Why do the UCI regulate saddle angle?

No_Ta_Doctor

Serious question. Do they have any rationale for it at all? All it seems to do is to reduce a rider's possibility of ensuring a comfortable set-up that, for men at any rate, won't damage his bits too badly.

The usual regulations re bike design, setup and components tend to be justified by attempting (pretty conservatively, and almost always debatably) on the grounds of bike price (ensuring the general population can go out and buy a race bike - e.g. the weight limit designed to ensure bikes are sturdy enough), safety (no disc brakes as mixed braking systems in a peloton could be dangerous) and to hold with the basic bike geometry (it's got to have a triangle or it aint a bike).

I can't see any of these applying to saddle angle. But hey, maybe it's a slippery slope, let them adjust their saddles one day and the next they'll all be turning up for TTs in a fairinged recumbent...

So why?

skylla

Saddle tilt rules never made any sense to me, just like bottle volumes. When these rules weren't enforced they never caused any problems to my knowledge, such as an unfair advantage to athletes?

No_Ta_Doctor

They regulate bottle volumes? Max or min or both? WTF?

What next? "That's not an approved UCI frame colour"?

rick_chasey

No tA Doctor wrote:

They regulate bottle volumes? Max or min or both? WTF?

What next? "That's not an approved UCI frame colour"?

There was a time where oversized bottles were considered to be of aerodynamic benefit.

Paul 8v

Rick Chasey wrote:

No tA Doctor wrote:

They regulate bottle volumes? Max or min or both? WTF?

What next? "That's not an approved UCI frame colour"?

There was a time where oversized bottles were considered to be of aerodynamic benefit.

I would have thought they would do the opposite! I used to have one of the shaped campag ones, I could understand them giving an advantage to be fair

frenchfighter

http://www.uci.ch/Modules/BUILTIN/getOb ... Y&LangId=1
Tech Regulations

And:
-UCI Technical Coordinator Julien Carron
“Ultimately the concept is to grant the rider sufficient freedom to allow a comfortable position to be adopted, reducing the pressure on the perineum, while avoiding any deviation through an excessively sloping saddle that could improve sporting performance to an unacceptable degree by the addition of a lumbar support.”

"The reason why entire teams tilted the saddles is clearly to improve the lumbar support, and there is a huge difference on the energy transmitted to the pedals due to action-reaction forces," Carron explained.

"For the fairness in competitions and to avoid disadvantaging rule-abiding riders, the saddles should be horizontal for everybody. It is the exact same situation for the horizontal position of the forearms during time trials or the position of the peak of the saddle 5 cm to the rear of the axis of the bottom bracket."

"All these rules were written to enforce the Lugano Charter: 'The real meaning of cycle sport is to bring riders together to compete on an equal footing and thereby decide which of them is physically the best.'"


What doesn't make sense about this rule is that it doesn't cost any money to do this so it is not like there is an unfair barrier to entry.

LangerDan

I think the regs are to prevent the sort of faffing around that used occur way back, especially with Gitane's development of aero bikes in the 80s - saddles with flipped-up tails or even ones with a fully faired rear section both of which allowed a rider to brace themselves on the pedal stroke.

disgruntledgoat

So is any tilt at all allowable? I may have to rethink my entire position!

rick_chasey

My saddle's are never level. Always have to point up a bit else I get bounced onto the tip.

skylla

disgruntledgoat wrote:

So is any tilt at all allowable? I may have to rethink my entire position!

I think it's a mere max of 2.5 degrees, with 0.5 degrees leeway.

Bottle volumes is min. 400mL and max. 800mL ??

disgruntledgoat

skylla wrote:

disgruntledgoat wrote:

So is any tilt at all allowable? I may have to rethink my entire position!

I think it's a mere max of 2.5 degrees, with 0.5 degrees leeway.

Bottle volumes is min. 400mL and max. 800mL ??

TIme to get the protractor out! My road bike doubles as a TT bike, this requires that the saddle is raised, pushed forward and tilted down.

HOwever, I'm not sure the scrutineers will be out in force in the bobbins level of local time trial I do, and even if they do nab me at the hill climb nationals, it'll be my normal road position.

bompington

Presumably at some point Graeme Obree titled his saddle so they had to ban it.

Paul 8v

bompington wrote:

Presumably at some point Graeme Obree titled his saddle so they had to ban it.

This is probably the actual reason!

tgotb

disgruntledgoat wrote:

skylla wrote:

disgruntledgoat wrote:

So is any tilt at all allowable? I may have to rethink my entire position!

I think it's a mere max of 2.5 degrees, with 0.5 degrees leeway.

Bottle volumes is min. 400mL and max. 800mL ??

TIme to get the protractor out! My road bike doubles as a TT bike, this requires that the saddle is raised, pushed forward and tilted down.

HOwever, I'm not sure the scrutineers will be out in force in the bobbins level of local time trial I do, and even if they do nab me at the hill climb nationals, it'll be my normal road position.

You'll be fine if you're TT-ing in the UK; that comes under the auspices of CTT, which has much more sensible equipment rules than UCI...

knedlicky

disgruntledgoat wrote:

skylla wrote:

disgruntledgoat wrote:

So is any tilt at all allowable? I may have to rethink my entire position!

I think it's a mere max of 2.5 degrees, with 0.5 degrees leeway.

TIme to get the protractor out! My road bike doubles as a TT bike, this requires that the saddle is raised, pushed forward and tilted down.

The rule applies to the angle between a saddle’s most raised parts, fore and aft. Typically a saddle is about 28 cm long, but its most raised parts only 20 to 24 cm apart.
This means, with a 3 degree tilt, you can have a difference in height between the saddle’s most raised parts of 10 to 12 mm.

This might not sound much, but I know from my own experience of having that much tilt, it’s visible enough to regular cyclists, for them to comment on.
When you go to 5 degree tilts, the height difference is 18 to 20 mm and double that again for 10 degree tilts.

Anymore tilt than 3 degrees and (unless you put adhesive non-slip strips on the saddle) you’ll perhaps slide more often than is good for efficiency, even if it feels comfortable enough and appropriately power-inducing in a TT.

Another way to sometimes judge if a saddle is too tilted is if you feel tension in the shoulders from a TT – because you’ve then got too much weight up front.

esafosfina

LangerDan wrote:

I think the regs are to prevent the sort of faffing around that used occur way back, especially with Gitane's development of aero bikes in the 80s - saddles with flipped-up tails or even ones with a fully faired rear section both of which allowed a rider to brace themselves on the pedal stroke.

Dan... those flipped-up-tailed saddles were great! I rode them on my pursuit bikes in the 91 Worlds... then the bloody UCI banned them! :?

jonginge

http://hobbscycling.blogspot.co.uk/2012 ... dards.html

itisaboutthebike

The way things are going the UCI won't be regulating anything shortly.................

oneof1982

There's piles of research on this!

No_Ta_Doctor

Good, God, I've opened a can of worms.....

esafosfina

No tA Doctor wrote:

Good, God, I've opened a can of worms.....

Nah... you're all good mate... after all, the UCI used to ban coloured socks! (I shit thee not!) :roll:

frenchfighter

rick_chasey

Who the f*ck decides on the UCI commissar uniform?

inkyfingers

Rick Chasey wrote:

Who the f*ck decides on the UCI commissar uniform?

A middle aged man from Switzerland.