IDGAF if a piece of equipment violates the "spirit of the rules". It's either fits within the rules or it does not, full stop. It's too subjective to have rules words like "fairing" and "made by a company" as part of equipment rules. What if I form an LLC and hand sign every piece of plastic crap I build in my garage? That's "made by a company".

"Spirit of the rules" is for conduct, not equipment.

On the safety front, is that actually a concern for non-draft races? Let's say some hooligan 3d prints a disc wheel that breaks on course and he crashes. Does that actually impact anyone around him who's not in the draft zone? Bike safety is a self-enforcing rule, you're not gonna ride something that isn't gonna make it to the finish.

My submission to Ironman, you can have this for free and change it as you like, but I promise it captures what you're trying to do more predictably than the current rule:


Any hydration, nutrition, tool storage, or other non-OEM storage on a bicycle may be located either within the existing frameset (including the seatpost, fork, handlebars, and aero bar extension) or in one of 2 areas:

1) Behind the hands, in an area extending vertically from the top of the stem to the rider's chest and extending horizontally from the rider's hands to a vertical line drawn through the center of the crankset, not extending laterally further than the width of the handlebars. No part will be allowed in the area above the rider's forearms, except in the area between the arms, covering not more than half the forearm width on either side when viewed from above. A computer may be mounted in this area so long as it's dimensions do not exceed 4"x3"x2".

2) Behind the seat, in an area extending horizontally from a vertical line drawn through the crankset and ending at a vertical line drawn through the rear wheel axle, with no part extending laterally further than the width of the handlebars.

Yes, people will find loopholes and make bespoke solutions to maximize this, but at least they're not doing in a such a way where the limit of legality is the mood of the official on race morning. Open to improvements from the community

I'd argue that ISO testing does help ensure safety, and passing these tests could be an easy requirement by Ironman.

Though, I I thought this article and podcast with Ronan of Escape Collective and Rob of Factor was great: https://escapecollective.com/...-bikes-so-expensive/

Especially when Rob said that they can create a bike that passes ISO, but that has tubes that can be crushed with your thumbs...

---

wovebike.com | Wove on instagram

Getting a certificate and putting a stamp on a product doesn't do you any good if you aren't following the exact process using the same quality raw materials, etc. The point being just because a government OK'd something 10 years or 10 days ago, has no bearing on what's coming out of that production line right now. If you don't trust companies to do their best to make their products safe, unless you have a government agent watching production it means nothing. And even then, once you have that government agent watching production, they are subject to the same basic problem as the assembly line. Human error, asymmetrical information between material and component suppliers, etc, etc.

As you point out, a product can be deemed "safe" by a testing agency and be completely unsafe. Take helmet chin straps (not talking bike helmets, although it might be the same), one area I have direct knowledge with. The only test they do is to hang a little weight from the chin strap and see how much it stretches. And they do that once. A decade or more ago. No checking on the buckle strength. No checking on the location where the strap actually sits to make sure the thing is actually being retained. Not checking on the attachment points of the strap to see how weak they are, prone to wear etc. Oh, and of course you realize plastics have a shelf life that gets more brittle and fragile over time, not just from sun and air exposure, but the mere scent vapors of commonly found chemicals in your house or garage? The CE and ASTM stuff has good guidelines. But as an arbiter of safety, it's illusion or theater is the main point.

That doesn't mean I don't think there should be any standards, but equally, it's manifestly obvious the standards are flawed and what really keeps people safe is companies wanting to put out a product that does it's job as well as they can make it with the various cost and product constraints, etc.

Experienced and reputable companies will stress test their products beyond the safety requirements.

To connect the problem to cycling, lets look at those Shimano cranks that have been delaminating for what, a decade? Tens of thousands of "bad" cranks on the market, that all go through some degree of CE or ASTM certs and ISO standards. A lot of box checking, paperwork filed, everyone says it's safe, and the biggest potential safety problem on Ironman's course has nothing to do with a bottle down the shirt or a 3d box behind the seat. And it came with a stamp and certificate no doubt, right?

So, it requires taking a step back and getting out of the weeds (forest for the trees) and accepting what rate of error is best for the sport. Currently, Homemade vs Company-made is so noisy and biased that it doesn't accomplish the intended goals: fairness and safety.

ISO already exists. It's affordable and widely accessible. It has error, but a whole lost less than Homemade vs Company-made. It's not "theater". The tests done on forks, frames, wheels and saddles do in fact ensure consumers are safer.

If Jimmy and Ironman feel their races need to be made more fair and more safe, they need rules that are easy to implement, that lack ambiguity and that actually make the sport fair and safe.

The UCI bans things it doesn't like the look of - their decisions are gut-based and not logical. It would be good, in my opinion, for Ironman to use a more relaxed logic and contrast themselves with the UCI. This would include IM not giving a care about shoe height, not caring what Skipper does as long as it's safe, and putting more attention on draft zones, safe passing on courses, anti-doping and having adequate nutrition on courses. Let IM be a place where safe innovation is fostered.

---

wovebike.com | Wove on instagram

The problem for IM is that they don't enforce their rules at races. Technical Officials from the local NSO (which runs under World Tri rules) are the ones that apply the rules. Which is why IM wants to be broadly aligned to WT rules.
Of course, that seems odd to the rest of us who don't see what relevance WT has to long course racing in comparison to IM, but IM don't really want to be an enforcement body.

There is a conversation going on between WT, IM and PTO about rules alignment and clarifying the wording. It may not be amended in the short term but WT revises their rules every two years, so it won't be far away.

Jimmy R certainly recognises the impact of the unclear wording that allows for TO interpretation.

They could actually start to enforce drafting in the Ag ranks to an effective degree

1000% agree with you there is better & lower hanging fruit IM could go after than this

---

Brian Stover USAT LII
Accelerate3 Coaching
Insta

Here's another one that I've seen. Felt IA owners buying a Quintana Roo or Trek Speed Concept draftbox and attaching it to their bike. Is that legal? Not pointing at Felt IA owners, but just an example that comes to mind. The boxes I sell are not 3d printed on a consumer printer at my house but are printed by industrial 3d printers by a reputable 3d printing service.

---

http://www.custombikexcessories.com
Instagram
Facebook

Cannot understand the complaints that the rules should explicitly allow certain aero components. Unless you're the one premiering the bottle-down-the-top before anyone's realised it, the only reason fairings give you an advantage is because others can't afford them. Just don't try to buy your way to the podium (nor lobby for the ability to) and all is good...

Buying your way to the podium is exactly the system they're setting up though. Someone with a $2000 cockpit on a $15,000 bike always had an advantage over sometime on a stock setup from a few years ago. The ability to close that gap with ingenuity as opposed to dollars helped level the playing field.

The issue isn't allowing or disallowing certain components, it's allowing only components purchased or given by an established company. That may as well be the definition of a barrier to entry.

I agree with emceemanners and will go step further. Bring on more rules and restrictions! Perhaps a minority opinion on this site. Make it so that bikes—even so-called superbikes—are forced to be more basic. The proliferation of $2000 cockpits and $15,000 bikes is a turnoff to the sport. I don’t care if aero gains are sacrificed for more level playing field.

Along the same thought. What truly constitutes a legitimate company? If I buy a 3d printer and set up an LLC, does that fit the criteria?

---

IG: NCGregory8778

No, you have to get Jimmy to bless it. Just ask for Jimmy at the races, tell him I sent you.

---

What's your CdA?

But that isn't necessarily the case. Plenty of expensive bikes and cockpits are slower than older or more affordable options.
Even then, the margins in decent equipment are far outweighed by the benefits available from comprehensive testing (generalising obviously)
In my view the application of ingenuity is figuring out how to test robustly yourself (which usually requires choosing versatile components). If you have money you go to marcag or DD or Xav or any of the others that can take you through an optimisation process.
Yes, you may be disadvantaged if your robust testing did show that duct taping your extensions was faster at low cost, but I'm not convinced that would be the case very often.

I'm actually not fussed about duct tape. What worries me is untested components being added into bar assemblies. CNCed extenders, 3d printed wedges etc.

Everyone who makes a podium is buying their way one way or another, either with the ability to train longer or buying a nice bike. But everyone who is winning on a nice bike is still training a tone.

---

Washed up footy player turned Triathlete.

That's what I'm saying. There are different paths to fast race times. You can spend money on the fastest stuff. You can spend time making the fastest stuff. You can spend time testing old stuff to maximize it's potential. They've taken away a pathway to be competitive for those who have more time than money.

It's kinda cool to see people achieve the same result in different ways. Like the Norwegians threshold training and others doing polarized training, both racing neck and neck. Ditto for Blu having a bespoke Cadex built around him losing to Laidlow on duct taped round extensions.

Well, i have seen dropped hydration systems made by official german companies claiming it indistructable on local events and on im events. How does a judge actually decide if it is safe or complies to the rules, i was told, in Germany, the judges are not allowed to touch the bike or the helmet ?
I only see problems with low quality 3d prints because of bad materials..i see alot of petg and other stuff around, just because the printer is not good enough the work high quality industrial materials...i just have gotten a part of a very very hard tpu and was told, destroy it if you can..free beer for a month..i was not able to...
I do see the problems they want to avoid but they cut off innovation triathlon is know for...

So, i will still show up with a 3d printed bta mount which includes my garminholder....at the end, they need us, the agegroupers and our money..i do not see them getting disqualified for having a garmin mount which is 3d printed while ignoring bad tires, bad brakes, bad material over all at the check in...

The problem is that ‘the level playing field’ is an ideology- it’s not a realistic destination. It wasn’t in Ancient Greece (when technology was broadly marginalised in sport) and it certainly won’t be now. I’ve written about this ad nausium in my research over the years but the bottom line is that you cannot normalise a society that sees huge variety in economy, sociology, beliefs, intelligence and priorities.

People need to remain focused on the safety and impact of new sports technology, not get hung up on trying to normalise an athletes investment.

I will make sure to get right on top of that :)

---

IG: NCGregory8778

Just got the reply of a judge which is also participating on Ironman events about this product:
https://www.rockerplates.de/BTA-Flaschenhalter-Basic-Mount-Canyon-SLX-CFR


According to him, this product '(BTA - Mounts), bottlemounts between the frame, will not be forbidden if the main purpose is the to carry the bottle...or carry tools (toolboxes) or rest the arms...so he told me, if tape is used to only minimizing aerodrag..dq or take it off, if the tape contents tools in between..it is kind of his own decision if it is safe or not..


So alot of interpretation possible, but all those toolboxes and 3d printed stuff should not be banned according to him...

Hello,

As I am preparing for my first IM 140.6 I am a bit certain about these rule changes. Specifically I have clip on profile design bars and have a 40mm spacer printed from 3d printer, it works wonderfully and is made from good plastic but should I be worried that referees could tell me to not use it?

Having a hard time to find OEM ones in Europe.

Also I have mounted a bottle cage with zip ties between the bars, is it also not illegal?

General reply to this thread. I saw a bunch of pros put ice into the front of their jersey at T100 singapore. Arguably for cooling first, and until it melts, maybe some aero benefit.

What's stopping someone putting a frozen bottle in that spot, or a frozen camelback in that spot. The problem is no one knows when it goes from ice to liquid at which point it is liquid containing nutrition that is on the front at which point it is technically illegal. But frozen stuff and probably only OK if not in a container that could hold "unfrozen stuff"

Yes my thought was:

1.Freeze 1.5L water bottle.
2.Cut off bottle.
3.Place bottle shaped ice in t1 with other ice to help it stay cool.
4.Place down top and go. Eventually the ice melts and you're fine.

Although maybe not, because technically putting anything down the jersey is outlawed right? Odd that PTO allowed ice but not bottles.

We see racers holding a bottle in hand while steering the bike. Laidlow at one point was in the aero bars holding the bottle instead of the bars.

Both of those examples are demonstrably less safe than jamming it down your top and continuing to ride.

In the name of being annoyed at the goofy things triathletes do, we've got people riding less safe with bottles in their hands.

Maybe they could have bottles on the bike? Or even some sort of container with a straw to drink from?

I'll take this one step further (as seems to be my place with rules lately). Can I make an ice sculpture fairing that fits into the back of my sleeves in a teardrop shape? Ditto for my calf sleeves. Does the ice need to touch my body for an ostensible cooling effect? Can I store "spare ice" in a faring shape in front of my arms?

The obvious answer to all of these is no, but it's fascinating how the competitors continue to find gaps in the admittedly poorly-written rules. If we remember, the rule actually says "any bottles/hydration or any other insert located in the front of an athlete’s race suit and (ii) any insert in an athlete’s calf sleeves; (DSQ)." It seems obvious to a layman that ice is an "insert", def "something that is made to go inside something else". It just drives me up a wall when rules that should be purely technical are left to discretion.

I just had an idea. What if you mixed jello and sculpted into an ideal fairing so one side is flat and goes flush with you chest and the other side is triangular shape and builds to a point and fills in gap between belly and forearms.

Now freeze it.

Now you have an ideally shaped frozen fairing. When it melts, well now you have this semi liquid that just won't drain like pure ice, but its still ice/water and you did not put a bottle in there and it is a cooling insert that seems to be allowed.