But that’s a general behaviour rule and applies to all equipment used SBR. Do ANY running shes meet or exceed "the standards of a reputable safety standards organization? No because they represent no risk. What about swimskins? Or socks? Or Omius headbands?
The relevant rule for bicycle related items is (IRONMAN Competition Rules 2025): 5.03 (h) All aspects of the bicycle must be safe to the rider and to other athletes in the Race. Minimum safety standards include, but are not limited to, meeting or exceeding the standards of a reputable safety standards organization (such as CPSC, ISO, or other equally reputable safety standards organizations), properly glued and sealed tires, tight headset and handlebars, and true wheels;
Now the operating sentence is the first: “All aspects of the bicycle must be safe to the rider and to other athletes in the Race.” The rule then goes on, helpfully, to list two safety standards organizations. But provided the “aspect” being used/attached (e.g. a 3d printed box that can be screwed on [and] fits very nicely . . . with two bottle cages [and] can hold all the repair kit) is safe for the rider and poses no risk to others, and in “good condition” then all good.
How many of these weird and wonderful cockpit assemblies have safety standards organization tick in that box?
Frankly refs have better things to do than wibble about whether a BTS box or little bag !duct taped to the saddle rails even! meets an irrelevant safety standard.
Check that helmets meet one of the specified standards but other stuff . . .
“Bicycle helmet certification standards include the CPSC (Consumer Product Safety Commission) in the U.S., EN1078 in Europe, and AS/NZS 2063 in Australia/New Zealand. These certifications ensure that helmets meet rigorous safety testing to protect riders from head injuries during crashes.”
Now whether all the rear ‘stuff’ fits into a 30x30 virtual square: bring it on.
Discussing possible upgrades for the team with Dan Bigham, we decided it was the moment to go public with the fish. Below you can see what should have been used, a 3d printed structure reinforced with carbon and kevlar tows, however, due to a last minute hotel change, the package never arrived. With the help of some good contacts, we managed to get a set of laser cut sheet metal mounts made in 48 hours. This is probably where the last minute rumors come from.
(Edit: picture taken during production obviously, not of the finished mounts)
I just don’t understand how this is illegal but the full blown air dam that LCB is using isn’t. It punishes those with less money but creativity and a desire to go faster.
Because the plastic cover has been “added” (zip tied on) “with the intent to” improve aero.
I do sympathise with your implied grievance, nevertheless.
5.03 (b) Protective screens, fuselages, fairings, or any other devices or materials (including duct tape) added or blended into the structure with the intent to reduce (or having the effect of reducing) resistance to air penetration are prohibited.
If WT or IM ever decide to ban these one piece aero bars, it’s going to be very interesting. I personally hope they don’t.
A lot of this reminds me of my days doing autocross with the SCCA. There were always people trying work within the rules and some got pretty creative. But there were some rules that made cheap bolt-on solutions illegal vs buying a complete solution for $10k+ was perfectly legal.
I get it by the letter of the law- but her and many other pros’ solutions don’t follow the spirit of the law. And for what it’s worth, I hate that I just complained about the difference in those two.
It’s just frustrating that a solution like that, which isn’t structural or weight bearing, is banned, but I can kinda do a lot of sketchier things with plastic that go unnoticed. I’d never do it, but could print spacers/reach extenders/angles for my bars and they’d go unnoticed, and be far more dangerous to myself and others. And that could very well be illegal, but nobody is going to check and call an AG’er out on that far more dangerous rule break.
I don’t think its the pro’s responsibility to stick to the spirit of the rules. In fact, I’d argue that the onus goes the other way. We’re a sport that typically embraces innovation, and there’s plenty of incentive for pros to figure out solutions which appear to violate the spirit of the rules, but which are legal with respect to the letter of the rules.
If we don’t like the rules or behavior around the rules, then the solution is change the rules. But let’s not blame the pros (and inventive age groupers) who have every incentive to get faster.
Blame the rule makers for poorly worded rules, or for rules they’ve implemented but haven’t thought through 100%.
A big thing World Triathlon could learn from SCCA autocross, is the concept of a rules season. It slows down the rule making process, but it makes it much more transparent, puts proposed rules out for member comment and allows for the stakeholders to poke holes in them. That process allows much more time for competitors to react to changes and creates better thought out rules. A rules season process would avoid this very mess the DTU and World Tri created.
If interested here is that rules making flow chart.
Great point. I completely forgot about that process (its been 15 years since I last did auto-x). My brother was on an advisory committee for a year or 2 at one point. It did make for lively conversation on the autox forums with board and committee members chiming in. Similar to what’s going on here…
So I’m still confused. There was a video mentioned earlier in this thread or maybe another thread that said the bta window was based on a 750ml bottle which measures 25cm long. So that would basically mean that the bta cage could not start any more rearward than the pads. If that’s the case, how are these setups legal from eagleman? Not picking on these athletes. It just seems like the rules aren’t being enforced correctly or consistently.
but then why are spoked wheels with any type of fairings allowed
I am happy to go all is possible, or we control everything but
to ban this but allow any spoked wheels where the fairing is not structural makes no sense.
just as it makes no sene that you can have a water bottle in your tri suit but can attach it to the bike in such way that you can eve. rest on it .
there is not sense , or at least I dont see it.
bit late for this
but I totally get your point
I guess we go uci legal or all is go, but where we are now is the worst place, we are going to play a constant catch up and we get more and more uncertainty.
and we certainly cant change rules end of May.
