BC olympic bikes

Tom Dean

Australians fume at UK bike secrecy: http://m.theage.com.au/sport/cycling/australians-fume-at-uk-bike-secrecy-20121221-2brnj.html

Richmond Racer

Waaaaaaaahhhhh

Pross

I thought you could buy them online so why not just buy some and reverse engineer them? At the end of the day, despite all the marketing hype, there is little difference between bikes - BC have done a brilliant job of getting a psychological advantage out of all this secret squirrel stuff!!

Pross

Ah, just read on and saw they tried that ploy.

Richmond Racer

The claim that the website was hokey is kind of silly - people did get on - and got quotes of something like a year for delivery for kit....

There's no doubt that Boardman and the Secret Quirrel Club boxed very very clever.

The Aussies complaining that they darent risk anything new on the day in case the UCI banned it, is just daft. Boardman checked every piece of kit every step of the way with the UCI - and because he's knows what they're like, when after approving something the UCI subsequently changed their minds Boardman already had a second line in development so that no time was lost.

The Aussies might want to look internally for some hints why they didnt do so well in London. Such as Bobridge and Hepburn going on the toot whilst on a training camp in Spain/Italy... :roll:

r0bh

It's not really BC's fault that you can drive a bus through the UCI rules on all kit being commercially available.

I'm pretty sure the frames haven't evolved much since Beijing so the Aussies have had 4 years to come up with something better. The skinsuits were actually a step backwards from Beijing as the rubberized ones were outlawed. Wheels are commercially available. So the only new bits of kit were the helmets (£3k each if you want one apparently) and cranks I think.

Richmond Racer

r0bh wrote:

It's not really BC's fault that you can drive a bus through the UCI rules on all kit being commercially available.

I'm pretty sure the frames haven't evolved much since Beijing so the Aussies have had 4 years to come up with something better. The skinsuits were actually a step backwards from Beijing as the rubberized ones were outlawed. Wheels are commercially available. So the only new bits of kit were the helmets (£3k each if you want one apparently) and cranks I think.

Not forgetting the hot pants!

I dont think the wheels had changed from Beijing...apart from being rounder than anyone else's of course

lostboysaint

Whinging Aussie shock. It's really amusing to hear them call us whinging Poms and then have to put up with endless rubbish like this in just about every sport that they aren't the best in! (So yes, we've heard a LOT of whinging this year!)

Tom Dean

I haven't read them, but it wouldn't be a surprise if the rules were badly written. I hope the UCI look into it.

Whether you think BC should be using public money to make three thousand pound helmets while domestic road racing dies on its @rse is another matter.

tremayne

Tom Dean wrote:

I haven't read them, but it wouldn't be a surprise if the rules were badly written. I hope the UCI look into it.

Whether you think BC should be using public money to make three thousand pound helmets while domestic road racing dies on its @rse is another matter.

Understand your general point. However, the margins that for example Trott won her medal by, have been comprehensively studied and are so slim - it was found that the 2012 equipment could actually have tipped her into Gold. (interesting point - all girls helmets were based on Laura Trott's specific requirements - not enough money available to custom build for entire female team). Can we spare £3k - when it can be demonstrated to be so tight that it coul dbe the difference between silver and gold? I think so.

Richmond Racer

The money from UK Sport for elite cycling is specifically for Olympic medals. Problem is that the framework doesnt allow for it to be used to shore up the Prem Calendar. Shame but...

Now whether cycling really does need an additional 17% funding for the next Olympic cycle...for a team that already scored 7 out of 10 golds in London and is already better funded that other nations, it might be a valid question.

Tom Dean

I wonder if custom building helmets for each rider would have been allowed? Isn't this the kind of thing the UCI wants to remove?

edit

Richmond Racer wrote:

The money from UK Sport for elite cycling is specifically for Olympic medals. Problem is that the framework doesnt allow for it to be used to shore up the Prem Calendar. Shame but...

Now whether cycling really does need an additional 17% funding for the next Olympic cycle...for a team that already scored 7 out of 10 golds in London and is already better funded that other nations, it might be a valid question.

I see. Maybe it's time to employ a 'Head of Diminishing Returns' to go along with the marginal gains...

Tom Butcher

I read an article by Bos saying similar things - other nations can't compete with the money GB have to spend. Be interesting what happens in the future - I've not really been involved in track cycling but certainly in our club there are loads of youth riders now getting coached and making visits to Manchester - if strength in depth means much GB should be well placed.

Richmond Racer

Hang on. 7 out of 10 golds just on the track, plus 1 on the road...then add 2 x RR on offer, womens TT, 2 x MTB, 2 x BMX - hell, loads more golds to go for

Rodrego Hernandez

Do they have the wheels for sale?