UCI suffers a defeat! Court rules in favor of SRAM in the "Maximum Gear Ratio Protocol" case, "wasting" €300,000 of SafeR funds

The Brussels Market Court ruled in favor of SRAM in a legal case where SRAM argued that UCI's actions regarding gearing restrictions were not in line with the principles of a fair competition, causing the bike equipment supplier to be placed in a notable disadvantage compared to its rivals Shimano or Campagnolo, which have already adjusted their portfolio in advance.

The UCI had planned to introduce a "Maximum Gear Ratio Protocol" as part of its broader rider-safety initiative during the 2025 Tour of Guangxi. The proposal aimed to limit the size of gears used in races, effectively banning some of SRAM’s drivetrain configurations that rely on smaller 10-tooth cogs combined with large front chainrings.

According to the UCI, limiting gearing could help reduce top speeds in the peloton and potentially improve rider safety, especially on descents and in high-speed sprint situations. However, UCI failed to provide sufficient scientific backing to its theory, ignoring some of cycling's more urgent safety problems such as unclosed roads, and dangerous finish designs.

SRAM strongly opposed the proposal, arguing that the rule unfairly targeted its technology while having little effect on rival manufacturers. The company claimed the process lacked transparency, proper consultation, and sufficient scientific evidence to justify the restriction. SRAM subsequently filed a complaint with the Belgian Competition Authority, contending that the UCI’s actions violated principles of fair competition and could distort the market for cycling equipment.

The Belgian authority sided with SRAM and suspended the planned testing phase of the regulation. The UCI appealed the decision, but the Brussels Market Court ultimately rejected that appeal, marking a major defeat for the governing body.

The ruling not only blocks the immediate implementation of the gear-restriction test but also raises broader questions about how the UCI develops and enforces technical regulations in the sport.

Another controversial aspect of the dispute concerns funding. Reports indicate that up to €300,000 from SafeR safety initiative's funds may have been used by the UCI to finance its legal appeal, meaning that teams sponsored by SRAM indirectly contributed to legal action against one of their own suppliers.