UCI to ban supertuck descending starting April 1st.

Page 5 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Cipollini once said that TT position is dangerous when you are leading the peloton because your rear wheel is moving around a lot more, so the chance of wheels touching and a crash happening is much higher.
That said, I can't remember a crash that happened because of it.
Overall I kinda get why they ban the supertuck and I don't have a strong opinion on it (sometimes I even use it for a short time on a wide, straight downhill). That said, it's not exactly a burning issue that needed to be regulated by the UCI.
I would think my backwheel wobbles more when I'm on the drops and pulling hard on the bars, versus the invisible-aerobars where I'm almost by definition making sure the front wheel stays steadier.
 
I understand the ban on the supertuck position. I don't understand the ban on the elbows on the bars.

I am not the fan of doing these type of bans like the supertuck because these riders are professionals. If they want to kill themselves, be my guest. But that's not how life work. Someone will always try to protect the humanity for us. And the supertuck was a disaster waiting to happen.
 
About the supertuck: Of course there may have loomed a crash, but then riders crash on descends in all kinds of positions - well, that's exaggerated, but not only "tucked" - in fact in no crash any of us seems to remember, while there have been lots of descend-crashes. Who knows, maybe riders are even more careful in that position.
And if there was such a crash, it certainly would not involve many riders. It would happen to the rider who chose to do it. It's also not like it's giving an immense advantage so that riders who are not comfortable with it are coerced to do it. It's mostly a thing that makes a rider feel he's faster, might gain a few seconds. It makes riders more comfortable because they can choose what they do.

So where do the most and worst crashes happen, statistically? - obviously when high speed and a full, nervous peloton are combined. So in sprints first, but those are a base of cycling races. Then in the preparation of sprints, in the final 10k, especially, when roads are narrowed by (sudden) road furniture. I know it's harder and harder to avoid roundabouts in countries like France, but it would probably help to look less at which city is willing to pay how much for a final, and more at where a rather safe sprint preparation is possible. Put the finish line outside of the city in some more cases, when there are wider roads.
Less motos! Less cars! Clear the road as best as possible, sometimes it's not possible, but sometimes it looks like one could have made a bigger effort.

About the feed zones, I think that's really worth addressing. A lot of crashes happen there. Usually not the bad ones, because the tempo isn't high, but yeah, if I was responsible, I would look there very closely, too, because those bidons, bags that need to be controlled... well, I'm not sure the new rules are helping that much, but at least that's an AREA where things could be better.

Furthermore make rules as strict and clear as possible that are known to everybody about the conduct in sprints and the peloton in general and enforce punishments - not by estimation after something happened, but following clear rules. I'm thinking of Groenewegen, Moscon...
Don't choose routes that cannot be made safe.
Adress the barriers - now, that has been done. Well done. Let's hope it helps a bit, at least.

That's where crashes happen, every race. Dangerous looking positions on a bike don't account for one bad accident I can recall. I'm sure there are some, but they must be very, very rare compared to all other things, and these positions actually add something to a bike race, so one should think twice before banning them.

By the way, I like your list, Logic. Include wheelies while in a race, even when at the end of a time trial. Something might happen to the rider and I see young children as young as eight copying it all the time. Also: No chatting. Distracts the riders.

So, my rant's over. I won't say a word more.
 
its a ban to raise some PR points, they cannot outrule real danger like roundabouts, wet descents or a turn 50 meters before finish so they do this BS, everybody knows it does nothing but you can check "riders safety" off your to-do list...reminds me when NBA changed the term "owner" to "governor" - completely pointless but everybody feels good about themselves on twitter
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
Good question. Technically in that position his hands are on the handlebars and he can break from that position.
Track riders do that in serious UCI World Championship track events without brakes and on fixed gears. Amateur racers do it on our velodrome all the time and, if someone has a problem they either mention it or go around. UCI would have a hard time representing it as a dangerous "example".
 
No it wasn't.
The Super-Tuck will, one day, potentially, be a disaster that was always waiting to happen.

I think BlueRoads has it right. Most crashes in pro cycling happen in large groups. When they happen in small groups, more often than not outside forces (road furniture/surfaces, race support vehicles) are involved. There will always be an element of rider error too; again, this will usually happen in corners, with the rider on the drops, and in the saddle. The supertuck is generally used by riders in very small groups or solo, and predominantly in situations free from the other safety issues.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
The Super-Tuck will, one day, potentially, be a disaster that was always waiting to happen.

I think BlueRoads has it right. Most crashes in pro cycling happen in large groups. When they happen in small groups, more often than not outside forces (road furniture/surfaces, race support vehicles) are involved. There will always be an element of rider error too; again, this will usually happen in corners, with the rider on the drops, and in the saddle. The supertuck is generally used by riders in very small groups or solo, and predominantly in situations free from the other safety issues.
There is zero value of being the second rider in a downhill escape and going into a super-tuck. Zero. Most pros would know that and those that haven't figured it out should get some verbal discipline from their cohorts. It won't matter if it's now banned and people can go back to the uncomfortable butt-up, chest on the top-tube tuck that is probably as fast or faster.
 
There is zero value of being the second rider in a downhill escape and going into a super-tuck. Zero. Most pros would know that and those that haven't figured it out should get some verbal discipline from their cohorts. It won't matter if it's now banned and people can go back to the uncomfortable butt-up, chest on the top-tube tuck that is probably as fast or faster.
Not entirely true. We've seen pros overtake other pros on wide descents by getting more aero. See Taylor Phinney's stage win at the 2014 ToC. Got in a tuck, flew past the Cannondale sprint train (riding for Sagan at the time) on a descent, TT'd to the finish.
 
Reactions: Krokro and Koronin
Not entirely true. We've seen pros overtake other pros on wide descents by getting more aero. See Taylor Phinney's stage win at the 2014 ToC. Got in a tuck, flew past the Cannondale sprint train (riding for Sagan at the time) on a descent, TT'd to the finish.
I'll have to go back and re-watch stage 2 of 2020 la Vuelta, but I'm thinking Marc Soler used the super tuck to try to catch the leading group. Granted when he caught them he wasn't using using that position and was going faster and just basically decided the best option was to just keep going and got himself the stage win.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
Silly, pointless etc -- everything that everyone else on this thread has said. It's really cool to see a new tactic in the peloton and riders like Alaf who are hell bent for leather descenders have really used it to their advantage.

Now, if the UCI was really serious about safety, they'd ban water bottles. I'm sure GT would agree afte his Giro crash.
But think about it -- how many times have we seen loose bottles cause an accident? Plenty. And what about the ethics of "turbo bottles," let alone all the CO2 released when team cars are accelerating up and down the peloton to hand up bottles? And the PET pollution when they get tossed away.

I'm actually serious about bottles. I'd love to see the UCI mandate hydration bags like Camelbaks, with refills allowed in designated feed zones. On a really hot day you could bring back the old Coke sponsored motos and equip them with a water tank to spray down riders to cool them off...

...and while we're on unfair advantages, the UCI needs to look at riders like Hirschi (just as an example) who use computer mounts as impromptu aero bars.
I didn’t mean for the UCI to ban the TT position, just cheating by resting hands on a long computer mount...clearly they misunderstood me...

I do like any restrictions on littering, however.
 
Not entirely true. We've seen pros overtake other pros on wide descents by getting more aero. See Taylor Phinney's stage win at the 2014 ToC. Got in a tuck, flew past the Cannondale sprint train (riding for Sagan at the time) on a descent, TT'd to the finish.
I'd agree with this if you're closing a gap at higher speed. My point was an close, descending echelon doesn't need following riders to adopt the position unless they accelerate to attack. That is racing. If you have a bunch of guys in a group not taking the point position they are at risk. No need and no aero advantage.
 
its a ban to raise some PR points, they cannot outrule real danger like roundabouts, wet descents or a turn 50 meters before finish so they do this BS, everybody knows it does nothing but you can check "riders safety" off your to-do list...
I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that can indeed be outruled.

For any race which can reasonably be expected to end in a bunch sprint, the UCI shall prohibit the placement of the finish line at a distance of 50 metres - or closer - after a tight corner. A tight corner is to be defined as any turn with an angle of 90 degrees, or less.
Other kinds of obstructions - such as narrowing of the road, and road furniture - shall also be prohibited under similar circumstances.
 
About the supertuck: Of course there may have loomed a crash, but then riders crash on descends in all kinds of positions - well, that's exaggerated, but not only "tucked" - in fact in no crash any of us seems to remember, while there have been lots of descend-crashes. Who knows, maybe riders are even more careful in that position.
And if there was such a crash, it certainly would not involve many riders. It would happen to the rider who chose to do it. It's also not like it's giving an immense advantage so that riders who are not comfortable with it are coerced to do it. It's mostly a thing that makes a rider feel he's faster, might gain a few seconds. It makes riders more comfortable because they can choose what they do.

So where do the most and worst crashes happen, statistically? - obviously when high speed and a full, nervous peloton are combined. So in sprints first, but those are a base of cycling races. Then in the preparation of sprints, in the final 10k, especially, when roads are narrowed by (sudden) road furniture. I know it's harder and harder to avoid roundabouts in countries like France, but it would probably help to look less at which city is willing to pay how much for a final, and more at where a rather safe sprint preparation is possible. Put the finish line outside of the city in some more cases, when there are wider roads.
Less motos! Less cars! Clear the road as best as possible, sometimes it's not possible, but sometimes it looks like one could have made a bigger effort.

About the feed zones, I think that's really worth addressing. A lot of crashes happen there. Usually not the bad ones, because the tempo isn't high, but yeah, if I was responsible, I would look there very closely, too, because those bidons, bags that need to be controlled... well, I'm not sure the new rules are helping that much, but at least that's an AREA where things could be better.

Furthermore make rules as strict and clear as possible that are known to everybody about the conduct in sprints and the peloton in general and enforce punishments - not by estimation after something happened, but following clear rules. I'm thinking of Groenewegen, Moscon...
Don't choose routes that cannot be made safe.
Adress the barriers - now, that has been done. Well done. Let's hope it helps a bit, at least.

That's where crashes happen, every race. Dangerous looking positions on a bike don't account for one bad accident I can recall. I'm sure there are some, but they must be very, very rare compared to all other things, and these positions actually add something to a bike race, so one should think twice before banning them.

By the way, I like your list, Logic. Include wheelies while in a race, even when at the end of a time trial. Something might happen to the rider and I see young children as young as eight copying it all the time. Also: No chatting. Distracts the riders.

So, my rant's over. I won't say a word more.
While not necessarily the most dangerous crashes, the biggest crashes happen on straight and wide roads when some riders lose concentration, and suddenly you have a mass pileup with a quarter of the bunch on the ground.

Sprints are also more likely to have big crashes when the route is untechnical, so the peloton isn't stretched out.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
While not necessarily the most dangerous crashes, the biggest crashes happen on straight and wide roads when some riders lose concentration, and suddenly you have a mass pileup with a quarter of the bunch on the ground.

Sprints are also more likely to have big crashes when the route is untechnical, so the peloton isn't stretched out.
They should ban loss of concentration.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan
If the UCIs reasoning for banning the super tuck position is because they are worried amateurs may try it and crash, they clearly have no connection to cycling in general. People do stupid stuff all the time on their bikes without seeing pros do it. Who's been to a CM ride and been surrounded by wheelie kids? Who's seen someone riding along while texting? Who's seen a fixed gear rider descending hills with their feet off the pedals and on the down tube or rear wheel/seatstays? It's also perfectly possible to ban something at lower levels if they have evidence that it really is causing crashes, although I'd guess most local racing scenes don't involve descents where it makes that much of a difference.

As others have pointed out, the things that seem to really cause avoidable crashes, motorbikes, or increase risk, terrible barriers, haven't been addressed and will only be addressed after the people who cheap out and use terrible barriers have had their say.
 
Vélonews just resurfaced an article from 2018 that tested the aero benefits of various riders descending styles. Pantani was the least aero because his body trapped too much air. The winners were variants on the supertuck as performed by Sagan and Phinney. So there does seem to be a real benefit.
 
Reactions: Sandisfan

ASK THE COMMUNITY