Right decision, or something crazy from the UCI

peterst6906

UCI have banned the Bont Crono:

http://www.bont.com/cycling/products/crono/crono.html

Good decision, or bad?

For me, I think it's kind of crazy given the way other pieces of equipment, especially aero helmets are adapted for a purpose outside safety and yet this one is banned.

Sometimes I find myself scratching my head at the things the UCI do. It's becoming so regular I'll have no hair left soon.

Bobbinogs

If the UCI hadn't banned them then the Style Police should have. If they have some spare time they can have a word with Dr Hutch about those socks of his too.

peterst6906

Bobbinogs wrote:

If the UCI hadn't banned them then the Style Police should have. If they have some spare time they can have a word with Dr Hutch about those socks of his too.

Ugly I can't argue against. If the UCI banned them for looking ugly I would have agreed.....

SCR Pedro

We should all buy a pair, just to p*ss off the UCI.

Cheers

Rule74Please

Don't you love marketing departments and those who swallow their bullsh*t

Zachariah

What's this about Bono being banned...?

Frank the tank

The UCI like many other sports organizing bodies feel they have to keep sticking their oar in (ban this, change that rule etc) just to justify their very existance.

Shiney shoes,badges and blazer brigades. They're all the bloody same.

invincible

looks like a victim of their own marketing

OffTheBackAdam

They permit "aero" helmets, where the tail is obviously designed to reduce air resistance.

“It is forbidden to wear non-essential items of clothing or items designed to influence the performances of a rider such as reducing air resistance ...."

Ugly shoes, mind you.

dag_on_a_bike

Didn't one of the commentators during Paris-Roubaix comment that (I can't remember who's) yellow overshoes were going to have their last outing because the UCI had banned overshoes as 'non-essential items of clothing'?

freehub

Overshoes are banned???????????? BUT WHAT IF IT RAINS?|???

Tom BB

Do UCI rules apply/affect Cat 4 races etc?.......I've just bought 2 pairs of oversocks ffs! Whilst they may not be to everybodies taste, my shoes dont match my kit, and I cant afford new shoes, so oversocks it is :oops:

EDIT: I've just read the link in the OP.....overshoes are seemingly fine if weather dictates.....its purely the aero shoe covers that are banned.....

snailracer

Different UCI rules apply to different types of races i.e. time trial, road race, cyclocross, BMX, etc. It's not clear what the ban applies to.

Eddy S

The ban applies to the wearing of these shoes at any UCI sanctioned event, whether it’s the TT stage of a stage race or Tour, the TT World Champs, a track or BMX world Cup and any BC sanctioned race - BC regs follow and are linked to UCI regs.

The ban doesn’t apply to your local (in the UK) 10 or 25, etc because those events are governed by CTT rules.

But, ride the National TT Championship and you’re back in BC regs and territory.

To the OP’s question: no, this is definitely not right nor a good thing and is yet another step to stifle development and progression of equipment. Very much the thin end of the wedge and yet more insidious interference from the men of Aigle. :evil:

58585

Definitely a good move.
Cycle racing should be reward the strongest rider - UCI need to ensure that technology never skews the balance.

I would personally like to see much stricter controls at the top level (tube shapes, wheel selections etc), but the manufacturers/teams would rebel...

Aggieboy

58585 wrote:

Definitely a good move.
Cycle racing should be reward the strongest rider - UCI need to ensure that technology never skews the balance.

I would personally like to see much stricter controls at the top level (tube shapes, wheel selections etc), but the manufacturers/teams would rebel...

Would it skew the balance though? If they proved to be that much of a benefit then you can bet that they'd all be using them, as for example TT helmets/bikes, skin suits, aero wheels etc.

turnerjohn

freehub wrote:

Overshoes are banned???????????? BUT WHAT IF IT RAINS?|???

rule 1.3.033 Items of clothing or equipment may be considered essential where weather conditions make them appropriate for the safety or the health of the rider. In this case, the nature and texture of the clothing or equipment must be clearly and solely justified by the need to protect the rider from bad weather conditions.

so they can keep dry

58585

Aggieboy wrote:

Would it skew the balance though? If they proved to be that much of a benefit then you can bet that they'd all be using them, as for example TT helmets/bikes, skin suits, aero wheels etc.

Wouldn't make a blind bit of notice on it's own, but it's a slippery slope.
Aero shoes, camelbaks under jerseys, skin suits with "wings". None of it's needed and it certainly doesn't make the racing any better!

schweiz

Pro Tour cyclists should only be allowed to race in Aran sweaters, corduroy breeches and hob nail boots. That'll tell us who's really the best rider ... and whilst we're at it get rid of 10/11 gears, support cars and luxury team buses.

FFS!

rick_chasey

schweiz wrote:

Pro Tour cyclists should only be allowed to race in Aran sweaters, corduroy breeches and hob nail boots. That'll tell us who's really the best rider ... and whilst we're at it get rid of 10/11 gears, support cars and luxury team buses.

FFS!

Have 'em ride these then...

schweiz

Why not? They're about as practical on an alpine col as an Aran sweater!

neiltb

if they're so worried about the aero benefits of shoes (as above, if they'd just called them shoes they'd likely be fine) the UCI should mandate a flat sheet of perspex of 1 square metre to be perpendicular to the road surface at the front of the bike.

It won't matter how slippery your shoes are then, I wouldn't fancy any time at the front though!