UCI president promises to seriously investigate possible gear restrictions in races: "A test is planned for the end of the year, in a competition"
CyclingSaturday, 19 April 2025 at 19:05
Recent years and months, we've seen more than enough high speed mass crashes that had more or less severe consequences on those involved. Among many other possibilties to reduce the risk of crashes similar to that of Itzulia Basque Country 2024 happening, one is so obvious, yet quite simple. To restrict gear options of riders and therefore reduce their maximum speed in critical moments.
Some riders, like Wout Van Aert, are campaigning for this, notably by proposing to limit gear ratios. "If you're on this descent (which leads to the Kanarieberg) with a limited gear ratio, no one can move. Today, the developments are so great that you're still thinking about overtaking," he noted to L'Equipe after his fall at 2024 Dwars door Vlaanderen.
Desired by the riders, this limitation will indeed be tested, as confirmed by the UCI president, David Lappartient, this Friday in an interview with Ouest-France. "A test is planned for the end of the year, in a competition," he confirmed, without specifying in which race this test would take place.
Despite this confirmation, Lappartient still expressed reservations about this possible limitation of gears. "Reducing speed, in general, is a bit antithetical to a bike race. I personally have very reservations about this limitation of gears, considering that it can also modify the characteristics of the riders, between those who are able to spin and those who manage to take big gears," he explained, specifying that he would also have difficulty drawing conclusions after a single test.
The UCI could also explore other avenues to ensure rider safety, particularly through changes to bib shorts and jerseys. The clothing used these days almost tears at a stronger breeze and provides little to no protection for when riders inevitably hit the asphalt from time to time. While nobody wants riders to compete in armor, perhaps a more durable material could spare riders of a few bruises...
Read also
claps 2visitors 2
Just in
Subscribe to our Daily Newsletter today!
Apr 06, 15:11
0
Popular news
Latest comments
- so sad...
maria2024202410-05-2025 - ahahahha.. but I think Roglic will be very happy to give you back the pink jersey (less interviews, less ceremonies, more time to rest).maria2024202410-05-2025
- Bummed for Wout. I hope he bounces back big tomorrowmij10-05-2025
- His manner of speech is that of someone who's totally laid back, not the nervous kind.
KerisVroom10-05-2025 - wow, Isaac Del Torro can TT. I am betting that he can surpass Ayuso in the future.KerisVroom10-05-2025
- van Aert will be happy if he can stay with the front group in that last climb. Pedersen will win stage 3 :-)
DareDevil10-05-2025 - Not good for Landa. Whole season gone already.DareDevil10-05-2025
- This one is for Primoz!!DareDevil10-05-2025
- Now I know Mads Pederson is a very talented hairstylist. I should have gone for this sort of hairstyle just for fun.KerisVroom10-05-2025
- Its everyman for himself at UAE if no Pogi. This was the case since last 3 yearsabstractengineer10-05-2025
This is one of the worst ideas I've ever heard. It's an advantage to the person who does his best power at the highest RPM. This rule was dumb in junior races and would be dumb at the pro level.
Agreed. What is the point of this? The pros should just start a new league and break away from the UCI. Let it sink
Agree with the first part totally, not the second. It may not be a perfect solution or needed for everyone but what’s wrong with protecting non fully developed kids? It starts when they’re born when you instinctively know you shouldn’t try to make them stand or put them in push-up positions as they’re not ready strength, bone shape or -resistance wise (amongst many things). You don’t send small kids with huge backpacks full of books to school and you don’t expect teens to lumber around building sites chucking cement sacks. There were good reasons for this and the gearing issue was a result of this, especially considering the frail stature of cyclists in general. HOWEVER, the rule has been abandoned as being unnecessary. The original idea wasn’t bad for kids in general but what it overlooked was that by the time kids actually reach the level to enter junior race level and compete seriously, they’ve done enough training to strengthen their mechanisms and over enough time for bone composition to adapt to new loads so they are unlikely to get injured from excessive loads as no-one can push more than a certain human power and they’ve worked their way close to that already. If you think it was overkill, fine but reflect on this, I trained for and had done several marathons and one day decided to enter the first edition of our local one. Despite being used to and perfectly prepared, I was in pain for weeks after and a year later the local media was full of reports of an explosion or injury related visits to doctors post-race by participants. What nobody realised in advance was that the course was very demanding on joints as much of it was in the city centre with short straights and sharp corners with pavements to mount so you were constantly also stepping up and down and leaning hard, just to show how sensitive you can be to new solicitation on the body.
1. Yes, for very small children, one shouldn't tax their bodies too much. 2. For older children, well, carrying heavy loads is actually a good thing and helps them get strong, see all of history prior to 150 years ago. 3. Just because an idea has good intentions doesn't mean it does good or is smart. My point wasn't that the intentions of the rule were evil, but that it was a foolish rule.
I'm not too sure about carrying heavy load is necessary a good thing. I know a person who has back issue from his job carrying gas tanks. He had to retire from his job before middle age.
That’s why they changed it :-)
You forget that amongst many problems (created in our naïve youth) that we only discover in old age, very few were relevant 150 years ago when most hardly got to 50 and then usually in very bad shape. As for the weight carrying, maybe under strict guidance and observation it will be positive BUT left unattended or under pressure to perform, even older kids are likely to overdo anything, it is not for nothing that most people who do hard physical labour usually destroy some part of their body, strength doesn’t protect you from everything.
1. Most people who made it to 5 in "ye olde days" made it into their 70s. 2. "Working out" (what we used to call "working") is good for you, makes you stronger, and makes you live longer.