fears). [Carl Spackler] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I still do not know if the UCI rules, particulary the technical rules, are written as they are, so that those in charge, can discretionarily enforce the rules, or because they haven't realized that they need to hire an expert in legal writing.

The current UCI technical regulations are a mess, both, in the way they are written and in their implementation. Something has to be done, soon.

Sergio

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: English is not my first language. Please read this translated post considering that.


Quote Reply
Re: The philosophy behind the UCI's fight against the "advent of a technocratic form of cycling" (among other fears). [Carl Spackler] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In many sports with an important mechanical aspect there are different competitions and rules depending on what equipment you can use. In sailing for instance you have the Laser series where you can compete for a reasonable budget with the same equipment as the Olympic champion. Everything is clearly and precisely specified and the rules are strictly enforced. The boat & sails should not determine the winner. In fact in some competition the boats are randomly assigned to the sailors. On the other end of the spectrum you have the America's Cup where there is always a huge argument about equipment, where many technological and scientific advances are made and where the equipment plays a major role in determining who is going to win. Sometimes (often) the technology eventually reaches the lower end of the spectrum. We could have a similar system in cycling / triathlon. It already exists for the 1h record with the UCI Hour Record and the Best Human Effort.

Francois-Xavier Li @FrancoisLi
"We don't stop playing because we grow old; we grow old because we stop playing." George Bernard Shaw
http://www.swimrunfrance.fr
http://www.worldofswimrun.com
Quote Reply
Re: The philosophy behind the UCI's fight against the "advent of a technocratic form of cycling" (among other fears). [Fix] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
In many sports with an important mechanical aspect there are different competitions and rules depending on what equipment you can use. In sailing for instance you have the Laser series where you can compete for a reasonable budget with the same equipment as the Olympic champion. Everything is clearly and precisely specified and the rules are strictly enforced. The boat & sails should not determine the winner. In fact in some competition the boats are randomly assigned to the sailors. On the other end of the spectrum you have the America's Cup where there is always a huge argument about equipment, where many technological and scientific advances are made and where the equipment plays a major role in determining who is going to win. Sometimes (often) the technology eventually reaches the lower end of the spectrum. We could have a similar system in cycling / triathlon. It already exists for the 1h record with the UCI Hour Record and the Best Human Effort.


I agree, but then... why will the UCI allow in 2010 the use of electronic shifting? I am sure you can get it cheaper if you look around, but the complete Dura Ace Di2 groupset was $4,806.00 in the first well known store I ran across in an internet search. Why is the UCI allowing Di2 and not a >3:1 seatpost?

Electronic shifting is clearly an example of "unequal access to technology" (I doubt most african or even most american riders can afford it). It is very obvious that a Di2 groupset goes against the spirit of the Lugano Charter. Why is the UCI not taking prompt action against this rampant example of (in their own words) "the advent of a technocratic form if cycling where power is concentrated in the hands of a few [economically, I suppose] powerful players?

Sergio

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: English is not my first language. Please read this translated post considering that.


Quote Reply
Re: The philosophy behind the UCI's fight against the "advent of a technocratic form of cycling" (among other fears). [Sergio Escutia] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
In Reply To:
In many sports with an important mechanical aspect there are different competitions and rules depending on what equipment you can use. In sailing for instance you have the Laser series where you can compete for a reasonable budget with the same equipment as the Olympic champion. Everything is clearly and precisely specified and the rules are strictly enforced. The boat & sails should not determine the winner. In fact in some competition the boats are randomly assigned to the sailors. On the other end of the spectrum you have the America's Cup where there is always a huge argument about equipment, where many technological and scientific advances are made and where the equipment plays a major role in determining who is going to win. Sometimes (often) the technology eventually reaches the lower end of the spectrum. We could have a similar system in cycling / triathlon. It already exists for the 1h record with the UCI Hour Record and the Best Human Effort.


I agree, but then... why will the UCI allow in 2010 the use of electronic shifting? I am sure you can get it cheaper if you look around, but the complete Dura Ace Di2 groupset was $4,806.00 in the first well known store I ran across in an internet search. Why is the UCI allowing Di2 and not a >3:1 seatpost?

Electronic shifting is clearly an example of "unequal access to technology" (I doubt most african or even most american riders can afford it). It is very obvious that a Di2 groupset goes against the spirit of the Lugano Charter. Why is the UCI not taking prompt action against this rampant example of (in their own words) "the advent of a technocratic form if cycling where power is concentrated in the hands of a few [economically, I suppose] powerful players?

Sergio

I'm not sure if that is a good example...I don't know if there's been shown any performance advantage to electronic shifting vs. cable actuated shifting.

It's sort of like having a gold plated frame instead of a painted one. It's expensive and looks really cool...but it's not going to determine the outcome of a race ;-)

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/
Quote Reply
Re: The philosophy behind the UCI's fight against the "advent of a technocratic form of cycling" (among other fears). [Tom A.] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
You are right Tom, I could have used a better example, but then... I am sure many also said that clipless pedals were never going to determine the outcome of a race ;-)

Sergio

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: English is not my first language. Please read this translated post considering that.


Quote Reply
Re: The philosophy behind the UCI's fight against the "advent of a technocratic form of cycling" (among other fears). [Sergio Escutia] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
You are right Tom, I could have used a better example, but then... I am sure many also said that clipless pedals were never going to determine the outcome of a race ;-)

Sergio
That's true, but at the time one of the main argument in favour of clipless pedals was safety. Carbon fibers or max weight are probably better examples.

Francois-Xavier Li @FrancoisLi
"We don't stop playing because we grow old; we grow old because we stop playing." George Bernard Shaw
http://www.swimrunfrance.fr
http://www.worldofswimrun.com
Quote Reply
Re: The philosophy behind the UCI's fight against the "advent of a technocratic form of cycling" (among other fears). [Fix] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
That reference to carbon fiber is a good one. If they really want fair play, then they should do as the Japanese Keirin Association does using the NJS standard, and stop playing that "cat-and-mouse" game with the manufacturers. But maybe they enjoy playing with the mouse.

Sergio

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: English is not my first language. Please read this translated post considering that.


Quote Reply
Re: The philosophy behind the UCI's fight against the "advent of a technocratic form of cycling" (among other fears). [Sergio Escutia] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
There are lots of other relatively easy things that could be done that would increase fair play, and decrease the advantage of very well funded teams with the capability to make "one-off" bikes or with access to prototypes. They could prohibit the use of any frame that is not commercially available for say, 1 year, with at least 1000 copies sold to consumers. They do similar things in auto racing.

This would make things more predictable for teams, and allow almost any team access to some of the best frames. It would probably also eliminate some of the uncertainty for bike manufacturers, as you could use the year period to ensure the frame is "approved" for competition.

Of course, those lucky ones who DO get access to the very latest and greatest might be not like it! :)
Quote Reply

Prev Next