UCI rule for riding the kerb

frenchfighter

Mentioned a while ago but cant find the thread. Good analysis by Inrng

http://inrng.com/2013/11/uci-rule-road-vs-cyclepath/

thomthom

Good.

The riders have no business outside of the roads. Also, it's extrememly frustrating to see the riders riding on anything but the pavees. The pavee sections are afterall a part of the the game board in the classics - not the bike lanes.

deejay

ThomThom wrote:

Good.

The riders have no business on outside of the roads. Also, it's extrememly frustrating to see the riders riding on anything but the pavees. The pavee sections are afterall a part of the the game board in the classics - not the bike lanes.

But they can still ride the gutters of the Paterberg and Eikenberg.

gpreeves

ThomThom wrote:

Good.

The riders have no business outside of the roads. Also, it's extrememly frustrating to see the riders riding on anything but the pavees. The pavee sections are afterall a part of the the game board in the classics - not the bike lanes.

Spot on. As long as non-avoidable use of bike paths isn't harshly penalised this can only be a good thing.

Inrng alluded to this, but would Stybar's hop now actually lead to a fine and disqualification?

ddraver

Officially Yes - but surely he'd be let off for sheer awesomeness!!!

rick_chasey

I always liked the idea they can use the environment around them to their advantage. That Freire attack being most obvious but definitely not the only one.

If they really want riders off certain curbs they should fence it, which they do.

Paterberg in the build up races to ToF is a free for all on the curb but come Flanders they fence tbe the curb off.

I guess it's a crowd safety thing rather than anything to do with racing.

Pross

gpreeves wrote:

ThomThom wrote:

Good.

The riders have no business outside of the roads. Also, it's extrememly frustrating to see the riders riding on anything but the pavees. The pavee sections are afterall a part of the the game board in the classics - not the bike lanes.

Spot on. As long as non-avoidable use of bike paths isn't harshly penalised this can only be a good thing.

Inrng alluded to this, but would Stybar's hop now actually lead to a fine and disqualification?

To me that just seems totally pointless as he gained nothing on the Sky rider in the process.

dougzz

Pross wrote:

To me that just seems totally pointless as he gained nothing on the Sky rider in the process.

He gained a ddraver 'Awesomeness' award, money can't buy those

ddraver

I suppose he wasnt ever going to be changing teams was he, but if he was he probably would add another 10,000 to his salary just in terms of marketing value...

TMR

Pross wrote:

To me that just seems totally pointless as he gained nothing on the Sky rider in the process.

It looked good though

Richmond Racer

TMR wrote:

Pross wrote:

To me that just seems totally pointless as he gained nothing on the Sky rider in the process.

It looked good though

Cant put a price on that, eh

markhewitt1978

You would think the idea is not to punish riders for every minor infraction, but only if they do it blatantly or cause an accident.

greasedscotsman

markhewitt1978 wrote:

You would think the idea is not to punish riders for every minor infraction, but only if they do it blatantly or cause an accident.

So you wouldn't punish Stybar then?

markhewitt1978

greasedscotsman wrote:

markhewitt1978 wrote:

You would think the idea is not to punish riders for every minor infraction, but only if they do it blatantly or cause an accident.

So you wouldn't punish Stybar then?

The (sensible IMO) rule in Formula 1 is that if you go off track you must not gain an advantage either by overtaking someone, catching them up, or prevent the competitor from overtaking you. So it would make sense to look at each one and think, could it have been avoided? Did it allow the rider an advantage? If he went wide to avoid a crash, for example, then this is acceptable. However if someone used the pavement to ride around the peloton to get to a sprint for example, this isn't ok.

rayjay

What happens if someone is forced off the road like Armstrong was and cuts across the grass?
I hope common sense comes in to play. I doubt it though.

thomthom

But the thing is.. there are no spectators off the track in a Formula 1 race and they know there won't be any spectators at the next blind turn either.. You can't compare the two at all.

They obviously won't penalise a rider going off the road to avoid a crash. But that's just simple logic - I know we are talking about UCI here.. but still.

greasedscotsman

markhewitt1978 wrote:

However if someone used the pavement to ride around the peloton to get to a sprint for example, this isn't ok.

What if a leadout rider moved to the front of the bunch? Would you just religate that rider or his team leader who won the race?

And what about Stybar. He was trying to seek an advantage by getting around the corner faster. So should be be penalised because of this or not because he didn't seem to get much of an advantage as Pross pointed out.

Don't know the answer by the way, I can just see lots of problems with this new rule.

thomthom

greasedscotsman wrote:

markhewitt1978 wrote:

However if someone used the pavement to ride around the peloton to get to a sprint for example, this isn't ok.

And what about Stybar. He was trying to seek an advantage by getting around the corner faster. So should be be penalised because of this or not because he didn't seem to get much of an advantage as Pross pointed out.

Don't know the answer by the way, I can just see lots of problems with this new rule.

I don't think they'd penalise this. I think they are looking at the riders moving a distance outside of the road - causing dangerous situations and advantages over the riders who are actually riding on the road.

greasedscotsman

ThomThom wrote:

I don't think they'd penalise this. I think they are looking at the riders moving a distance outside of the road - causing dangerous situations and advantages over the riders who are actually riding on the road.

But the new rule states...

"It is strictly prohibited to use sidewalks/pavements, paths or cycle paths alongside the roadway that do not form part of the course."

Stybar is on the pavement (isn't he?), so could be penalised for doing so. It's not the distance from the road or if it's considered to be dangerous.

thomthom

I don't think you should see this new rule that black and white. As inrng also writes, defects have to be dealt with on the side of the road - not from the car. Yet we still see some minor adjustments on the bikes being done from the team cars without any big fuss..

It's more the signal that it's now not acceptable to be riding outside the roads that is important. The obvious cases will be penalised and the rest will probably not and I'm quite fine by that. I'd penalise the involved riders in the Flanders crash from 2012. They were 'lucky' they only crashed themselves and didn't hurt the spectator. There's a huge difference in that situation and Stybar's which is why I think there really won't be much discussion about when to penalise or not.

ddraver

ThomThom wrote:

It's more the signal that it's now not acceptable to be riding outside the roads that is important. The obvious cases will be penalised and the rest will probably not and I'm quite fine by that.

I would suggest that the people most likely to be fined will be no-name domestiques from the local Belgian wildcards rather than Messers Boonen, Cancellara or Sagan...

Paul 8v

Bit of a shame, I like it when they are all over the shop at the Belgian races, Stybar's hop is awesome.

markhewitt1978

Of course the problem then comes in that it's at the discretion of the stewards, or clerk of the course or whatever it is in cycling

So you end up with pressure for important riders not to be penalised.

cesco

When you see this, the new rule makes 100% sense:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pGTqYSZS7F4

I can't imagine anyone being penalised when they go off road to avoid a crash, think Armstrong / Beloki.

slowbike

markhewitt1978 wrote:

greasedscotsman wrote:

markhewitt1978 wrote:

You would think the idea is not to punish riders for every minor infraction, but only if they do it blatantly or cause an accident.

So you wouldn't punish Stybar then?

The (sensible IMO) rule in Formula 1 is that if you go off track you must not gain an advantage either by overtaking someone, catching them up, or prevent the competitor from overtaking you. So it would make sense to look at each one and think, could it have been avoided? Did it allow the rider an advantage? If he went wide to avoid a crash, for example, then this is acceptable. However if someone used the pavement to ride around the peloton to get to a sprint for example, this isn't ok.

I hope thats how the rule will be used - it was clear in the first video that 2+ riders took to the pavement/spectator area to move up in the peleton and the first one was caught out by a spectator trying to keep clear. That sort of behaviour should be avoided.
The one with Stybar hopping up onto the pavement to take a wider angle through the corner is debatable - it's clear that the path is clear and he could argue that he believed was coming in too fast for the corner so cut wide to avoid a crash - eitherway, he didn't gain much/any advantage from it and I would think any significant group coming through the same corner would probably end up with a few riders taking to the pavement too - just to avoid a crush.

But - what are they going to do when there's a big pileup at the front of the peleton that blocks the road? Penalise everyone that goes around the outside? We've seen a fair bit of CX riding on the GTs ...

thomthom

ddraver wrote:

ThomThom wrote:

It's more the signal that it's now not acceptable to be riding outside the roads that is important. The obvious cases will be penalised and the rest will probably not and I'm quite fine by that.

I would suggest that the people most likely to be fined will be no-name domestiques from the local Belgian wildcards rather than Messers Boonen, Cancellara or Sagan...

Perhaps - but I'd have that down to the leaders 9/10 times are where they should be. In front of the peloton not needing to take that kind of risks.

ddraver

I think you re missing my point (possibly becasue it wasnt very pointy), they ll fine or DQ riders that are nt genuinely going to win anything to show that they re serious. Can you imagine the outcry if they DQ'd Tom Boonen from RVV? However, if they DQ a few kids from Italy or Spain who finish 73rd or 74th the point will be made but no one (important) will be disadvantaged.

TMR

Richmond Racer wrote:

Cant put a price on that, eh

Correct.

I'm sure we don't want the Peleton to become dull, boring automatons. Flair and individuality should be encouraged as long as it isn't a. cheating, or b. going to harm anyone.

thegibdog

I just mentioned this on inrng but surely the key point here is safety. The race officials are responsible for the course. Racing off the course endangers the riders and bystanders – there’s no way the officials can be responsible for this as the boundaries are limitless.

Interesting that it specifies ‘sidewalks/pavements, paths or cycle paths’ rather than being a catch all. I’m surprised that there isn’t already a rule in existence forbidding riders to race off the course in any circumstances. Does this mean grass verges, bus stops, car parking areas etc are fair game?

Richmond Racer

The view from one pro, Matt Brammeier, tweeted 1st Sep:

Matt Brammeier @Mattbrammeier85
Why is there no deterrent/punishment for riders jumping onto pavements & bike paths in races? Someday, somewhere, someone will die.

Lanterne_Rogue

Richmond Racer wrote:

The view from one pro, Matt Brammeier, tweeted 1st Sep:

Matt Brammeier @Mattbrammeier85
Why is there no deterrent/punishment for riders jumping onto pavements & bike paths in races? Someday, somewhere, someone will die.

A bit dramatic, perhaps, but there's truth in it - sooner or later someone will get hurt badly. If we lose some of the cheeky moves with the sort of élan that has FF searching for tastefully monochromed photography, well, console yourself with the notion that you'll be able to tell the grandkids that you remember when bike racing involved proper bike handling instead of this modern rubbish...