jose rujano

[lagartija]

just beating the drum here.......the little guy can chrono , always has been able to put up descent times, go figure.........and we know he can climb

i think he is disadvantaged as far as his bike goes, in the last few years most bike comp. have released bikes well under UCI minimum ,with all but the biggest of riders having to add weight to there rigs to meet the standard.....many,many, pros dont ride the lightest pedals or bottle cages, some placing metal sleeves in the bottom brackets , steal bolts replacing TI , and now bikes are so light you dont need to remove your power meters, once only used in training like cycle opps hubs......a guy that small , riding maybe a 48 or 46 sloping , they have to hang all sorts of weight on his rig.........im not huge , riding a 54 , granted everything on this rig is highend , but it doesnt meet UCI regulations even with my training wheels on......and you can forget about it when i throw on the carbon tubulars...........
i guess what im saying is the UCI need to recognize technological advances made , and there draconian regulations have absolutely nothing at all to do with safety.........

[blackcat]

Originally Posted by lagartija

just beating the drum here.......the little guy can chrono , always has been able to put up descent times, go figure.........and we know he can climb

i think he is disadvantaged as far as his bike goes, in the last few years most bike comp. have released bikes well under UCI minimum ,with all but the biggest of riders having to add weight to there rigs to meet the standard.....many,many, pros dont ride the lightest pedals or bottle cages, some placing metal sleeves in the bottom brackets , steal bolts replacing TI , and now bikes are so light you dont need to remove your power meters, once only used in training like cycle opps hubs......a guy that small , riding maybe a 48 or 46 sloping , they have to hang all sorts of weight on his rig.........im not huge , riding a 54 , granted everything on this rig is highend , but it doesnt meet UCI regulations even with my training wheels on......and you can forget about it when i throw on the carbon tubulars...........
i guess what im saying is the UCI need to recognize technological advances made , and there draconian regulations have absolutely nothing at all to do with safety.........

ask Savoldelli if he wants a 6.5 kg frame descending.

As Boardman says, every frame that goes up, must also come down. Ofcourse, the preponderance of race finishes are on the mtn top, not the descent, but all stages with mtn passes require a frame that "must go down"

So the UCI should take a look at the guys like Backstedt, Sosenka, Vansummeren and Larsson, and compare em to Rujano. They should have a proportional bike weight. I think Rujano could easily take this to the court of arbitration and get a verdict. It does seem to discriminate.

[lagartija]

Originally Posted by blackcat

ask Savoldelli if he wants a 6.5 kg frame descending.

As Boardman says, every frame that goes up, must also come down. Ofcourse, the preponderance of race finishes are on the mtn top, not the descent, but all stages with mtn passes require a frame that "must go down"

So the UCI should take a look at the guys like Backstedt, Sosenka, Vansummeren and Larsson, and compare em to Rujano. They should have a proportional bike weight. I think Rujano could easily take this to the court of arbitration and get a verdict. It does seem to discriminate.

i think we agree here......if i remember correctly paolo rode a 56 , right in the cusp of standard equipment meeting the weight rules ,so the possibility of his rig being''weighted'' exists and that was a year or two ago......so in effect he and others did descend on 6.5 kg rigs safely, im not saying boardman is not up on the newest tech , but frames , wheels , bottom brackets etc, have all improved since his day , and like any other skill its all personal , some guys are just better at it than others.........you chose one of the best......

[blackcat]

Originally Posted by lagartija

i think we agree here......if i remember correctly paolo rode a 56 , right in the cusp of standard equipment meeting the weight rules ,so the possibility of his rig being''weighted'' exists and that was a year or two ago......so in effect he and others did descend on 6.5 kg rigs safely, im not saying boardman is not up on the newest tech , but frames , wheels , bottom brackets etc, have all improved since his day , and like any other skill its all personal , some guys are just better at it than others.........you chose one of the best......

think you misconstrued a little, plus, I was not completely clear.

I mean a bike going downhill, does not need strong componentry and confidence in his equipment (well he does, but run with this).

The point Boardman was making, was not on the security or confidence in the bike, it was just that he needed extra weight, so he did not bunny hop when hitting a bump in the road, and that the extra weight helps with the bike handling.

So, any extra weight, lead weights et al, will help downhill. But weight that is proportionally distributed, will be even more effective that just adding lead tape in one the top tube.

[Big_Blue_Dave]

I believe Rujano can ride a great Giro, but he needs a team that will do a good TTT to be able to keep him in touch with the other favourites. Otherwise, he will have to do a couple of long distance attacks like in the 2005 Giro which may not give him the opportunity to win the overall but just the KOM.

[Dekker_Tifosi]

If Rujano trains properly and reaches same form as Tour of Colombia 2009 he will ride another podium in the Giro. I'm sure of it. He has the ability. He just needs to use it, like in 2005

[blaxland]

Originally Posted by python

one but important rujano problem is unfairness of the uci rules co bicycle weight limit. i am barely kidding b/c it hiders him in tts and mnts.
do the proportions and it become obvious - a 48 k rider is at a significant disadvantage compared to a 72 k when riding uphill the same 6.9 k bike. top climbers are normally beefier than him too by about 10 k. all considered the tiny dude is amazing

this is a discussion i have had many times over with cycling mates...we came up with the 10% rule...going off rider weight (68kg rider bike limit 6.8kg)thus rujano would be able to ride a 4.8kg bike....wow thats light but still possible....how come only the tall?big framed guys get all the advantages in cycling(example;tall= better leverage,heavy riders=push bigger gears)and small guys not being able to ride lighter bikes.(light cyclist'better climbing?what do you think?

[Irish2009]

One thing I think is missing is that a court is just as likely to say " A bike plus rider must meet a minimum weight ". They use this rule in F1 and it's not challenged by any of the teams with lighter drivers,because it's easier to regulate.

[blackcat]

I understand weight is important in F1 cars and how they handle.

But power-weight wins GTs. And if the power-weight disciminates against the lighter riders, then they have a case.

The reason for UCI regulation is two-fold. Saftey, and marketing to consumer. The UCI are at odds with manufacturing companies, they do not necessarily want the buy-in for a racing bike to be above 3k for a cat3 rider. They want to keep it accessible and no barrier to entry. There is a conflict there, because they take money from the industry in sponsorship. You may say, US Health Insurance Industry analogy

[hfer07]

Originally Posted by blaxland

this is a discussion i have had many times over with cycling mates...we came up with the 10% rule...going off rider weight (68kg rider bike limit 6.8kg)thus rujano would be able to ride a 4.8kg bike....wow thats light but still possible....how come only the tall?big framed guys get all the advantages in cycling(example;tall= better leverage,heavy riders=push bigger gears)and small guys not being able to ride lighter bikes.(light cyclist'better climbing?what do you think?

I believe the analogy goes both ways:
*A tall rider has those advantages you mentioned, but the flip side is the wind resistance/drag generated by his body frame.
*On Jose Rujano's case, having a bike proportionally weighted to fit his physiology, will help him "in the mountains only"- but becomes a problem descending and on the flats-Imagine this guy dealing with heavy crosswinds!!

Overall- I think is the talent/skills of the rider what makes the big differences, the equipment helps to enhance those abilities better.
No matter how light could Rujano ever get-he cannot match Contador's or Andy's acceleration in the mountains...