BREAKING: UCI Postpones Rule on Unsanctioned Races

Apr 11, 2013 at 6:30
Apr 11, 2013
by geebeebee media  
 
You must login to Pinkbike.
Don't have an account? Sign up

Join Pinkbike  Login

The UCI has postponed enforcement of article 1.2.019. On March 28 the UCI wrote a letter to all national federations stating that they would be enforcing article 1.2.019, which stated that licensed riders could not compete in unsanctioned events. This provoked widespread comment and anger from across mountain biking and road biking. Today they released an offical statement stating they will not be strictly enforcing the rule strictly until 2014. Their official statement reads:

bigquotesThe UCI listened to the feedback from the various groups involved and who feel affected by a strict and immediate enforcement of rule 1.2.019 and its associated sanctions. The UCI has decided to postpone strict enforcement of rule 1.2.019 in 2013 with the expectation that all stakeholders (National Federations, race directors, teams and riders) will discuss and do what is necessary to prepare for the rule’s full enforcement in 2014.

USA Cycling has confirmed that they will not be enforcing the rule this season for any discipline. In a recent press release, Steve Johnson, USA Cycling's president and CEO, said, "Notwithstanding the fact that rule 1.2.019 has been enforced in Europe for many years, it is clear strict enforcement in the U.S. and other countries will have unintended and undesirable consequences. USA Cycling listened to the views expressed by the cycling community in America, and these issues were fully represented in discussions with the UCI. We would like to thank the UCI for its willingness to suspend enforcement of the rule globally to allow time for productive dialogue with all stakeholders to find a workable solution for the future."

Initial reactions from race organisers seems to be positive about this decision, but the long-term implications remain to be seen.
Must Read This Week









155 Comments

  • + 209
 Why postpone it? Get rid of the damn rule all together!
  • + 72
 They're waiting for everyone to forget about it again before they start to secretly enact it... hopefully by then those douche bags pulling this crap will die from old age.

Anyone else think this is response is timed fairly well with those teams openly stating that they're defying the rules as a "f*ck you" to the UCI?
  • + 38
 this doesnt cut it....only solution is to leave the uci
  • + 100
 "what is necessary to prepare for the rule’s full enforcement in 2014" ?

Make our own MTB governing body, with blackjack and hookers!
  • - 21
 yeah because it's just that easy right ? ...
  • + 17
 I think everyone is still going to hate UCI. I sure do. Hopefully all the teams and pro riders will continue being defiant to their rules and we can get rid of them completely.
  • + 15
 Ha, you think that they would give up that easy? You know damn well they are getting with their lawyers to reword it so they can screw you eventually. Mountain bikers are nothing but a redheaded stepchild to the UCI.
  • + 21
 I disagree. We are what keep people like the UCI in business. The great thing about capitalism is it drives companies to act the way their customers desire. Remember that new Pinkbike video player? Thanks to our comments, it was gone in about a day. If we had not voiced our opinion, deemed it useless and given up, we'd still be dealing with poor video playback. We are the UCI's livelihood, so lets show them that we won't take this
  • + 14
 We need to figure out how to get the UCI out of mtb. The best thing would be to not buy a USA Cycling membership this year and not attend USA Cycling/UCI events for the rest of this season to show them this won't be tolerated. USA Cycling needs to support the racers on this, not the UCI.

Lets make 2013 the year of enduro racing, since none of them are UCI events. Boycott UCI racing this year, though I will still have to watch World Cup DH.
  • + 70
 "Make our own MTB governing body, with blackjack and hookers!"
-----
"yeah because it's just that easy right ? ..."
-----

Once we have the blackjack and hookers, the people will come.
  • - 7
 I think USA Cycling does support a lot of smaller, rider-run events and I like what they are doing. I think this should be about the UCI, leaving USAC out of it, just my .02$
  • + 5
 But USAC could of have the balls to stand up for it's racers instead of being a lapdog for the UCI. According to Velonews, they're going to fully enforce the rules in 2014(even though they said they will try to work with the teams and what not).

velonews.competitor.com/2013/04/news/uci-postpones-rule-barring-riders-from-unsanctioned-races-and-usa-cycling-follows-suit_281662
  • + 0
 WHY DO THE UCI DO THIS SHIT?! #f*ckTHEUCI
  • + 1
 damn.....the UCI cannot always put its claw on the goodstuff.,,,this aint no power struggle.
  • + 1
 Do not make it monotonous work. It has to be free, beautiful sport. UCI sick bears rule and limits the possibilities. If so quick to respond to this disappointment, however, may have a lot to say and we can change something in connection with this sick act
  • - 2
 The UCI is the Headteacher in the school of professional mountain biking, and we are the students
  • + 6
 DH1 should get the full 4x and DH races and start their own World Cup! every Team and UCI rider should join them and leave the UCI behind!
  • - 17
 The UCI seriously needs to tell mountain biking to go eat a dick... and then sit back and laugh as all the "pros" start crying about that too. Clearly mountain bikers are more prepared for the professional requirements of a league like the XFL than they are for the top level of professional sporting.
  • - 21
 Oh, and reality check for all you "do away with the UCI" knuckleheads... The IOC requires all Olympic movement sports to have an international federation, and that the international federation then supervises or otherwise accredits the national federations that organize the sport in each country... So, exactly what's the plan for when you do away with the UCI?

All you idiots seem to think mountain biking is much larger than it is. The reality is, MTB couldn't survive on it's own apart from the UCI... you'd lose XC in the olympics and you'd stifle the sport's growth.

And whichever idiot is suggesting not to buy a USAC license... that's f*cking brilliant! Take money out of the pockets of your national federation who works hard to grow the sport locally because of a UCI rule that USAC has no hand in, that's equally enforced by ALL other national federations beside the USAC, all because somehow think this will lead to the 'year of the enduro'.... are actually f*cking retarded or do you just have no clue how shit works in reality?
  • + 12
 You're kinda turning into protour here haha^
  • + 13
 Hmm... who knew that MTBing wouldn't exist without the Olympics... man, I had no idea!
  • - 12
 Who knew your reading comprehension was that bad. I never said mtb wouldn't exist. I just said you'd lose XC in the Olympics which, believe it or not, matters greatly to sponsors who put money into the sport... and that it would stifle the growth of the sport. That's the reality. One governing body overseeing national federations will get more done than a bunch of disconnected dumbasses spread across the country trying to do their own thing. It's called organization...
  • + 2
 In some points, it look like the mistake between the FIS-TTR in snowboarding. FIS is an ski organization and they have nothing to do with snowboarding exept money. UCI in is basement, is an road cycling federation
  • + 9
 "The IOC requires all Olympic movement sports to have an international federation..."

"So, exactly what's the plan for when you do away with the UCI?"

"All you idiots seem to think mountain biking is much larger than it is. The reality is, MTB couldn't survive on it's own apart from the UCI..."

No, I'm pretty sure my reading comprehension is just fine.... if you're going to be insane, at least have the balls to stand by what you write otherwise you just look foolish/childish.
  • - 8
 MTB would continue to exist... but, mtb as a pro sport, would not survive. Apologies, I should've dumbed it down for you kids on the short bus but I assumed that was a reasonable leap in logic. Right now, you have pro's bitching about not making enough money now, you take away the governing body's organization and they'll make even less money. In the history of sport, no sport has ever become more profitable by becoming less organized.

So... you have two choices.
1. Replace the UCI with an equally controlling governing body pushing the sport towards professionalism and greater profit and exposure... In which case all you pussies will still be crying like girls about rules that don't even pertain to you.

Or...

2. Bail on the governing body idea and let it go back to a grassroots 'hobby' where the best you can hope for is some small time local exposure and maybe a regional series. In which case the whole idea of "pro" goes away.


...But in the end, whatever happens, the reality is NONE of you asswipes are UCI Pros so you've got your balls in a sack over something that has no impact on you whatsoever.
  • + 3
 Although he seems kind of 'trolly'^ I kind of agree with him
  • - 3
 Not trying to troll... just trying to make the point that just because there's a regulation doesn't mean it's a bad thing if you look at it long term. Everyone seems pissed more because they hates the UCI so this has to be a horrible rule instead of actually stepping back, considering the big picture, and thinking about the long term impact to the sport. I get that it's rad to have pros at your local races.. Hell, I love watching Gwin toy with a track that just had its way with me and doing in three minutes what took me four or four and a half... but then again, I'm not a young rider trying my ass to become a pro and get sponsors so Gwin isn't taking anything away from me. Gwin isn't giving lessons to the young riders at these races... he's not doing anything to pump up the image of cycling as a whole or encourage more participation in the sport. He's just padding his stats. I understand that the promoters of races like the Whiskey 50 don't want to pay the USAC for what they think they can do themselves equally well.. but people seem to forget that races like the Whiskey 50 promotes just the Whiskey 50... USAC is promoting cycling across the USA. They're supporting the juniors program, they're supporting developmental efforts, they're paying for cycling awareness commercials during the Tour de France... they're supporting the whole sport.
  • - 3
 IMO... The top pro's should be uniting behind a rule like this, encouraging races like the Whiskey 50 to help contribute to the development of the sport and to young riders instead of being outraged that they won't have the opportunity to go beat up on lesser talent to gain results, recognition, and prizes. The fans should recognize that this is a good step... an effort to bring the elite levels of cycling competition together to work toward the same goal instead of toward their own individual gains. While mtb will never be as big as sports like the NFL, it could stand to learn a lot at the organizational level from how larger sports conduct themselves. Could you imagine what would happen if an NFL wide receiver cracked a tall can with a fan after jumping into the stands a la Duncan Riffle on Heckler's rock? Sure, it was awesome to see Riffle party with the fans but we're at a point where we have to decide if we want mountain biking to continue to be "awesome" and "extreme" or whether we want it to become a mainstream big time sport. Do we want to keep watching races on Freecaster or do we want HD broadcasts on NBC live? We're at a crossroads and I would rather see mountain biking, and cycling in general, continue to grow even if that means the pros have to learn to live with a bit more restriction.
  • + 1
 I see Jhou's point and agree with him
  • + 6
 "MTB would continue to exist... but, mtb as a pro sport, would not survive. Apologies, I should've dumbed it down for you kids on the short bus but I assumed that was a reasonable leap in logic."

You're insulting our intelligence and yet you cannot convey your thoughts to others... right. You are living proof that being alive longer does not translate into more wisdom. Insulting people by degrading people with disabilities with that short bus comment is pathetic and disgraceful especially if you really are almost 40 as you indicate in your profile that took one click to check out.

Contrary to your absurd assumptions on my intelligence, someone who you have never met or talked to, I know exactly what it takes for a sport to become included into the Olympics seeing how park/pipe skiing was recently included, which has been a massive issue for years now. But guess what?! A fair amount of people (for the size of the freskiing industry which is only a fraction of a fraction of MTBing's) have been making a great living off of skiing as professionals for quite a while now without the OLYMPICS! OMG SHOCKER!!!

If you feel that joining a scumbag organization like the UCI is the only option worth of claiming to be in the Olympics instead of working towards other options, then that's your opinion. XC has been on a decline since the 90s and the UCI and the Olympics has not changed that in any way. All they've achieved was to prolong the descent by, in simple terms, name-brand recognition.

It's honestly pathetic when someone cannot just give their own OPINION but they have to make baseless and useless insults towards others. You care way too much about the internet. You're mature enough to understand that, right? I friggen hope so... now go outside, man-boy... by the sounds, you need some fresh air and to enjoy MTBing for what it is.
  • - 21
 1. I wasn't insulting "our" intelligence... I was insulting your intelligence. This was not an assumption, it was an observation based on your comprehension and composition.

2. If you cannot read the posts above and understand them, that is not a problem with my ability to convey my thoughts... it's a problem with your ability to comprehend what you read. Perhaps if mommy had spent more time with you instead of pumping your full of adderall and blaming your teachers you'd be less inclined to rage out against institutions and rules which you clearly do not understand.

3. None of the rest of that rambling paragraph was relevant or worth responding to. It is amusing that after your little rage post full of excessive capitalization and punctuation, rambling about scumbags, manboys, disabilities... after all that, you say it sounds like I need to go outside? LMAO. Reality check... You're the one all worked up about a rule that doesn't impact you.
  • + 21
 Would you just kindly shut up
  • - 17
 Sure... after you kind sir.
  • + 7
 Almost 40 and he doesn't know that "kids" is plural or that people were making a living being professional mtbers before the Olympics and the IOC...

OK sorry guys, I'm done, haha.
  • - 13
 Lol... So, professional mountain bikers can make a living just fine but somehow they're so strapped now that they need to be allowed to race unsanctioned events? Your logic is truly impressive. Not in a good way, but impressive nonetheless.

PS - 34 is hardly almost 40... Not sure if you're trying and failing to insult me by calling me old or if you're actually that bad at math too. Fail either way though.
  • + 11
 Don't feed the trolls people...
  • + 1
 I blame the UCI for the decline of mountain biking. They have always been about road racing and fail to put resources to keep our sport in the light. Now that there's a resurgence in our sport, they want a bigger piece of the cake without putting in the efforts. Enduro is doing fine without the help of the UCI and I'm sure XC and DH can be too.
  • - 8
 You blame the UCI for the "decline" of mountain biking??? You mean how it's bigger than it ever has been in the history of the sport?

It's simple economics, MTB doesn't generate funds like road does. I'd be that the whole of mountain biking generates less revenue than the Tour de France does on its own.

Please enlighten us though since you seem to know... just how much profit will the UCI generate by USAC sanctioning more events? I could be wrong but I'm pretty sure USAC gets to keep most if not all of the funds from US races they sanction so, at best, the UCI may get a few more drops in the bucket.
  • + 3
 Wait what? Of course road riding generate more profits that mountain biking, but they dont have to ignore the sport as a whole. I was referring to the popularity of mountain biking and how it can be ran better. Go troll somewhere else or just go ride your bike. ....
  • + 2
 Last time I checked some of the biggest events in mountain biking are not sanctioned by the UCI. Example crankworx, rampage and all other FMB events. Not to mention the amount of hype the enduro series is getting before it even starts. I think we'd do just fine without the UCI.
  • + 1
 ^this guy knows whats up!!

@badbadleroybrown...you must work for the UCI...grumpy...supporting the UCI with assumptions vs the facts that have been presented...insulting peoples intelligance on purpose then saying that you didnt...you also seem to like road biking...your featured photo is of such nature...after all is said and done...The only thing I can recommend is that you go ride your bike and live life to the fullest while you still can! Drink a beer, chill with friends, in general...have a good time bro!!
  • - 7
 LMAO... Yeah, I must work for the UCI since I have the brain power to jump off the UCI hate train and recognize what's good for business. Exactly what in the f*ck does liking road biking have to do with anything? I like all types of cycling... that's the benefit of being a grown ass man and having a real job, I can afford to do what I enjoy and I don't give a f*ck if the teenage council of awesome approves of it or not. Maybe if more of you adolescent asswipes could think for yourselves and get beyond "the UCI sucks" you might understand why this is a good rule... Not likely though, I lost hope for your generation years ago so I don't expect much of you all and I'm still consistently disappointed.
  • + 3
 Wil was right. There's no way any sensible person that actually cares about our sport would say such stupid crap. I think it's now solidified that this person is just screwing with us. Well done, whoever you are... well done.
  • - 5
 It's not my fault you lot know dick about business... Thankfully, smarter people than you are in charge of mountain biking and likely always will be so I'm not particularly worried. I just get a huge kick out of all you keyboard warriors throwing a hissy fit about rules that don't effect you and the massive ignorance thrown about by all of you. Good times either way... If you ever start to have hope for the future of humanity on an intellectual level, just read some Pinkbike comments and you'll know better.
  • + 2
 @badbadleroybrown you are a hypocrite. And I also noticed that when you run out of arguments you decided to just attack us and not the issue very mature for a "grown ass man" as you call your self.
  • + 3
 "I just get a huge kick out of all you keyboard warriors throwing a hissy fit..."

Is this basically not what you're doing right now as well?????

www.pinkbike.com/photo/8823282
  • + 0
 @ Ajax - Not at all... I'm pointing out why it could be a good thing if you idiots could see past your blinding UCI hate. You guys are getting all amped up, first about a UCI rule that doesn't impact you and then about me defending the rule as good for the long term. It's funny listening to you idiots crying like someone just told you Santa Claus wasn't real when none of you f*ckers even have international UCI licenses.

@ Garland - How am I hypocritical? Nowhere have I told others not to be insulting and then insulted people? Perhaps you need to google hypocrisy. I made my points... if you all are too stupid to understand them, you're too stupid to understand them. Calling you out for being stupid is neither hypocritical or an 'attack'. It's simply calling a spade a spade...
  • + 1
 Aaaaand back to insults. Well done really proved your maturity with that one bud
  • + 1
 @badbadleroybrown Alrighty there mr. "keyboard warrior"
[Reply]
  • + 31
 BRING ON THE ENDURO WORLD SERIES!!!!
[Reply]
  • + 22
 It is still going to cause the same shit-storm in 2014. USAC's claim that unsanctioned events' insurance is not as "robust" is total bull. USAC wants paid while offering promoters NOTHING in return for their investment.
  • - 15
 You're an idiot... USAC insurance is more comprehensive and cheaper than most packages that you could arrange without them unless you're somehow hooked up. It's like anything else, you buy in bulk you get a better deal...and that's setting aside the reality that they bring drug controls and procedural & safety standards that extend well beyond just the racers on course.
  • + 7
 No, Dan is right. If USAC's insurance is soooo wonderful, then why do none of the promoters want to use it. USAC only got Colorado's cycling association to join with them by strongarming. They've been trying to strong arm OBRA for years to no avail. I've heard multiple stories from folks injured at USAC events who received nothing from this alleged "comprehensive" USAC insurance, but nothing about folks actually getting compensated. You need a reality check.
  • - 11
 Actually... you need to recognize that you're making an extremely limited comparison. Colorado's cycling association is one example and that's great that they do have good insurance. They're the exception, not the rule though. And guess what, if they're so keen on keep riders covered they're always welcome to continue to carry extra insurance. If you crash at a race like the Southridge Winter Series, where guys like Gwin and other top pros often show up, you get jack shit... you get a couple fat guys in t-shirts looking at each other with confused expressions. Now... looking beyond just insurance. You've got a race like Southridge and you've got a bunch of non-pro up and coming 20-somethings who are several seconds slower than guys like Gwin but fairly close to on another. On a normal race, they're pushing one another taking the level of competition up an increment.... Now, you throw Gwin and Gee in there and all of a sudden you've got a bunch of 20-something up and comers who are trying to raise their game five increments to compete with guys who shouldn't even be there. Now one goes down hard and gets injured who may have just gotten some bumps and bruises or maybe not even gone down otherwise.
  • + 5
 Why did USAC go so hard after Colorado then? Why are they continuing to go after OBRA, when OBRA's insurance package is better? Go back and read the link I posted above--that insurance is next to worthless. It will get you nowhere if you have really bad crash. If you are racing, you should have your own insurance. But, insurance is not the real issue! Money is, but USAC can't come out and say that.
  • - 10
 LMAO... Dude, you have no clue what the f*ck you're talking about and no clue how to debate. Your post makes very sense, rebuts nothing I posted, and is basically just one big run on ramble. That said, I did read your article... Nothing about the USAC insurance was substandard, that's the way American insurance works. Dude cries a lot about the $1000 deductible but notes that his own insurance also has a $1000 deductible which actually illustrates just how standard that is in the US.

You are using, as your only examples of deficiency on the part of USAC, the fact that they want to bring Colorado and Oregon cycling under their umbrella...? Are you f*cking dense? Those are pretty much the two most cycling friendly areas in ALL of the US. ANY national cycling body would be acting similarly... so your whole example is proof of exactly jack shit. And that's before we consider, as I mentioned, that the USAC in no way restricts anyone from carrying extra insurance... Now... again, both of those areas may have great insurance. But that's an exception not the rule and, again, we're talking about the two biggest cycling hot spots in the US. When you start talking about other regions it doesn't hold true... and, there's far more to USAC than just their insurance.

But, let's just say that you're right and the UCI and USAC are awful horrible things that should be destroyed... The IOC requires all Olympic movement sports to have an international federation, and that the international federation then supervises or otherwise accredits the national federations that organize the sport in each country... So, exactly what's the plan for when you do away with the UCI and the USAC? Just say f*ck it and let MTB devolve back into the "grassroots" nothing sport it was 20 years ago where not even the top pros could make a living at it? Good plan!!!
  • + 2
 why is the uci the ONLY way forward for the sport of mountain biking? in the 90's the sport had really good sponsorship from outside the sport for the race series, where has that gone? the sport of mountain biking definitely has grown tremendously over the past 30 years, but that's on the recreational side of the sport, and that's evidenced by the fact that 5-6" trail bikes are the fastest growing segment of mtn bike sales. i just don't see how the racing side of our sport has grown relative to where it was at in the 90's. the uci has the benefit of "legitimizing" our sport in the eyes of the rest of the world, but even w/ xc racing in the olympics since 1996 , where has that really gotten us? if back in '96 you told me there would only be 6 wc dh races i would have found that very hard to believe. and i don't have a problem w/ anybody wanting to tell the uci to eff off, i feel they could put a better effort into growing all forms of mtn bike racing. the uci either needs to, actually grow the racing side of the sport, or f*** off! and mr. brown really, to sit here for hours on end insulting people for their opinions is INCREDIBLY ignorant, you are definitely due for a karma bitch slap.
  • - 4
 Listening to all you idiots drone on is karma enough...

And, if you could read, you'd see that I never said the UCI is the only way forward... just that you have to have some governing body. No sport has ever grown by becoming less organized so... The UCI is the bad guy now but let's say you bail the UCI and form some new body... Do you think this new body will be a free-for-all do whatever you want league? If so, I say again... no sport has ever grown through less organization. Now, if the new body is strictly organized and focused on growth they're the new bad guy because they'll be imposing the same types of rules.

As for growth... you're kidding yourself. In 1996, there was not a single rider making the type of money that Hill, Atherton, Peat, Gwin, Minaar, etc all command today. The number of races is a reflection of the lack of national federation support because individual promoters are more concerned with growing their pockets than the sport... If more races were sanctioned, there could be 20 races per year. But instead, let's all throw a fit because Gwin and the gang won't be able to barnstorm the local races and pad their bank accounts at the expense of some local kid trying to climb the ranks??? And I'm the one in need of a karma bitch slap????

It's growing pains but, long term, it's what mountain biking needs to legitimize the competitive equality in its races in the pursuit of mainstream exposure... riders just need to suck it up and learn to deal with it. Get a domestic license if it's that big a deal to you... problem solved as it only applies to international licensees. Encourage your favorite race to get sanctioned with USAC and help grow the sport and then all pros are welcome, problem solved.
  • + 0
 hey, another insult, shocking. it was a question, nothing more, nothing less. btw, the anger about this rule doesn't just apply to the gwin's and gee's of the world. and assuming anything other than the uci as an organizing body would be worse than the uci, doesn't hold much weight. i don't buy for one second that greedy individual promoters are what's keeping the uci from having more dh world cups. and i don't buy that mtb racing has grown the way it should have since the 90's b/c the 10 best downhillers are making a decent living. race promoters growing their pockets? if that were true, you'd be right, there would be 20 more races, in every state! if my favorite race doesn't want to be usac sanctioned they shouldn't have to, and if our local pro (gwin and gee aren't the only pro's) wants to race it b/c they want to (for whatever reason) they should be allowed to. there is plenty of room for the uci and usac to be as succesful as they want to be regardless of pro's racing unsanctioned races. but hey, let's just boil it down to growing pains and stay the course. every person angry at the uci has every right to be, the uci have done a horrible job at doing their job. and i've read your post's, the bitch slap is coming down you, that is not even debatable. go ahead and insult away, i'm done.
  • - 4
 OK... so if it's not race promoters being greedy than explain why the promoter of the Whiskey 50 was offered, by a pro who wanted to race there, to have ALL expenses for sanctioning covered at no cost to the promoter? USAC spent more than a half million dollars last year to promote mountain bike racing and development throughout the US... how much did the Whiskey 50 promoter contribute to that? Absolutely nothing...

Oh, and again, this isn't something the UCI is doing to mountain biking... it's an old rule. Anyone with an international license should've already known about it. Anyone who follows cycling should've remembered the drama back in 2009 when Lance Armstrong wanted to race the Tour of the Gila but couldn't because of this very rule. Just because they made a point of notifying everyone after receiving an inquiry about a pro riding the Whiskey 50 doesn't mean this is something new, it was just a reminder.

And, reality check, it's not about the salaries of the top 10 riders... it's about the reality that EVERY aspect of mountain biking is bigger than it has ever been before. There are more riders making a sustainable living in mountain biking, racing and on the periphery, than ever before... clearly the UCI isn't ruining everything as you haters are trying to claim.
  • + 2
 Down here in New Zealand, we don't give a shit about some race in butt-fuck nowhere, USA called the Whiskey 50. Just ride bikes. I'm not affiliated with any clubs at international, national or even regional levels, never have been, never plan to be. I build trails on city land, with the permission of the city council and then proceed to ride them with friends. We ride fast, but we aren't racing. The sport is growing because its fuckin fun! If I were to pinpoint a large organization that we should be thanking for the growth of our sport it wouldn't be the UCI, it'd be Red Bull...
  • + 2
 ^Red bull is the bomb tup
  • - 4
 LMAO... You live in New Zealand and you want to call anywhere in the US 'butt-f*ck'??? Isn't there a sheep somewhere expecting you home??? Don't want to piss off the misses you backwoods f*ck.

Please tell us... how much has Red Bull spent on cycling advocacy and development programs? Oh... that's right, they don't... they just spend sponsor dollars to put their image out. f*cking morons... it's amazing how hard you guys suck the cock of anything that's generally accepted as awesome while blindly following the herd in hating anything UCI but you're all too damn stupid to actually think for yourselves.
  • + 1
 No badboyleroybrown, what's amazing is how narrow minded and f*cking retarded you are being. Have you seen how much coverage New Zealand has been getting in riding circles lately? Tonnes more than your shitty booze run race, or whatever you call it. And sheep jokes? Really? Lame. You'd be better off with some shitty Hobbit joke. Attack the issues mate, not me. We get an insight to your real intellectual capabilities when you do that and it's not good. You are proving the "USA, USA, USA! f*ck the rest of the world" generalized opinion of the American mindset. Sorry to all the normal Americans out there, this guy is making you all look silly, but I know you aren't.

But I digress...

Without all the money poured into a number of sports around the world by red bull, many of them wouldn't have the platform they have today. I don't really care about racing, as I said above, but I do love riding, and im pretty sure i can do that without the help of the UCI or Red Bull for that matter, but I like the opportunities the pros have to push the boundaries in the freeride category so we the people can see what is possible. How much of the pros salaries are paid by the UCI? Give me reruns of follow me, from the inside out, strength in numbers, where the trail ends etc any day over live coverage of a race, especially one in BUTT-F*CK NOWHERE, USA!

Lady's and gentlemen, it's official, may I introduce the new Protour!
  • + 0
 Hahahaha! You're a joke dude... New Zealand could get as much coverage as you want, it's still a backwoods shit hole worth about 1/1000th of California, let alone the US as a whole. New Zealand is like the chodum of the world... yeah, it's there yeah it takes up space, but it's really pretty useless.

...and reality check. Red Bull spends annually about what the USAC spends on cycling. The difference is that Red Bull is promoting themselves while USAC is promoting cycling you jackass. There's a difference. As for who's paying the salary... what the f*ck is your point? Are you retarded or do you seriously think that some leagues pay salaries? The NFL doesn't pay your salary, your team does... the UCI doesn't pay your salary, your team does... that's the way EVERY sport works you stupid shit.



But the absolute best is, not only are you too f*cking slow for this rule to apply to you but you "don't care about racing" yet you've got your panties in a knot over a rule that applies only to racers... f*cking brilliant! You can keep introducing the new Pro Tour all you want but no one is interested in your wannabe league. The current Pro Tour is just fine... and if mtb had the foresight to know what was good for them, they'd happily mirror the conti/pro-conti/pro-tour setup.
  • + 1
 @ badbadleroybrown am I right in thinking you're the full time salaried representerive for the UCI in the USA?
  • + 1
 Haha, I don't have my panties in a knot about the rule, you're mistaking me for yourself. You're the one getting all lippy and defensive. I just don't like the way the UCI conducts itself.

Obviously someone has to pay the pros who ride freeride (the style of riding I enjoy, the sort that can survive without the UCI) so they can travel the world doing cool things and generally its their sponsors, one being Red Bull... I think you're missing the point of my argument.

You're not acting your age mate, and no one is enjoying this except me, not because I enjoy a good keyboard mash, but as a professional. As a psychologist, I'm finding your behaviour absolutely astounding and quite frankly that of someone 20 years your junior.

Were you too small to be a school yard bully? Did your younger siblings beat you? Is this your revenge for these issues?

I give up mate, no point bashing my head against a brick wall... Once again the American takes the win not by having a more valid argument, but by making the most noise. Sigh...
  • - 2
 LMAO!!! Oh... so now you're a psychologist. You're a f*cking joke is what you are dude. You're worked up about a rule that doesn't apply to you in the least bit and your entire "debate" tactic is saying "I'm not mad, you are"....

It's not my fault you're too stupid to see the long term gains or too short sighted to understand that Red Bull advertising through exhibition isn't healthy for the longevity of the sport. Yeah, obviously the one who has no issue standing up for his own thoughts against a mob of adolescent ignorance is the one who's got issues... sure. I get it, pussies like you have been taught to go with the herd and encouraged to not think for yourselves so you sit here and read 10 other people say the rule sucks so it must suck. Some day, you may grow up and learn to think for yourself and give a shit less what the teenage council of awesome thinks about things... until then, keep sucking the popular dick and telling people you're a psychologist... LMAO! Damn, that was some good shit!!!
  • + 1
 a href="http://www.sherv.net/emoticons.html">img alt="Beating head against the wall" width=70 height=50 src="http://www.sherv.net/cm/emoticons/fighting/beating-head-against-the-wall.gif">/a>

We're not all prepubescent 34 year olds with bar work mate. Some of us grew up, went to University and got a good job.
  • - 2
 Yeah, I work in a bar... LMFAO. God you're pathetic in your attempts. You went to university huh... Oh really... is that how that works? I'd think someone who went to Uni would be capable of independent thought but you're clearly not so I call bullshit. You're as much as psychologist as I am a super hero...
  • + 2
 thank god its over!!
[Reply]
  • + 17
 They should honestly just torch that rule all together. It sucks that the UCI is taking a sport of passion and trying to turn it into a corporate meat grinder. I'd hate to see what's coming next...
[Reply]
  • + 18
 This is the only thing from keeping me from going PRO!, that and my speed..........
[Reply]
  • + 14
 I know the logical comment is usually a very unpopular one here on Pinkbike, but the UCI could be attempting to be fair and, after realizing all of the backlash they would have to deal with, they're giving all of the unsanctioned event organizers time to register and jump under their respective country's federation without affecting this year's events? I think that, despite the rule being complete bullshit, this is a remarkably reasonable decision from the UCI -- don't look a gift horse in the mouth. One commenter above mentioned that he's going to boycott the UCI, but still watch the DHI races that the UCI puts on? Bro -- those races won't exist without the UCI, and, as downhilling stands right now? We need the UCI, even as much as we hate them. We need them for the exposure they've brought to DH because of their international standing, influence and 'officialness'. They're the only organization that has 'legitimized' downhilling, in the public's eye... We actually have insurance.


Now, am I a supporter of the UCI or their actions towards DH? F*ck no, I am absolutely not. They're bastards. However, the softening of their stance on this stupid rule because riders and companies spoke up has saved our asses this season. Maybe this is a sign of things to come when the UCI is indeed a federation that respects and works reasonable deals with all of the different disciplines? Then again, maybe not. But the last thing riders and companies need to be doing is boycotting -- sure, threaten to boycott, pull money, etc. But for god's sake, put some skin in the game! Complain somewhere else than PB! Write letters and blogs, make phone calls, pose reasonable and articulate arguments -- THAT is what will win us this game, not ranting on a website. If you truly hate the UCI, change it -- be part of it and change it from within. Become a racer and change the organization from that perspective, or an organizer with a voice. You have to be the change, folks.

Smile
  • + 5
 This rule is 100% NOT reasonable. Not now, not in 2014, not ever. The UCI is telling their license holders that they can only compete in UCI sanctioned events. This is a hardball attempt from the UCI to squash their competition, or to squeeze them into using UCI or national affiliate sanctioning, thus creating more revenue. It's a business decision. The UCI, USAC, etc... all just want to make a buck. The way they are going about it is, well, very un-cyclist. Those UCI and USAC exec's will be getting flats every time they go ride... if they ride at all.
  • + 2
 Dude. Reading comprehension much? I said the UCI's final DECISION about the rule is reasonable, not the rule itself. The rule is an attempt from the UCI to creat a monopoly and polarize grassroots MTB.
  • + 2
 in all fairness, you did sort of write a book. stopped after the 3rd line.Wink
  • + 4
 Ha ha, true! Smile But I made a good point. In all fairness, if he's not going to read the entire thing, he shouldn't make ignorant remarks or false retorts. "Despite the rule being complete bullshit..." Is about halfway through the first paragraph. But I guess one doesn't have to read all that well to be a keyboard jockey. Wink
[Reply]
  • + 9
 This rule is an obvious attempt to bully the top riders into choosing between the current big UCI back races (World cups/Champs etc) and the new bread of race formats (Enuro world series etc) in an attempt to crush these new formats before they get bigger and rival/make the point of the UCI questionable. Say what you will but the UCI should be making cycling accessable for all and i know that a big name rider in a local event will bring A.) more racers B.) more people to watch, who then might give raceing/riding a go C.) more race organisers, which will only progeress the sport.

a long hard look is needed
[Reply]
  • + 13
 they are still the same assholes that they were a few days ago in my eyes.
[Reply]
  • + 5
 I have just got back in to the great sport of MTB after almost 14 years of racing cars and sex drugs and rock n roll. WOW have things changed for the worst. All the crying about wheel size, all the marketing scams that this website displays that influence the sport and what kind of bike we ride and now this crap!!!! Cmon, this is a sport born from humans wanting to feel free, young and just feel good. F*^k your rules UCI, the great sport does not, nor did we ever need you or your rules. Down with the UCI and all they dont have to offer the sport. This sport needs to go back to its roots.... Friendly FUN!!!!!!!!!! stop taking it all so serious as you are just riding a bike. bike riding is fun not serious
[Reply]
  • + 6
 Hahahahahaha! What a bunch of idiots. I hope the feedback included a few pies in the face and some steamers on their doorstep!
[Reply]
  • + 3
 every licensed competitor should boycott uci events for a year. the license is to race in its events not too not race other events....i know pro's rely on there earnings but teams should back them on this.....strike, strike . strike.
[Reply]
  • + 3
 No one here would give up riding if there was no WC or any other pro level events. Look at the X Games, you dont need the UCI or any other body. Media coverage of visually interesting events is what is more appealing to the masses.
[Reply]
  • + 2
 I'm not sure who this actually affects? In the UK most events are run through BC from grass roots. BC here in the UK is the insurance provider and anyone running a non-sanctioned event may not be insured at all - Thus not insuring the riders at their events.
[Reply]
  • + 2
 DH1, DH1, DH1... It's because of the threat of groups, promoters, etc, like DH1.. The UCI want's to be in charge and stay in charge. Don't know if the ixs downhill is a UCI thing either. If the guys at Freecaster had a ton of cash to put up and RAN those events, UCI would look like a bit silly. Well, so far, Redbull tv's coverage is just okay. Rob is awesome. I kinda miss the 3 hours of "LIVE" coverage. That new-ish Enduro series, don't know if there are ties to the UCI. But DH1 was thinking about running or dabbling in Enduro or running in conjuction with enduro events (I might be mistaken. But I thought I read that somewhere) I think this rule might be more for road cyclists and the drug issue.

In the end, it's about money or who's meat is bigger. And just cuz you have a ton of cash or a huge sausage, it's how you look using what you have, so someone with a pocket full of nickles and a good 6" has frightened the old man...
[Reply]
  • + 3
 Just get rid of this rule. It's not necessary and it's uncalled for. What's the UCI going to think of next? Stop ruining mountain biking and just let people ride when ever they want to and where ever they want to!
[Reply]
  • + 2
 I agree with badbadleroybrown. Pro's on salaries should not be taking glory away from the amateur race scene, the point about the kid who works his ass off just for the chance to race and do well is a good one. If pro's are going to turn up to a local race series, why don't they have the decency to showcase, tutor, give something back to the scene, to the amateur riders that support them.

Someone mentioned in the 90's that MTB was huge and without the Uci... Eurosport and Grundig were sponsors for the UCi back then, and the biggest salary at the time was paid by Specialized to Shaun Palmer (to the best of my knowlege) and to compare that to the pro's of today I think they'd question the amount.

I believe that the UCI needs a change in attitude, not with regard to this rule enforcement but with mtb in general.
[Reply]
  • + 6
 UCI dance guide: one step back, two steps forward
  • + 3
 "two steps back, one step forward" more like
  • + 4
 or how about '3 steps' backward all together?
[Reply]
  • + 5
 Postpone it?? It's not going be better accepted next year... Get ride of it!!
[Reply]
  • + 1
 United States antitrust law United States antitrust law is a collection of federal and state government laws, which regulates the conduct and organization of business corporations, generally to promote fair competition for the benefit of consumers. The main statutes are the Sherman Act 1890, the Clayton Act 1914 and the Federal Trade Commission Act 1914. These Acts, first, restrict the formation of cartels and prohibit other collusive practices regarded as being in restraint of trade. Second, they restrict the mergers and acquisitions of organizations which could substantially lessen competition. Third, they prohibit the creation of a monopoly and the abuse of monopoly power.
[Reply]
  • + 2
 Let's look at it this way: how many of these uci political cronies actually ride a bike at all? Why is it these career politicians have any say what we ride, where we ride and how we compete?
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Say for example you work your arse off to buy your race kit, bike, pay for your travel to events. You train like hell to get results, you risk injury and repair costs for a podium etc.. So once all this is a factor and you turn up and you know that after all this prep, line choice and commitment you can podium, possibly win the points and prize to get something back for your efforts, only for it to be taken from you because a sponsored pro on a high salary with the best of private medical care and no gear replacement worries decides to show up for a little extra “practice”. In my view that’s wrong. It’s like a amateur weekend race at Knockhill being won by a smug Lewis Hamilton on his day off, whilst the runner up has just incurred £800 on tyres, £200 on brake disc replacements, £120 on fuel costs, possible child care costs for the weekend, a pissed off wife because he only won £500 for 2nd place. You get my point?
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Leroy, when, ever, have people been annoyed at local pro riders coming to a local race? Ill tell you, never.
We all love to see these guys ripping in the flesh. If you're not competitive and don't wish to be then you won't be racing in the elite/pro class. And if you do want to be competitive, what better than to have someone like sam hill to set a bench mark? So ehats the problem.?
here in aus, we dont get a lot of pros racing our national series, but recently we had Hill, Graves, Hannah, Kovarik and more, and it was awesome.
You're clutching at straws now mate, cool it.
[Reply]
  • + 3
 ok so we should enjoy the UCI WC this year, and start organizing another world series without them for 2014!!!!
[Reply]
  • + 4
 At least they listened. But only because they had to.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 someone should make another race circuit and say gtfo to uci imo, everyone should boycut UCI but i guess its impossible, it may also be the first in wait no not the first but one in many incoming stupid law by them
[Reply]
  • + 4
 It's good to hear that rider's objections had an influence on UCI...
  • + 2
 that's true, but for now they have not change a lot!
  • + 2
 Yeah but for how long? This really is ridiculous!
[Reply]
  • - 1
 Don't like the UCI? Want your own governing body? These guys are trying to offer an alternative: www.facebook.com/pages/MTBSO/226797040778108 Click the link, and click like! The more followers they get, the better. Time to safe the sport from greedy induviduals who are not in touch with the spirit of our great sport!
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Wait does that mean it's still "legal" to ride not UCI events or is the national cycling organisation deciding?
[Reply]
  • + 1
 UCI so what, I didn't get into mountain bikes for racing I love cycling on my own terms not someone else's.
[Reply]
  • + 2
 still not gonna buy a license this year..usa cycling can suck it!
[Reply]
  • + 2
 Back to NORBA that was the shit..
[Reply]
  • + 1
 What good will "postponing" do anything, doesn't really make much difference :/
[Reply]
  • + 1
 that's sh** for licensce riders these year! Hope they put this rule in there a** for next year.
sorry for the language
  • - 2
 "sorry for the language"

What? English?
[Reply]
  • + 2
 people power! be on your guards for when this comes up again!
[Reply]
  • + 0
 As an organiser of BC events I like having BC behind me - lots of support and help to make the events the best I can make them.
  • + 0
 yes but you shouldn't be forced to, it should be your choice
[Reply]
  • + 2
 I'm just going to race unsanctioned races as Ron Mexico.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Still .... would be nice to know why the creation of the rule in the first place ?
[Reply]
  • + 2
 Nice try UCI. We still think you suck though.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 "Oh snap! We f*cked up" Bunch of corporate retards being greedy.
[Reply]
  • + 1
 how many riders is working in UCI?
[Reply]
  • + 1
 UCI go regulate another sport like mountain hiking, or wind surfing?
[Reply]
  • + 2
 Damage has been done!
[Reply]
  • + 1
 UCI kills the pleasure and the reason for which we bought our bikes
[Reply]
  • + 1
 postponement???? throw it out the freaking window!
[Reply]
  • + 2
 Momentary celebration...
[Reply]
  • + 1
 At last, the least common of the senses: COMMON SENSE
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Bring back the NORBA!
[Reply]
  • + 1
 Suck Balls UCI!
[Reply]
  • - 3
 The best part of all this is that none of you idiots with your panties in a wad even have UCI licenses so you're all outraged over something that doesn't apply to you in any way. Awesome...
  • + 4
 The flow on effect of such a change affects the entire community of mountain biking. People want to see their hometown riders at local events. They want to see them in fun events. Even then it's not even the point. The move could prove illegal in some countries where similar things have been tried. On top of this it was an obvious attempt to try and strongarm the Enduro series which they failed to accommodate for in spite of it's rising popularity and marketability. This has nothing to do with the usual kids talking shit on pinkbike or others being keyboard warriors, though there is certainly no shortage of it.
  • - 1
 So you're saying that the UCI wrote a rule years before the Enduro series was ever conceived of with the specific intention of later using that rule to strongarm the as yet non-existent Enduro series??? Rule 1.2.019 has been on the books for something like 10 years and has only loosely been enforced until now. That's part of the misconception... this isn't a new rule. They were just stating that they were going to begin enforcing it more strictly.
  • + 2
 Just as soon as the series is announced and major teams attempt to make a foray into it. Far more than a coincidence I'm afraid. The UCI has been counter-productive in the mountain bike world since day one. It's not in the sports best interests, plain and simple. I'm not sure if you genuinely believe what you're spouting or whether you're just being contrarian.
  • + 1
 I get that the UCI is easy to hate, but you can't argue that international pro's are making truck loads more money today than they were 20 years ago and that mountain biking's public profile is as high as it's ever been.

From my perspective... this ensures competitive equality. You don't want your "amateur" domestic pros competing against your top international pros from a competitive perspective. It's cool for the guys in the middle to mix it up with either extreme but when you have the opposite extremes battling it's a competitive imbalance that's hard to sell and that encourages injury because you have guys riding over their head trying to match people way out of their league. Now, that's not a big deal when you're selling to freecaster... but if you want to watch UCI World Cup DH in high def live on network tv then you have to realize that you're playing to a different crowd than the grassroots bunch that thought it was so awesome to see Duncan Riffle crack a beer on Heckler's Rock. So... they're basically saying top domestic license holders can mix it with the international guys in national events and 'amateur' domestic pros can mix it up with the top domestic license holders but international guys can't mix it up with the amateur pros. Just like they do with road... This ensures that its a competitive race and not a forgone conclusion.
  • + 1
 As for being contrarian... not at all. I don't race pro and don't have a license international or otherwise so I don't have a dog in this fight. I'm just sitting back looking at the complete picture from a business perspective. There's what, 8 wc dh races now? If all the top races were sanctioned that could grow that number to 12 wc races... sell tv rights and sponsorship for the series, share profits, grow sport. It's smart business. Mountain biking is at a crossroads & needs to decide if its a real "professional" sport or if its a mid-size grassroots sport. Personally, I'd like to see mtb go full on pro... I'd like to start the weekend with the idea of watching some enduro racing on saturday in HD followed by some wc dh on sunday for a dozen weeks a year. But the reality is we aren't going to get there without taking steps like this IMO.
[Reply]
  • + 0
 TOO LITTLE TOO LATE!
[Reply]
  • - 1
 All this does is allow pros to race against you
  • + 1
 Whats the problem in that it gives you more of a challenge. who cares if you are on the podium as long as you are having fun and embracing the challenge with a positive attitude. If all you want to do is stand on top of the podium there is a novice and or beginner class for that.
  • - 1
 Oh the irony.... The whole hissy fit argument being made is that many UCI pros cannot make a living racing only UCI events so they must supplement their UCI events with unsanctioned events... Where they show up to kick you ass so they can get the results, exposure, and prizes of podiums placings.

If where you stood on the podium didn't matter, UCI pros would be racing exhibition classes for love of the sport... the reality however, is that UCI pros are stealing results from young kids who are working 60 hours a week at bike shops to get enough cash to build their rides and driving hours to go to the races hoping for a podium, praying for a win, dreaming of big sponsors... But hey, Gwiny and Gee are bored this weekend so f*ck the young up and commers! How exactly is that good for the sport?
  • + 4
 If you cannot hang with the pro's then race in another category.
  • + 0
 I AM THAT KID THAT WORKS COUNTLESS HOURS AND DRIVES COUNTLESS HOURS TO BE ABLE TO RACE. And have been for four years now from when i got my first job at a shop when i was fifteen. I personally welcome the challenge of any racer, especially pros. When I'm done with my run the first thing i do is check my time against the top pros. Every time I'm a little closer and when my times are comparable enough to Gwin and Gee That is when my work will be recognized. And if one day I'm on the podium with Gee, Gwinn, Peaty or any other top pro, that is when I will know my work has paid off. And if I never get there I can at least say I had one HELL of a good time trying, and have no regrets.
[Reply]
Below threshold threads are hidden

Post a Comment



Copyright © 2000 - 2014. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv92 0.063470
Mobile Version of Website