**** just got real - UCI revisiting the Lugano Charter
12-19-13, 11:36 AM
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,029
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
**** just got real - UCI revisiting the Lugano Charter
https://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/...onsultant.html
Martin Gibbs, the UCI Chief of Staff, said, ‘We'd really like to get back to the kind of levels of interest in this area that we saw with riders like Chris Boardman and Graeme Obree in the 1990s. Not necessarily quite that level of anarchy, but certainly we'd like to see that sort of excitement.
‘I think in the past the UCI has been guilty of regulating things it shouldn't have, and not regulating the things it should. We want Dimitris to look at everything, all the regulations, across the board. With his current knowledge, he'll be able to take an intelligent approach to regulating what we need to, and leaving the rest alone.'
Katsanis's remit will include looking at the Lugano Charter, the 1997 document that brought to an end the innovations of the 1980s and 1990s by spelling out the approach that the rider must always be more important than the bike.
‘A lot has happened in development since then,' says Gibbs. ‘Its philosophical basis is fine, but in the past actually translating it into rules has been a challenge. So we want to see if it needs re-written or refreshed.'
‘I think in the past the UCI has been guilty of regulating things it shouldn't have, and not regulating the things it should. We want Dimitris to look at everything, all the regulations, across the board. With his current knowledge, he'll be able to take an intelligent approach to regulating what we need to, and leaving the rest alone.'
Katsanis's remit will include looking at the Lugano Charter, the 1997 document that brought to an end the innovations of the 1980s and 1990s by spelling out the approach that the rider must always be more important than the bike.
‘A lot has happened in development since then,' says Gibbs. ‘Its philosophical basis is fine, but in the past actually translating it into rules has been a challenge. So we want to see if it needs re-written or refreshed.'
12-19-13, 12:11 PM
#2
aka mattio
I doubt that things are going to get revised to the point where we see weird and explosive experimentation - I just bet that they'll find a better balance with what they regulate and how they articulate those regulations.
12-19-13, 01:26 PM
#6
Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 27
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Really, really awesome. Although do you guys think this will give the GB team an even bigger advantage than they already have, equipment wise? But really, totally, a positive IMO.
12-19-13, 01:40 PM
#7
Elitist
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 15,965
Mentioned: 88 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1386 Post(s)
Liked 92 Times
in
77 Posts
I haven't noticed any other national teams (or private teams) investing as heavily in equipment and technology. Maybe the Australians.
But, if this opens the door for major manufacturers to make money off of new tech, then I can see the major players (Specialized, Trek, Fuji, Giant) letting their engineers go wild in an effort to chase Olympic Gold and all of the free press and sales that come with that.
Many of us have worked in bike shops and I remember when Lance was on his streak and customers would come in saying, "I want a Trek." Period. They didn't care about specs, groupos, low-mid-high end...they just wanted a Trek because Treks won races.
12-19-13, 08:35 PM
#10
Senior Member
Perhaps using a crash test standard like they do with wheels will be better. Frames requiring ballast to pass have been around for many years now, thus proving the durability of the lighter frames. Perhaps also acknowledging the fact that groupset weight reductions have had a big impact in this respect also!
12-19-13, 11:31 PM
#11
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 261
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Perhaps using a crash test standard like they do with wheels will be better. Frames requiring ballast to pass have been around for many years now, thus proving the durability of the lighter frames. Perhaps also acknowledging the fact that groupset weight reductions have had a big impact in this respect also!
JMR
12-20-13, 07:39 PM
#12
Resident Alien
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Location, location.
Posts: 13,089
Mentioned: 158 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 349 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 10 Times
in
6 Posts
Think Graeme Obree's home built specials.
Tight restrictions on the form of equipment preclude the sort of light bulb moments you saw in his case, and tend to favor the bigger budget folks that can squeeze the most from what they have.
Motor racing is full of examples of some crazy genius finding a new way to skin a cat and knocking off the big guys. Colin Chapman and Lotus was a great example...hey, let's put the engine in the back. They were tiny compared to Ferrari and Mercedes, yet they came to dominate F1.
Funny to note that Obree took big swings at the Lotus bike, by that time Lotus was Goliath and Orbee was David with a welder and an idea.
As a kid I broke a lot of heavy steel bikes in half.
Last edited by Racer Ex; 12-20-13 at 07:43 PM.
12-21-13, 10:48 AM
#13
Junior Member
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 13
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
12-21-13, 10:50 AM
#14
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Middle Earth (aka IA)
Posts: 20,433
Bikes: A bunch of old bikes and a few new ones
Mentioned: 178 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5888 Post(s)
Liked 3,471 Times
in
2,079 Posts
12-21-13, 01:50 PM
#16
Senior Member
Still gotta have that saddle 5cm behind the bb looks like, no help to anyone riding kilos.
12-21-13, 04:33 PM
#17
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: South Africa
Posts: 429
Bikes: S-1 :-D
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
The latest on saddle position is that the nose needs to be in line or behind the BB, I believe. Nose-tip within 5cm was allowed under biometric discretion previously, but its the biometric discretion part that has fallen away, if i understand correctly.
12-21-13, 07:01 PM
#18
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: St Louis
Posts: 1,846
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Maybe the regulations will start to understand that not every cyclist is even proportioned and between 5'8" and 6'1". The rules are annoying for average sized folks, but downright impossible for the very short or the very tall.
12-21-13, 08:06 PM
#19
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Hollywood
Posts: 956
Bikes: Bianchi Pista, Bianchi Vigorelli
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Latest? wheres that info coming from?
As i understand it- and as it was inforced all 2013-
*the saddle can be even with the BB(or behind) in sprint events ridden in drop handlebars (500/1K, Sprints, Keirin)
*the saddle must be at least 5cm behind the BB in Endurance events and/or any event ridden in aero bars..
the new restriction of enforcing a 5cm saddle set-back on kilo riders that use aero-bars is what has me and Babypuke all worked up..
Do you have some different information??
12-22-13, 09:44 AM
#20
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: South Africa
Posts: 429
Bikes: S-1 :-D
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
AHHH- HUH?
Latest? wheres that info coming from?
As i understand it- and as it was inforced all 2013-
*the saddle can be even with the BB(or behind) in sprint events ridden in drop handlebars (500/1K, Sprints, Keirin)
*the saddle must be at least 5cm behind the BB in Endurance events and/or any event ridden in aero bars..
the new restriction of enforcing a 5cm saddle set-back on kilo riders that use aero-bars is what has me and Babypuke all worked up..
Do you have some different information??
Latest? wheres that info coming from?
As i understand it- and as it was inforced all 2013-
*the saddle can be even with the BB(or behind) in sprint events ridden in drop handlebars (500/1K, Sprints, Keirin)
*the saddle must be at least 5cm behind the BB in Endurance events and/or any event ridden in aero bars..
the new restriction of enforcing a 5cm saddle set-back on kilo riders that use aero-bars is what has me and Babypuke all worked up..
Do you have some different information??
12-22-13, 11:14 AM
#21
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: South Africa
Posts: 429
Bikes: S-1 :-D
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Here's an excerpt from the UCI 'REGULATIONS: CHANGES PROPOSALS PART 1 – GENERAL ORGANISATION OF CYCLING AS A SPORT' (Rules amendments in force 01.01.14),
from here: https://www.uci.ch/templates/BUILTIN-...Y2NjU&LangId=1
which, in summary, says you can have your saddle tip up to the bb centre-line, so long as you are in drop bars, but if you add pursuit bars, the 5cm behind rule applies:
(The bold and strike-through disappeared when I pasted this hear, so i've just deleted the bits with strike-through; i hope i have rebolded all the correct bold bits)
(in bold, the modified parts to be approved)
1.3.013 The peak of the saddle shall be a minimum of 5 cm to the rear of a vertical plane passing
through the bottom bracket spindle. This restriction shall not be applied to the bicycle
ridden by a rider in a sprint event on track (flying 200 m, flying lap, sprint, team sprint,
keirin, 500 metres and 1 kilometre); however, in no circumstances shall the peak of the
saddle extend in front of a vertical line passing through the bottom bracket spindle.
The peak of the saddle can be move forward until the vertical line passing through the
bottom bracket spindle where that is necessary for morphological reasons. By
morphological reasons should be understood everything to do with the size and limb
length of the rider.
Any rider who, for these reasons, considers that he needs to use a bicycle of lesser
dimensions than those given shall inform the commissaires' panel to that effect at the
time of the bike check (see diagram «Measurements (2)»).
Only one exemption for morphological reasons may be requested; either the peak
of the saddle can be moved forward or the handlebar extensions can be moved
forward, in accordance with Article 1.3.023.
(text modified on 1.10.10 ; 1.02.12, 1.10.12)
In force: 1.01.14
1.3.023 For road time trials and individual and team pursuit on the track, a fixed extension may be
added to the steering system; in this instance, the height difference between the elbow
support points and the highest and lowest points of the handlebar extension
(including gear levers) must be less than 10 cm . It is also possible to add a handlebar extension
for the 500 m and kilometre time trials on the track, but in this case, the position of the tip
of the saddle must be at least 5 cm behind the vertical plane passing through the bottom
bracket axle.
The distance between the vertical line passing through the bottom bracket axle and the
extremity of the handlebar may not exceed 75 cm, with the other limits set in article
1.3.022 (B,C,D) remaining unchanged. Elbow or forearm rests are permitted (see
diagram «Structure (1B)»).
from here: https://www.uci.ch/templates/BUILTIN-...Y2NjU&LangId=1
which, in summary, says you can have your saddle tip up to the bb centre-line, so long as you are in drop bars, but if you add pursuit bars, the 5cm behind rule applies:
(The bold and strike-through disappeared when I pasted this hear, so i've just deleted the bits with strike-through; i hope i have rebolded all the correct bold bits)
(in bold, the modified parts to be approved)
1.3.013 The peak of the saddle shall be a minimum of 5 cm to the rear of a vertical plane passing
through the bottom bracket spindle. This restriction shall not be applied to the bicycle
ridden by a rider in a sprint event on track (flying 200 m, flying lap, sprint, team sprint,
keirin, 500 metres and 1 kilometre); however, in no circumstances shall the peak of the
saddle extend in front of a vertical line passing through the bottom bracket spindle.
The peak of the saddle can be move forward until the vertical line passing through the
bottom bracket spindle where that is necessary for morphological reasons. By
morphological reasons should be understood everything to do with the size and limb
length of the rider.
Any rider who, for these reasons, considers that he needs to use a bicycle of lesser
dimensions than those given shall inform the commissaires' panel to that effect at the
time of the bike check (see diagram «Measurements (2)»).
Only one exemption for morphological reasons may be requested; either the peak
of the saddle can be moved forward or the handlebar extensions can be moved
forward, in accordance with Article 1.3.023.
(text modified on 1.10.10 ; 1.02.12, 1.10.12)
In force: 1.01.14
1.3.023 For road time trials and individual and team pursuit on the track, a fixed extension may be
added to the steering system; in this instance, the height difference between the elbow
support points and the highest and lowest points of the handlebar extension
(including gear levers) must be less than 10 cm . It is also possible to add a handlebar extension
for the 500 m and kilometre time trials on the track, but in this case, the position of the tip
of the saddle must be at least 5 cm behind the vertical plane passing through the bottom
bracket axle.
The distance between the vertical line passing through the bottom bracket axle and the
extremity of the handlebar may not exceed 75 cm, with the other limits set in article
1.3.022 (B,C,D) remaining unchanged. Elbow or forearm rests are permitted (see
diagram «Structure (1B)»).
12-22-13, 01:37 PM
#22
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Hollywood
Posts: 956
Bikes: Bianchi Pista, Bianchi Vigorelli
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Here's an excerpt from the UCI 'REGULATIONS: CHANGES PROPOSALS PART 1 – GENERAL ORGANISATION OF CYCLING AS A SPORT' (Rules amendments in force 01.01.14),
from here: https://www.uci.ch/templates/BUILTIN-...Y2NjU&LangId=1
which, in summary, says you can have your saddle tip up to the bb centre-line, so long as you are in drop bars, but if you add pursuit bars, the 5cm behind rule applies:
1.3.013 The peak of the saddle shall be a minimum of 5 cm to the rear of a vertical plane passing
through the bottom bracket spindle. This restriction shall not be applied to the bicycle
ridden by a rider in a sprint event on track (flying 200 m, flying lap, sprint, team sprint,
keirin, 500 metres and 1 kilometre)
from here: https://www.uci.ch/templates/BUILTIN-...Y2NjU&LangId=1
which, in summary, says you can have your saddle tip up to the bb centre-line, so long as you are in drop bars, but if you add pursuit bars, the 5cm behind rule applies:
1.3.013 The peak of the saddle shall be a minimum of 5 cm to the rear of a vertical plane passing
through the bottom bracket spindle. This restriction shall not be applied to the bicycle
ridden by a rider in a sprint event on track (flying 200 m, flying lap, sprint, team sprint,
keirin, 500 metres and 1 kilometre)
this seams to contradict your experience at worlds??
12-22-13, 01:46 PM
#23
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Hollywood
Posts: 956
Bikes: Bianchi Pista, Bianchi Vigorelli
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Originally Posted by UCI
(including gear levers) must be less than 10 cm only a position where the forearmsare in the horizontal plane is permitted. It is also possible to add a handlebar extensionfor the 500 m and kilometre time trials on the track, but in this case, the position of the tipof the saddle must be at least 5 cm behind the vertical plane passing through the bottombracket axle.
https://www.uci.ch/Modules/BUILTIN/ge...I4NzM&LangId=1
12-22-13, 02:02 PM
#24
Resident Alien
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Location, location.
Posts: 13,089
Mentioned: 158 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 349 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 10 Times
in
6 Posts
https://www.bicycleretailer.com/sites...etin%20N°4.pdf
According to this bulletin effective 2014 you can morph yourself to the bottom bracket centerline without having to prove you need it. Tips of bars may go to 80 cm as well, but not both. Pad height to bar tip height 10cm or less difference.
My experience has been that tweener years or years where the National federation might have a different rule...confusion reigns. I had an official argue with me about Masters track nats rules a few years ago so I produced an email from the head of USAC's officials confirming what I was saying.
The response was "well, he didn't tell ME".
There are more than a few officials in this sport that have the who's paying who relationship backwards.
According to this bulletin effective 2014 you can morph yourself to the bottom bracket centerline without having to prove you need it. Tips of bars may go to 80 cm as well, but not both. Pad height to bar tip height 10cm or less difference.
My experience has been that tweener years or years where the National federation might have a different rule...confusion reigns. I had an official argue with me about Masters track nats rules a few years ago so I produced an email from the head of USAC's officials confirming what I was saying.
The response was "well, he didn't tell ME".
There are more than a few officials in this sport that have the who's paying who relationship backwards.
12-22-13, 02:15 PM
#25
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Hollywood
Posts: 956
Bikes: Bianchi Pista, Bianchi Vigorelli
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
https://www.bicycleretailer.com/sites...etin%20N°4.pdf
According to this bulletin effective 2014 you can morph yourself to the bottom bracket centerline without having to prove you need it. Tips of bars may go to 80 cm as well, but not both. Pad height to bar tip height 10cm or less difference.
My experience has been that tweener years or years where the National federation might have a different rule...confusion reigns. I had an official argue with me about Masters track nats rules a few years ago so I produced an email from the head of USAC's officials confirming what I was saying.
The response was "well, he didn't tell ME".
There are more than a few officials in this sport that have the who's paying who relationship backwards.
According to this bulletin effective 2014 you can morph yourself to the bottom bracket centerline without having to prove you need it. Tips of bars may go to 80 cm as well, but not both. Pad height to bar tip height 10cm or less difference.
My experience has been that tweener years or years where the National federation might have a different rule...confusion reigns. I had an official argue with me about Masters track nats rules a few years ago so I produced an email from the head of USAC's officials confirming what I was saying.
The response was "well, he didn't tell ME".
There are more than a few officials in this sport that have the who's paying who relationship backwards.
that might take some adapting- as i always get a morph for extension length.. my 29" legs and 72" wingspan made the extension morph easy to pass..
not having to change saddles every time i put on aero bars would be amazing!!!
Last edited by Quinn8it; 12-22-13 at 02:18 PM.