The much needed UCI loller thread

[CyclistAbi]

@Unchained

Whatever problem you approach in a more scientific and methodical way, at minimum including statistics and the time needed to understand the underlying system involved, after start to implement measures, results are always different. If the measures implemented are effective.

So the idea only cycling can for ever and ever remain the same, statistically and is some regard, that is on what indeed not only cycling fans but more importantly governing bodies would like to sell. Why? As it's the easiest thing to do, requires no effort whatsoever.

A good example was once this approach was used to determine on how many safety orientated issues are cyclists fault. It turned out it's around 30%. Before that it was generally accepted, by fandom, it's close to 100%. And AFAIK this study wasn't done by UCI.

Crazy.

 

[jmdirt]

I think that even though I disagree with the handlebar width rule I have been 'polite' about it. Today while I was grinding away 30 minutes into a climb I glanced down at my bars and what popped into my head? The new UCI rule is F****** STUPID! But what's even more stupid is that once it was pointed out to them how inequitable the rule is, they didn't respond with, "good point (s), we will amend accordingly", they said "p*ss off, we talked to some people."

 

[RedheadDane]

But what's even more stupid is that once it was pointed out to them how inequitable the rule is, they didn't respond with, "good point (s), we will amend accordingly", they said "p*ss off, we talked to some people."

Maybe the people UCI talked to are the same people who came up with that whole "calculating watts per kg by pretending all cyclists weigh 70 kg" thing that's been discussed over in the TdS thread...

 

[Samu Cuenca]

Maybe the people UCI talked to are the same people who came up with that whole "calculating watts per kg by pretending all cyclists weigh 70 kg" thing that's been discussed over in the TdS thread...

No, (some of) those guys understand what they're doing. The UCI on the other hand will probably soon make it illegal to weigh less than 70 kg.

 

[RedheadDane]

No, (some of) those guys understand what they're doing. The UCI on the other hand will probably soon make it illegal to weigh less than 70 kg.

"Sorry, Gaia. It's for safety."

 

[CyclistAbi]

Guys, for all the stupidity from UCI, regarding safety, you have to agree that if we force them making inflatable collarbone protectors mandatory, instant justice?

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

Guys, for all the stupidity from UCI, regarding safety, you have to agree that if we force them making inflatable collarbone protectors mandatory, instant justice?

I look forward to seeing news reports of you and your placards on the street in Aigle trying to force them into this.

 

[Samu Cuenca]

"Sorry, Gaia. It's for safety."

I mean there are definitely some riders who would be better off gaining a few pounds, but 30 kg. is probably a bit extreme.

Guys, for all the stupidity from UCI, regarding safety, you have to agree that if we force them making inflatable collarbone protectors mandatory, instant justice?

Yes, the people at UCI should be forced to wear ridiculous outfits.