[SuspectDevice]

Latest workd from my friendly local UCI offical is that hyrdration bladders have been banned from all UCI races. I would assume this was instituted to complement the "NO Feeds" rule in CX and the "no fairings" clause in the road rules.

I am unclear wether or not this ruling effects mtb racing but I assume it does as well.

Thank UCI for banning one more eyesore! Not that i can ever recall any pro ever using a hydration pack, except as an aero add-on for track and TT's.

 

[Echo]

I don't think it's so much that they are currently an aero advantage, but more that it's only a matter of time before someone makes one that is an aero advantage.

I hope it doesn't apply to MTB. Not everyone is a l33t pro like you... some people need more than a water bottle.

 

[Mtbkngrl]

That explains why my eyes were burning when I passed someone wearing a camel bak.

 

[SuspectDevice]

Originally posted by Echo
I don't think it's so much that they are currently an aero advantage, but more that it's only a matter of time before someone makes one that is an aero advantage.

I hope it doesn't apply to MTB. Not everyone is a l33t pro like you... some people need more than a water bottle.

NO they really are an aero advantage, in the arena of 20 to 30 seconds over a 40K TT, Camelbak even makes a model called the aeroback that is designed to go under a skinsuit...

When Colby Pearce set the north america hour record Dean Golich found that not only was the hydration bladder an aerodynamic advantage it also offered an additonal ergogenic effect bay way of lowering core temperature and reducing caridac drift. Golich theorizes that a 40ounce aeroback halfull with Ice has a net 25 watt gain in power output toward the end of a sustained supra-maximal bout. That is a significant and unfair advantage.

I need more than a water bottle too, that's what hand-ups are for...

 

[Echo]

Aight

 

[oldfart]

I thought they already were illegal in road events. In cross the races are short enough that you don't really need fluids during the event.

For mountain bike, they are essential for marathon events where feed zones are far apart to non existant and doubly essential for amateurs like myself who do not have a support crew to hand up a bottle or two in a local event.

Plus bottles which have bounced out of cages are a bit of a hazard on course not to mention, a concern for the now fluidless rider's performance. I think the UCI should ban handups from off road events to make it truely a self sufficient race. And also they should force all riders to shave their legs. Talk about eyesore. And long socks! Especially white tube sox with a stripe on the top.

 

[Heidi]

Originally posted by oldfart

For mountain bike, they are essential for marathon events where feed zones are far apart to non existant and doubly essential for amateurs like myself who do not have a support crew to hand up a bottle or two in a local event.

I will be shocked if this carries over to mtb. A lot of my races are around 2, 2.5 hours and it is 90 degrees. To not allow riders to properly hydrate would be ridiculous. Race promoters would then need to supply enough waterbottles for all racers for the entire race (plan on at least 2 per rider).

 

[towelie]

How are camelbaks an unfair advantage? It is not like they are a hyperexpensive piece of exclusive hardware! Anybody can use one. It is like saying leg shaving is an unfair advantage.

 

[spincrazy]

I think it's dumb. What, you're a better athlete because you don't need as much water or can still continue suffering and damaging your body? Absurd. Makes no sense at all. Why not no water bottles or no food before, after and during race?!!

 

[JRogers]

If this is true, it's ridiculous. Few high level pros use camelbaks and the amateurs that do probably can't have any aero benefit anyways as they're not going fast enough. They may shave off 20-30 sec. in a 25-30 mph TT but that same advantage is just not going to be seen in a 10-15 mph MTB event. It just makes it a pain in the ass.

 

[SuspectDevice]

I would say that not desiging a race course to allow hand-ups is a failing of failure of the individual promoters.

I feel that feeding strategy is a vital componet of XC racing, I often drank upwards of 10 bottle during the course of a race. If i were using a camelback i would have had to stop and change my pack, which i've actually seen people stop to do before.

Another argument for using bottles is the ease in manipulating their contents. I often would alternate between h20 and various concentrations of sports bev to ensure sufficent gastric emptying. For the penultimate lap I would aften take a coke, with bladder use you are pretty much limited to whatever you fill it up with and a bottle on the bike.

When i'm racing it can often be hard to remeber how and what to drink, so arranging me feeds before hand really helps there.

 

[Triphop]

Originally posted by towelie
How are camelbaks an unfair advantage? It is not like they are a hyperexpensive piece of exclusive hardware! Anybody can use one. It is like saying leg shaving is an unfair advantage.

Exactly. Part of the rationale for banning non-traditional frame designs for road racing, was to prevent an unfair advantage for those with mucho $$$ who could afford super hi tech designs.

This does not make any sense. Perhaps they should ban water bottles on the downtube, as they have been proven to provide an aero benefit vs. not using a bottle on the downtube.

 

[oldfart]

Originally posted by SuspectDevice
I would say that not desiging a race course to allow hand-ups is a failing of failure of the individual promoters.

Agree with that 100%. But if the rider knows before hand if there are and how many feed zones, they should have the option to carry a bladder and suplement at feeds if they chose.

One race I still do every year is the test of metal. They arange the course so that you ride past one point twice but otherwise its one big loop. Plus on the biggest climb, they have two feeds, neutral though, no way for a helper to get to those points. So max number of bottles is probably 6. Another local race is in Summerland and its one large loop. No feed zones. It is a BC Cup race most years which means they follow UCI rules. It would be a bad thing for the race to be changed to a multi lap affair just because camelbacks were disallowed and therefore multiple feeds were needed. My opinion is that one essence of mountainbike racing is the self sufficent nature. Carrying the tools you need to make repairs and carrying the food and fluids to keep you going are not that far apart philosophically.

The aero advantage off road would be far less of an advantage than on the road where speeds typically are greater thoughout an event.

 

[towelie]

Originally posted by SuspectDevice
I would say that not desiging a race course to allow hand-ups is a failing of failure of the individual promoters.

I feel that feeding strategy is a vital componet of XC racing, I often drank upwards of 10 bottle during the course of a race. If i were using a camelback i would have had to stop and change my pack, which i've actually seen people stop to do before.

Another argument for using bottles is the ease in manipulating their contents. I often would alternate between h20 and various concentrations of sports bev to ensure sufficent gastric emptying. For the penultimate lap I would aften take a coke, with bladder use you are pretty much limited to whatever you fill it up with and a bottle on the bike.

When i'm racing it can often be hard to remeber how and what to drink, so arranging me feeds before hand really helps there.

Uhhhh...so use bottles then. Doesn't mean a camelback shouldn't be an option.

 

[SuspectDevice]

Originally posted by oldfart

Originally posted by SuspectDevice
I would say that not desiging a race course to allow hand-ups is a failing of failure of the individual promoters.

No feed zones. It is a BC Cup race most years which means they follow UCI rules. It would be a bad thing for the race to be changed to a multi lap affair just because camelbacks were disallowed and therefore multiple feeds were needed.

If the race is a single lap, it is by default not following UCI rules governing course length etc...

the UCI regulations affect almost no-one in North America, let us look to the fact that very few NA trade teams even register with the UCI...

Bike races as we know them will continue un-abated, as UCI technical rules are not applicable to the age- and ability graded racing schema's that the usa, australia, the UK and canada use.

If this were belgium or italy on the otherhand, where the only type of races that exists are ELite, and eltite without contract, where every race is a UCI race, these little niggly things would affect anyone who wants to compete.

The UCI tries to make every race as consistent as possible in terms of technical specifications that course designers and promoters have to adhere to. This is to protect the riders, and the image of the sport.

The manner in which the UCI carries out it's mandates however often leads much to be desired, but such is the cost of doing bussiness with a world wide beauracracy...

 

[rockracing]

this is really ridiculous, however probably won't affect some like myself, with lap racing you can get a new bottle each lap if required, but with with "marathon" type events gaining popularity and you ride a small frame like me you're stuffed with only one 500ml bottle.

 

[oldfart]

Originally posted by SuspectDevice


the UCI regulations affect almost no-one in North America, let us look to the fact that very few NA trade teams even register with the UCI...

Bike races as we know them will continue un-abated, as UCI technical rules are not applicable to the age- and ability graded racing schema's that the usa, australia, the UK and canada use.

Acually in Canada we do follow the UCI age categories. The US does not as far as I know. I don't know about skill categories though. All Canada Cups follow UCI rules. Pretty sure the BC Cup races do too. The Test of Metal has UCI points offered and its 65km one lap of a rather distorted figure 8. Pros finish around 2:45-2:50. Last year due to Norba's lack of prize money and loss of UCI points value made the Test a better race for those seeking UCI points.

The actual letter I read does not make a lot of sense as the english is really poor.