Thanks for posting this Chris...

I'm waiting for them to form stricter rules for aero extensions ...

db

Thanks for starting this thread

Yeah, the computer mount and flat top sections on aero road handlebar make it all the easier to do.

Part of me gets why it shouldn't be done in certain situations (in the pack, or by beginners), as the former can bring down dozens of riders while the latter just don't know things well enough.

I have no idea why they'd want to ban it for someone like Hirschi though...

Personally speaking, I used it to good effect as a Cat-3, with 15 upgrade points toward Cat-2 at least partially attributable to it (only used it when I was OTF). Really makes me sad if USAC follows suit.

Having said all that, I also do recognize that it is dangerous, as any inattention to bad road surface could lead to crashes...

Should just ban the computer mounts. I get the super tuck - there is no doubt that is dangerous even for the elite, but this one makes no sense.

I cringe when guys I ride with super tuck...they're amateurs, not pros. Still, the super tuck seems pretty risky. However, I don't quite understand banning riding with forearms on your bars. I do this occasionally and ride with guys who do. You're not going anywhere near the speeds you are in a super tuck. The only reason I can think of is if the rider on the front of the peloton doing this, loses control, then causes a mass pileup. However, many of the crashes in the peloton are purely from touched wheels, etc.

I feel like the UCI is instituting these bans purely to say they are doing something regarding rider safety. However, if you listen to the riders, they are primarily complaining about course designs, road furniture, and race conditions. Things that are harder for the UCI to control. I doubt we're going to see any reduction in crashes following UCI rules on the super tuck and forearm riding.

---

"Most of my heroes don't appear on no stamps"
Blog = http://extrememomentum.com|Photos = http://wheelgoodphotos.com

When I first read this I immediately though of these, and how the UCI them as well:

What the need to do is ban sprint finishes. I haven’t seen any crashes due to supertuck or VAB, but plenty due to poorly designed finishes. Finishes should be wider and let all non sprinters coast in behind at the same given time. Massive amount of sprint carnage last year. Fix that first.

To be fair, I have heard of the very occasional anecdote where a rider doing the VAB/IAB/Hirschi Bar didn't pay attention to road surface, hit a bump/pothole, and crashed.

Never seen it though, but I have heard of such incidents.

But to your point, the number of such incidents pales in comparison to sprint carnage, which would appear to be a much lower hanging fruit.

Also, to make another connection to our favorite descending dare devil (from the same event where he did the pedaling supertuck); note that 2nd place finisher, Louis Meintjes, was also on the VAB/IAB/Hirschi Bar.

Personally, my own thoughts go along the lines of
- it's harder and less "visible" to make sprint finishes safer
- UCI is under pressure to make things safer
- These positions "look" dangerous (moreso than actually are dangerous)

I don't want to be pessimistic, but my guess (no proof, and hope I'm wrong) is this is a good way to look like you're interested in rider safety without actually addressing the truly dangerous parts of racing.

---

My Blog - http://leegoocrap.blogspot.com

I guess this will have an impact on the draft legal ITU boys and girls. Often see ITU pros riding the virtual aero bars either at the front of the pack or when Ali is on a breakaway.


5.2. Equipment:
a.) In general, UCI rules, as of January 1st of the current year, will apply during competition and also during familiarisation sessions and official training:
(i) UCI road race rules for draft-legal triathlon and duathlon races;
(ii) UCI time trial rules for draft-illegal triathlon and duathlon races;
(iii) UCI Mountain Bike (MTB) rules for winter triathlon, cross triathlon and cross duathlon races.

Cheers, Rich.

Ha, I love that !

If I looked hard enough, I may find my old pair down in the basement somewhere !

Do you have evidence of this? Would genuinely love to see it, if so.

---

Dr. Alex Harrison | Founder & CEO | Sport Physiology & Performance PhD
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
📱 Check out our app → Saturday: Pro Fuel & Hydration, a performance nutrition coach in your pocket.
Join us on YouTube → Saturday Morning | Ride & Run Faster and our growing Saturday User Hub

That is a more optimistic position than I was able to generate.

My thoughts were one of 2 things:

1. Old-timey cyclists are nostalgic
2. Bike companies want to force people to use the contact points provided on their bikes, now that everyone realizes those contact points are not the safest, and thus, have a gaping market gap of longer/lower/narrower componentry to sell in the next decade. Those bike companies have strong relationship to the UCI decision-makers and lobbied internally for this. Maybe I'm just cynical.

---

Dr. Alex Harrison | Founder & CEO | Sport Physiology & Performance PhD
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
📱 Check out our app → Saturday: Pro Fuel & Hydration, a performance nutrition coach in your pocket.
Join us on YouTube → Saturday Morning | Ride & Run Faster and our growing Saturday User Hub

That's the direction I was thinking as well. Cue the 2,000 EUR Speeco bar. Complies with current UCI rules, and my bet is that other companies will look to make something similar.

being a pessimist again...

but I would guess some tech restrictions are coming as well, so I might hold off a little bit on the speeco bar.

---

My Blog - http://leegoocrap.blogspot.com

i would argue that invisible aero bars is more 'dangerous' than the super tuck.

What is not as well known is that Cane Creek speedbars and Scott Rakes (both are drops bolted on, near the stem) are apparently legal for USAC racing. I know someone who used the former, although i’d argue that the placement of “drops” on those bars is so awkward (essentially steering with hands very close to the stem), that they don’t provide much of an improvement (in terms of leverage) over the VAB/IAB

I still have my Scott bars where the drops curved back in. Maybe they'll make a comeback now!

It's just getting silly. It's all "seeming instead of being". We know the incidents that do maim folks but nothing will of substance happen. Then we do something with stuff with no statistical proof anyone suffers from it.

Geez.

When it gets to forcing people to "hold" or "sit" on the bike that is already within rules from even 20 years ago.......it's getting stupid. I mean sure, no cartwheels or standing on the saddle with your feet or whatever.

I'm a cat 4/5 nobody. When riding alone I get bored and sit my forearms on the aero bars. You damn better pay attention to road surface anyway. What's to say (for pros or joes) that pothole comes while you take the hands off the bars to take off a jacket or arm warmers? Why the distinction over IAB? Ban removing more than one hand at a time from the bars? So pros will have to pull over to take jackets off before a climb and pull over at the top to put them back on for the descent? If you follow the "logic" of banning IAB the logic would dictate there's a dozen other scenarios of hands and bars that are "unsafe".

:eyeroll emoji:

What's to say (for pros or joes) that pothole comes while you take the hands off the bars to take off a jacket or arm warmers?

----

A girl here in spring of '19 had that happen to her. Not the pothole, but she went to take off her jacket and her arm got stuck in the sleeve and so both arms were behind her body and a gust of wind pushed her bike a bit and she ate it head/face first. I believe she broke a shoulder and suffered a concussion.

(not adding this caveat to actually suggest they should add 1 hand on bars at all times rules). Just noting that my reaction was more or less "you know I've been in that situation taking off a jacket before riding no hands....it would suck to crash in that scenario".

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

Jesus have mercy that's terrible!

I can sympathize. Either a guy touched my wheel in a 3-up sprint OR I had a front tire go mid-sprint......but I had that happen. Face/head demolished. Hospital. I only remember for some reason a forward lean suddenly as the front bars whipped left/right with the front wheel hopping up and down. You can see the last data point in my file even of gearing up and hitting about 1000w then the rpm's go thru the roof and the power approaches zero. I remember nothing after that until onlookers had righted me and sat me up.

Agreed, especially during a hot, humid month.

---

Eric Reid AeroFit | Instagram Portfolio
Aerodynamic Retul Bike Fitting

“You are experiencing the criminal coverup of a foreign backed fascist hostile takeover of a mafia shakedown of an authoritarian religious slow motion coup. Persuade people to vote for Democracy.”

Agree. Its time to ban, sprint finishes, the fans on the road, fat dude in the devil suit and pitch fork, stray dogs, cows, cars, feed zones, road signs, wheel touching, drafting in a peloton, or any other thing that might.....just might.....cause a crash. :/

To be fair, the UCI - and all governing bodies - have to make these decisions mostly in the absence of strong evidence. Not even helmets have hard evidence of value in a racing peloton, and I think we're mostly fine with helmets while racing.

It'd be a value to start some sort of long-running cohort study that could examine changes to rules and how they affect overall safety. That'd start with setting up some sort of database that logged each "incident" and requiring detailed reporting around the context of each incident (equipment used, speed, riding position, course, interactions with other riders or vehicles. etc).

But until then we just kind of have to react as we go. And I don't blame the UCI on this front.

To be fair, the other changes did address some possible factors in sprinting crashes.

And I don't think it's fair to characterize this as seeking nirvana where all risk is removed from cycling. It's just picking on things that may not have a lot of value to the sport relative to their risk.

Sprinting has a lot of value to the sport. It's a fundamental part of it. IAB/supertuck much less value. They're kind of fun to watch. They *probably* give a marginal edge to solo-or-small breaks. (Even though the positions are (were) available to the chasing peloton as well.). And I'm a huge fan of small breaks and the guys who attempt them. So that's maybe the cost.

I agree it's mostly cosmetic, and I'd have liked to have seen more in the course design section. Also missing was any penalty for failures in course design, even though the rider penalty section was updated . Or at least mentioning that a race with course that doesn't meet the standards may not lose its UCI-sanctioned status until fixed.