Hey Gerard,
how many of those UCI regulations are a direct result of your innovations? It’d be cool to see how the rules came to the point they are at today, because there’s a lot of history buried in those pages. That’d make for some pretty interesting reading, and a cool bragging rights sort of thing. I guess it could be taken the wrong way (because those rules are there for our safety), but I’d be interested in seeing how those rules evolved over time. Perhaps it’d be a cool coffee table book.
I do. Feel free to disagree with me, but remember that you would be wrong.
I do. Feel free to disagree with me, but remember that you would be wrong.
You sound just like the UCI.
I think the record-holder is the group of Chet Kyle, Dave Kennedy, Don Guichard et al from the US Olympic bike projects. If I remember correctly they have caused 5-6 rule changes. Since Don and Dave work for us now, we have learned from past mistakes and I don’t think we have really caused anybody to get upset over our designs.
People used to laugh about aero bars and helmets too. There was a time when they were very ‘uncool’.
People used to laugh at Bozo the Clown, too…
Not me, I’m scared of clowns.
No, it’s perfectly clear. It’s like porn, you can’t define it, but you know it’s porn when you see it.
When it comes to technical evolution, ‘frustrating’ is the nicest word I could think of when it came to this. I just don’t understand the UCI - this is the only sport that tries to fight design engineering and does it… badly.
It’s just like the hour record again!
No, it’s perfectly clear. It’s like porn, you can’t define it, but you know it’s porn when you see it.
Don’t you mean “pjorn”? 
I thought I was the only one who didn’t get that part. Its OK, apparently, to have supports for the elbows and forearms, as long as you don’t actually use them?. And WTF are “safety ergonomic considerations”??
That has to be the stupidest thing I’ve read in a while.
Spot
Hmmm…that doesn’t seem to make any sense. How can you allow something to be a support for elbows or forearms and yet not let elbow forearms be points of support?
Welcome to our world. BTW, now everybody also knows why Zabriskie’s position changed in the Dauphine. I don’t think any of the 200 posts of that thread got it right (as this is not a new rule, they announced this before, but it was unclear so they sent out another unclear clarification).
Hmmm…so you’re saying that DZ’s bar position at the Dauphine needed to be changed according to the UCI, but this one was OK?
It almost seems to be a case of how good an official you get on the day and their interpretation of the rule book…
** but it was unclear so they sent out another unclear clarification**
Ahh, yes. The wonderful world of high level sports administration. The only thing that is clear is that often no one knows what is going on!
Cheers Tom A.
Is there nothing UCI won’t do to halt progress?
Obviously Levi’s support is not a support the way Dave’s support is a support as it supports in an unsupported way as opposed to the support in a supportive way sported by Dave. Can’t believe you couldn’t figure that out yourself.
Cheers Tom A.
Is there nothing UCI won’t do to halt progress?
Well, here’s another thing I find humorous about the situation. They’re acting like this “alternative arm position” is some secret, special, overwhelmingly advantagous trick…when testing has shown that it’s efficacy is highly individual. In other words, it “works” for some, but not for others and the amount that it “works” is within the range of other position tweaks…and mostly really comes down to a rider preference that’s based not only on just drag, but also comfort, power production, and control.
On top of that, it was only until recently (last decade or less) that the TT extensions became overwhelmingly “level”. Look at the old pics of TTs when aerobars were first introduced and they were virtually all tilted WAY up. The UCI should be all FOR this…it’s going back to the way some of the great riders rode (LeMond, Indurain, etc.)
Obviously Levi’s support is not a support the way Dave’s support is a support as it supports in an unsupported way as opposed to the support in a supportive way sported by Dave. Can’t believe you couldn’t figure that out yourself.
Got it.
You know, as much as I find unions to be counterproductive in general…it’s crap like this (along with all the doping crap that’s going on as well…on both sides) that REALLY tells me that none of this stuff is going to get sorted out at all until the riders form an EFFECTIVE union.
I can’t believe I just wrote that…
Here is my take ont he whole thing…UCI is doing what it is supposed to do, which is govern the sport. With every leaderhsip, the organization takes on a personality. UCI (Ergo PAt McQuaid) is now committed to fighting doping and infractions of set-up rules. There have been some who say the Praying Landis postion makes the bike harder to steer and most unconraollable under certain situations as well.
What I also take from this is something that Lance once said "The bike might be fast, but I need to make sure the rider is.) Levi got drilled at the Dauphine (Lsot over a minutes) in his Praying Landis position, but Cancellara changed his entire position and still whupped on everyone at the Suisse.
To me, this is all personal and a matter of rider fitness. Yes, aerodynamics play a part, but if the car engine isn’t as big as it should be, a sleek body isn’t going to go as fast as it could.
Bob
Here is my take ont he whole thing…UCI is doing what it is supposed to do, which is govern the sport. With every leaderhsip, the organization takes on a personality. UCI (Ergo PAt McQuaid) is now committed to fighting doping and infractions of set-up rules.
The problem is, there aren’t any rules being “infracted” with that type of bar setup. It’s poor “governance” to be unclear in rule specification/interpretation.
There have been some who say the Praying Landis postion makes the bike harder to steer and most unconraollable under certain situations as well.
And I can tell you from personal experience that those people are wrong…especially so if the front end of the bike is designed with appropriate geometry.