Is Any Other Federation Enforcing This?

[DirtyWorks]

In this story, USA Cycling is enforcing the UCI's demand that ALL license holders are forbidden from participating in events not sanctioned by the UCI/USA Cycling.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/any-uci-licensee-forbidden-from-unsanctioned-events-says-usa-cycling

I know these forums have an international audience. Has ANY other national cycling federation announced plans to enforce this rule?

 

[DirtyWorks]

I stumbled upon this claim:

Bill Kellick, USA Cycling Director of Communication, told Cyclingnews “It is the UCI’s expectation that we, and all national federations, enforce the UCI participation rules for all disciplines, not just mountain bike.” And yet, when Barry Wicks contacted the Canadian, British, Australian, and French Federations, he found that none of them would be enforcing the rule. In fact even the UCI would not even confirm or deny if they were requiring USA Cycling to enforce the ruling.

Which suggests this is more Thom Wiesel's strategy of world cycling domination in action.

http://www.bikemag.com/blog/the-bakery-soul-sucker/

 

[stainlessguy1]

In this story, USA Cycling is enforcing the UCI's demand that ALL license holders are forbidden from participating in events not sanctioned by the UCI/USA Cycling.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/any-uci-licensee-forbidden-from-unsanctioned-events-says-usa-cycling

I know these forums have an international audience. Has ANY other national cycling federation announced plans to enforce this rule?

The ruling is pretty international .

So the intent was that holders of a racing license were not to compete in unsanctioned events primarily ( at least they told us at the time) so you don't discourage fun competitive events for young up starts or others who race at fairs or schools or whatever.
What it has become is another matter , regarding all the fees that are imposed and submitted to the federations.

I have not heard of enforcing plans but if they don't like you , I guess they can pull your license if they find out you competed in the annual run , canoe and bike around the stadium at the yearly fairgrounds .

The issue is this , its an organized body that you submit fees too for being licensed and that body is recognized internationally. If another body decides to hold races for licensed riders with UCI licensed riders it is in contradiction too what we stand for in a civilized society.
There are benefits for belonging to an organization, for the riders. ( you signed the application )
If one doesn't like the politician they voted for then next term , vote them out . At the moment that is how our society works.
So if you wish to compete outside the UCI or CCA or USA cycling or what ever your licensing body is ; then form a new organization I guess that would be legal to do in a free and democratic society , but you may not be allowed to compete in the old organization unless they say you can be a dual licensed rider . ( should it ever come to that).
Kind of like having dual citizenship, some countries allow it some countries don't.
My question is , why would any rider spend their time to race an unsanctioned event as a licensed racer. The event has no value , except training , sort of like riding a gran fondue ride.

 

[stainlessguy1]

reply to my reply ...lol

Sorry about that , I jumped the gun .

The link to the article about Soul sucker is referring to Pro licensed riders , I was referring to amateur licensed riders in general . That rule still stands to the best of my knowledge.

Re-reading the article , yes by all means , Any national federation can hold races and have them sanctioned as Pro-Am .
That is the way it was in my time . You raced Pro-Am races and you knew there would be some pro teams there that you would be racing against.
So it would be open to Pro and cat 1 / 2 depending on the area and talent and organizing body doing the organizing .

To do it any other way would hamper home grown talent from becoming better as stated in the article .
Since the organizing bodies are already proper affiliated with international scope and they know what they are doing , the racers are also of talent and of equal skill it all fits the bill of original intent regarding licensed riders in general .
Its not the same thing as some types trying too win a cancer fund raiser be first over the line and brag about it at the office .

Any country should be allowed to hold pro am races in their homeland no questions asked. If you can get pros to come out , great . If not , its still great.

 

[Master50]

Cycling Canada sent out notices but their are not many unsanctioned events here either. IE no renegade dark federations.
I will stick my neck out here but I believe this is really only and issue with US riders and I suppose other nations that participate in these out of the system events.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Any country should be allowed to hold pro am races in their homeland no questions asked. If you can get pros to come out , great . If not , its still great.

Nope. The UCI wants to maintain total control of competitive cycling. They hate competition.

In the U.S. the federation has no interest in grassroots racing. What makes this triply ridiculous is most of the American elites are not making a living riding a bike. The riders are supposed to be okay with being further impoverished. I don't really understand why a rider would do that to themselves, but there it is.

Master50, there's no "renegade dark federations" in the U.S. OBRA is the largest and is very open. If anything, USAC is the dark federation. Transparency is not welcome there.

 

[Oldman]

Nope. The UCI wants to maintain total control of competitive cycling. They hate competition.

In the U.S. the federation has no interest in grassroots racing. What makes this triply ridiculous is most of the American elites are not making a living riding a bike. The riders are supposed to be okay with being further impoverished. I don't really understand why a rider would do that to themselves, but there it is.

Master50, there's no "renegade dark federations" in the U.S. OBRA is the largest and is very open. If anything, USAC is the dark federation. Transparency is not welcome there.

The focus on the NW area had the UCI pressing USACycling to sanction anyone riding a weekday racing series alongside a suspended rider. An actual Steve Johnson communique had the locals in a tizzy at the same time trying to cover their tracks on Armstrong's transgressions.
The follow up notice to Cascade Classic's promoters just adds emphasis to your observation.

 

[Giuseppe Magnetico]

Why is this news? Rule 1.2.019 was created decades ago, I remember reading about this waaaaay back in 1996!!! The only reason why we're talking about it now is because of internet conspiracy theorists actually decided to read the fine print, which 99% of people don't, they just hand over their dues and have no idea what their signing up for. Yes, the rule applies to "all" license holders if your governing body falls under the UCI umbrella, which most do, but unless you're paid to ride on a pro team the UCI isn't going to come knocking on your door if you decide to participate in unsanctioned races you bunch of nervous nellies!! This isn't just a UCI rule, if you do this for a living it's laid out in your contract quite clearly about steering clear of unsanctioned racing. And most pros who do go rouge for a weekend don't even use their real names or wear their team kits, only the stupid ones do. I let my license expire a few years ago, unsanctioned racing is more fun anyway.

 

[stainlessguy1]

Nope. The UCI wants to maintain total control of competitive cycling. They hate competition.

In the U.S. the federation has no interest in grassroots racing. What makes this triply ridiculous is most of the American elites are not making a living riding a bike. The riders are supposed to be okay with being further impoverished. I don't really understand why a rider would do that to themselves, but there it is.

Master50, there's no "renegade dark federations" in the U.S. OBRA is the largest and is very open. If anything, USAC is the dark federation. Transparency is not welcome there.

This is true , and ridiculous .

You have that middle paragraph right on spot with what I was thinking , what if you were an unemployed pro , still training to regain a team . There is no budget for you to travel all over and even if you had one , you probably wouldn't be allowed to race as an independent in a pro race anyway .
So how do you legally do it?
A Pro , semi pro , continental pro , give me a break . There needs to be allowances for that situation.
Time for a change, now that there are more riders in North America than ever before , I see no reason why the West cant have another pro category on its own , by that I mean The United States is larger than all the European countries put together just on land mass. Population is pretty Equal .
Therefor I see no reason that the US cant put their own foot print on it and get their own Pro teams going on North American soil. Including us here in the great white north too of course. Call it CanAm Procycling League , or something like that .

I mean really we have space , giant roads, hills / mountains , flats , weather patterns from all regions available at will .
Just how many more selected teams can they fit down a single lane or foot path in the classics of Belgium and northern France anyway ?

Above all this we have fans , lots and lots of fans , people just don't know it yet, but they are lurking everywhere.
Speaking of fans , we have millions of ethnic fans that cant all pile into a plane to head home and see a classic in Europe, They come out to see what races we do have here and they even ride their bikes to the races . ( that was for UCI benefit in case they claim we cant create the atmosphere here)
We have a bike building industry that is still growing , with innovative technology that rivals anything Campagnolo has done in the past , and in many ways surpassed them. ( that was for the purist and nostalgia types)
Time for a change in a big way , North America is a continent , not a tiny couple of countries , but 2 giant countries, plus Mexico .

Screw the UCI if they are too blind too see there has been an industry quietly building itself up in the shadows and a following that put itself on the international map with performance bests to rival anything the Europeans put out.
The UCI should wake up , there is 300million people of buying power strong and still growing.

Time for a change , or at least its time for a major amendment to the UCI rules .

 

[DirtyWorks]

Time for a change, now that there are more riders in North America than ever before

I would argue that is not true. I compare 2013 with the 1980's and it's just not the same sport economy. There's more money at the very top for riders now. That is true. But, in exchange for abject poverty at lower elite levels.

There are more people cycling as recreation in the U.S., that is for sure. That's good. But, specific to competition, USAC's participation rates are flat, purses are waaaaay down inside USAC sanctioned events.

My hope is enough independent events can keep going such that they can support their own Pro/Elite economy outside the UCI/IOC. That creates other issues, but good problems to have!

Giuseppe Magnetico, this isn't a conspiracy theory. The UCI intended to enforce the rule for the first time. I agree with the rest of your comments though.

 

[Giuseppe Magnetico]

Giuseppe Magnetico, this isn't a conspiracy theory. The UCI intended to enforce the rule for the first time. I agree with the rest of your comments though.

If you've been reading knee jerk reaction of current cat 3 and 4's and Jr. mtb'rs on social media over the last couple of weeks, which has been hilarious btw, the conspiracy thing started there. People are commenting as if UCI stormtroopers are going to come get you if you show up at a "unapproved" event. The rule has been enforced since it's inception, not the first time by any means. What happened recently was a "clarification" of the rule as it pertains to bad marriage with USAC, people were surprised because the vast majority don't read the fine print when they buy a license.

 

[ustabe]

If you've been reading knee jerk reaction of current cat 3 and 4's and Jr. mtb'rs on social media over the last couple of weeks . . .

The last time I rode an unsanctioned event a car hit me. That was my lesson. From then on I was an ABL of A and USCF guy all the way.

 

[Giuseppe Magnetico]

The last time I rode an unsanctioned event a car hit me. That was my lesson. From then on I was an ABL of A and USCF guy all the way.

That's unfortunate, but I know people that have lost their lives at sanctioned events. So what's your point? Do you also blame the gun when somebody gets shot?

 

[ustabe]

It's this. In unsanctioned races my rate for getting hit by cars was 100%. In sanctioned races it was zero. Ergo, I shouldn't do unsanctioned races. Smiley face.

 

[Giuseppe Magnetico]

One race gone bad. Hmmm, you hardly seem to have any experience on the subject of unsanctioned racing, yet you seem like you have a point to make here, which was what again?

 

[Giuseppe Magnetico]

Wow, one whole entire race! Tell us more about your extensive experience on race safety. You seem like a real authority on the matter..