Coach Chris Kilmurray Weighs In On 2019 UCI MTB Rulebook Changes
Chris Kilmurray, coach to riders like Tahnee Seagrave, Greg Callaghan, Greg Williamson and others, chimes in on how he thinks the 2019 UCI MTB rule changes are going to affect next year's racing.
2019 MTB rule changes
For all the stick the UCI gets, the past handful of years have mainly seen positive or at least progressive rule changes. At the core of most of these changes is a collaborative process between the UCI’s MTB focused staff and the Elite teams that compete in the World Cup series. While it’s not all been plain sailing and rosy for riders and teams, the rulebook does need to advance, grow and develop with the sport of DH and, by and large, given the bureaucratic tendencies of the UCI, the development of rules & regulations for DH has been, these past few years, somewhat directed by the key stakeholders. 2019 sees some welcome and some surprising changes but overall changes that advance the professionalism of the sport.
Course Marking
The 2018 Rulebook had a very arbitrary “you must enter the course where you exit” rule concerning leaving the course. This was brought in in 2016 after issues with interpretation of the then rules which left the definition of “advantage” up to the president of the commissaires panel. In 2018 with a few high profile disqualifications the need for a more ironclad rule on how the courses should be marked and defined was needed as that is what, in the end, governs then need for a disqualification. The changes for 2019 all seem positive, “tape” and “stakes” are now both mentioned for course marking and the importance of the latter for a disqualification has been clarified.
Remember when Bernard Kerr snuck out the tape at Leogang?
Wheel Size
Business up front – party out back? The Mullet bike? I have no idea who lobbied for this change but the general rule of a bike needed front and rear wheels of the same diameter is gone for MTB competition. Again contrary to the opinion of many, the UCI have been very relaxed in applying the road cycling focused rules of Rule Book 1 to off-road disciplines; recognising the need for the sport's rules to reflect its rapid development – but turning a blind eye is a bit different to actively highlight and allowing “frankenbikes”. Maybe like our distant cousin, motocross, we will settle on a slightly bigger front versus rear wheel? DH and enduro now have the option of odd sized wheels, but not XC .. maybe I’m missing something? But either way rule 1.03.018 overrides all else and in theory bans 29ers?
Santa Cruz was quick to jump on the 29er bandwagon.
Running Order and Protected Status
The 2018 T.V. running order was a mess – but was a change brought on mainly by a few select DH teams. It was a change that resulted in a less than well-worded rule in the rulebook and a quick scramble to sort it before finals at DH WC #1 in Losinj followed by a season-long mess! It was always going to be a “try it and see” change and we clearly saw it didn’t work – so back to a more sensible system. Although the wording is very awkward in the rule amendments, there are not 5 spots for men and 3 for women for non-protected riders to start in their reverse qualifying order for finals. A positive and workable system. The top 3 junior men and women from current standings are now also protected for finals which is a hotly debated change among some team managers.
The contest for the hot seat will be back to its high-suspense olden-days in 2019.
Timed Training
A small but potentially important change for a select few riders. Juniors from the top 10 male and top 3 female WC ranking of 2018 will be allowed timed practice in 2019 at the first race. It may seem small but that timed session can be crucial practice time for riders – so as a first-year Elite on a new track in Maribor it could be a season-changing positive for some.
eMTB, Snowbikes and Pumping
I’m not sure what to say here, but I have some pretty strong eOpinions. That aside it seems to me that if the UCI legislate for these events they are more likely to get event organises on their books, so to speak, early. Cycling disciplines are growing, none faster than ebiking. So it makes sense. The standout oddity for me is allowing 20” wheels in MTB pump track competitions… that’s just BMX and they are certainly faster around a pump track than a 24” wheel… right?
The changes to the rulebook are highlighted in red:
Photos: Matt Wragg, Andy Vathis, Paris Gore, Ross Bell, Paul Cram, Dave Trumpore & Hannes Berger.
Author Info:
Must Read This Week
[UPDATED] Final Elite XC Results & Overall Standings from the Mairiporã XC World Cup 2024
42190 views
42190 views
Sign Up for the Pinkbike Newsletter - All the Biggest, Most Interesting Stories in your Inbox
PB Newsletter Signup
1.2.019 No licence holder may participate in an event that has not been included on a national, continental or world calendar or that has not been recognised by a national federation, a continental confederation or the UCI.
Depending on the circumstances, a national federation and the UCI may grant special exceptions for particular races or events run in its own country.
Particular races or events may consist of:
- events organised occasionally only and which do not belong to the organised
sports movement;
- events whose format is not covered by the UCI regulations.
Any national federation intending to grant a special exception must submit its reasoned request to the UCI administration in the beginning of the season and at least two months before the respective event. The decision of the UCI in this respect is final and shall not be subject to appeal.
============================================================
I believe Brook MacDonald and a few more got their wings clipped for doing a street race in Chile?
No MTB riders have been sanctioned, just a slap-on-the-wrist letter to explain that they competed in an unsanctioned race and to check before they enter a race that it is on a calendar.
The recent Red Bull Hardline had a UCi Commissaire appointed. Will we see riders made to wear rear number boards, National/World Champs jerseys etc..
Food for thought folks..
Those a*sholes have their hands in everything as if they deserved it. They are here to serve US, we do not serve them. So prohibiting athletes to participate in races where they make probably the biggest impact bring most new souls to the sport is pure bollocks. This is where they inspire kids and fans, by showing up on a local race. This is where they do some of the best ambassadorship for their brands because they MEET people in person.
So Sorry, f*ck UCI and National Cycling Federations. I reinforce it: you are here to Serve Us not the other way around.
The rule is bullshit and was controversial in the US a couple of years ago with the rise of endurance races that were operating under a different sanction. Fatbike races commonly operate under a different sanction so that studded tires can be used.
Thus, EWS riders (along with other non-UCI events such as Crankworkz) will then need to have UCI licenses while the event itself will need UCI Commissaire/s present.
There is a concept called "Duty of Care" - This concept applies to all aspects of life. We live in a litigious world. When someone trips on the footpath and hurts their ankle the first question the often ask is who can they sue - if they don't ask this then their friends and relatives ask it.
So if you want to know who to look to to "blame" for "excessive rules" - look to understand their evolution
I am 100% fine with paying the BMX club double of what they are asking but I don't want to support Swedish Cycling Federation with a tiniest penny.
en.static.uci.deltatre.net/inside-uci/rules-and-regulations/regulations
See Part I.
Wait, what?
From the header of the "Technical Specifications" section that contains that rule:
"Except where stated to the contrary, the following technical specifications shall apply to bicycles used in road, track and cyclocross racing.
The specific characteristics of bicycles used in mountain bike, BMX, BMX Freestyle, trials, indoor cycling and paracycling for riders with disabilities are set out in the part regulating the discipline in question."
The preamble to the technical specifications part (rule 1.03.011 onwards) states "Except where stated to the contrary, the following technical specifications shall apply to bicycles used in road, track and cyclo-cross racing."
Neither 1.03.018 or any other of the 1.03.xxx regs after 1.03.010 have any impact on any kind of MTB racing.
Run 29+ if you want, it's all good!
That's definitely a mistake. There is no part of 1.03.018 that applies to MTBs. It's even stated within the text of 1.03.018 that its provisions apply to road and CX.
How many times does a protected rider (top 20 in standings) not qualify in the the top 30? How many times does a top 10 rider in the standings not qualify in the top 30? More importantly, how many times does someone who finishes the season in the top 20 have qualifying results out of the top 30 not including mechanicals and DNFs die to injury?
In other words, how often is someone who has a top 20 qualifying result being bumped from TV coverage for a protected rider who didn't qualify well? We don't need Gwin sitting in the hot seat for 50 riders because he has a flat in qualifying and not see his run (and i know Redbull could record it, but its harder at that time because the time gaps between racers' start times are smaller so coverage is limited).
I think the start list should be in reverse order of qualifying times as in years prior. However, if any top 20 riders (i.e. protected) did qualify not in the top 30 (tv spots) they would bump out the riders who had the slowest qualifying times in the top 30 and be order in reverse order of qualifying times.
This has to happen if we want riders at the top end of the sport to be paid well and attract sponsorship dollars. That will hopefully lead to more teams, more coverage, and more races...
Part of what makes this sport exciting is that sometimes unknown or little known riders can get on a hot streak to give the top guys a run for their money, i.e. Reece Wilson. I don't know about you but I would much rather see someone who is hot at the moment take their race run rather than someone who was on point last race or last season.
Go to @EliotJackson site. Reece Wilson is a top 20 guy (was all season), so like you I want to see him race. However, he averaged 35th in qualifying, which would mean, on average, you wouldn't see him on TV per your metrics.
If you look at the overall season Dak Norton is the only guy who had a podium level result who wasn't in the top 20. My point here is while we all love the randomness, I don't think it is a random as well all think.
When I mentioned Reece I was mostly talking about one race in particular(can't remember which one) where he was pushed off the broadcast by protected riders... if he qualified in 35 but is 20 overall I still don't believe he earned his spot on TV for that particular race.
Being paid as a top 20 rider is all well and fine but it still doesn't mean other people who have earned their spot at that venue should be pushed out. Every weekend it is a different venue with varying weather and conditions and the people who do best on the day should be rewarded per their effort not based on their standing. No one should be entitled unless you earn it that weekend!
And I didnt even start talking about what mess this would cause in the mtb industry...
Rim width I THINK is in relation to cyclo cross...I think...
Regulation for MOUNTAIN BIKE state...
version on 01.01.2019
4.1.044 For Mountain Bike downhill and enduro events, as opposed to the general rule defined in article 1.3.006, the two wheels can be of a different diameter but should comply with the specifications of article 1.3.018.
Article 1.3.018 states...
"Equipment 14/14
NON-STANDARD WHEELS IN CONFORMITY WITH ARTICLE 1.3.018 1.3.018
Wheels of the bicycle may vary in diameter between 70 cm maximum and 55 cm minimum, including the tyre. For the cyclo-cross bicycle the width of the tyre shall not exceed 33 mm and it may not incorporate any form of spike or stud."
70cm diameter including the tyre is guess what? 27.5 inches
IMO SC is the ultimate bandwagon brand - from R&D through branding and consumers - it all reeks of "don't do what others are not doing, call it your own thing and slap on that attitude-badge for bonus points"
SC is rapidly becoming the new Specialized IMO
I don't think that any rider should be protected! Puncture, crash or be injured doesn't give you the right over someone who has earned the spot on the weekend. This rule was brought in to stop people weather watching and gambling on an earlier start time for race runs, all part of the game really and a risk.
Practice should be practice, everyone, no matter what their ability should practice together, the current rule gives an unfair advantage to the riders near the cut.
Seed the next race off the overall in reverse order or the previous race.
Wheel size - Who cares.
Out of the tape - Poles become important, how does a tree factor into this? Out of the tape is out of the tape, this should include bending over poles and jumping over the bent pole, stops riders taking liberties on the taped tacks. Bottom of the pole should qualify as the pole, or a special pole for specific stumps etc to make it so they can't be hopped etc.
Basically money talks, and to some degree this is protecting the money - which I think is right.
The sport should be about performance and a equal and level playing field, not who can buy it!
How does YT make the TV broadcast look any slicker, the broadcast is put on by an independent team, its not like a rider who isn't in the top teams is going to turn up late and make the broadcast look unprofessional, that is disrespectful to the other riders and teams. Having a big bus in the pits makes no difference to me watching the live stream, that bus will still be there for the public visiting the venue (or if Andorra, no it wont as the pits are at the top of the track, so nowhere near the action).
Its the same argument for when people say "the World Cup should be here, here and here".
No, the World Cup is wherever RedBull want it to be, because THEY pay for it and that's why it has a massive audience compared to what it got before RB did the coverage.
The regs have to be for the benefit of the money. Protected riders is to garuantee airtime of the sponsors brands. If you don't protect the big money riders, the money won't come to the sport
Some points that you make are incorrect though.
Regarding destinations / venues.
The local organiser submits a tender to the UCI, I can't remember the exact cost. It's between 30k euro and 40k euro, depending on how many years you are willing to tender for. It is then the organisers job to make a profit. RB and the UCI do place some tight regs on the local organiser though, especially media wise and making sure Mercedes have enough expo.
Audience growth.
Contentious subject. Data not clear enough. Certainly not bigger than when it was on Eurosport and terrestrial.
Whitely has been around long enough to see the cyclic nature of DH is an old battleaxe and works hard for his riders. Money has been here before, we had Eurosport, broadcast TV (The First mtb World Cup at Ft Bill in 2002 achieved its highest ever viewing figures - broadcast on Channel 4 UK) . It is true he lobbied harder than anyone else for the rule changes.
DH is a sport full of risk, and money should not be able to buy you out of the risk of a rider not getting air time due a mechanical. You invest in racing - you accept that risk. If you don't have the stomach for it, invest elsewhere.
I've sat on nearly every side of this argument, and despite it all, I still think we should never sacrifice sporting integrity for money. The last thing DH needs is to become a square, corporate, stale sport ran by suits.
Haven't the protected riders (who gained that status by consistently posting good finishes) also "earned" that spot? I would argue they have earned the right to be there much more so than a rider who may have just put down one good run in qualifying.
You're focussed on the now, and like a few hard lobbyists can't look at the whole picture and DH holistically from the bottom up, rather than the top down. Top down doesn't work. We see that in society and now in DH, as grass roots dies. We need stability, not continuous growth.
I raised the NZ Rugby union story before - they took the approach that DH is taking, poured money into the elite aspect hoping it would drage people in and it eventually affected them hugely, as grass roots participation suffered massively. It went the other way to what they thought it would. They pivoted quickly, and opened pathways for players to move through the ranks based on talent alone, while reconnecting the sport to all backgrounds.
I'd be happy for DH to go the way it is going if some mangers looked beyond the "now" and helped develop regional, national and continental pathways for riders to move up.
In this respect, Baller has nailed this for the EWS and has shown that profitability and doing the right thing for a sport can work.
In short, Kathy Sessler knows whats up, and so do Santa Cruz.
Initially I found some of the protection rules frustrating, but grew to understand and appreciate their necessity
Money does talk, but at what point does the money potentially remove some of the spark from the sport.
There is something about knowing that everyone has to qualify, that everyone has the same practice and that everyone is at the same risk, regardless of how consistent they have done in previous races.
The format from last year meant that riders of similar ability were training together, does this make for closer racing? Arguably yes, but it also means that its easier for the top riders to see the other top riders lines that they did not see and therefore gain a competitive advantage that they may not have had.
If a rider is under pressure, we had this with Gwin, Minnaar in 2017 then they can choose what races to enter knowing that the race run will bring them points. Yes they have the ability to score those points but they also have the brains to be able to practice less, throw seeding and still have the energy for a race run, would they have placed as highly in that race run if they had to put full effort into practice and seeding? Who knows but I would say not.
Dh is and always will be a small participation sport, any moneys that come into the sport are great, at the moment the investment from the likes of YT is probably mostly focused on riders wages, those riders, like all athletes will make other money from sponsorship deals. Its not a life long career after all and being higher risk, injury can come.
I stand by my slightly rose tinted view that the sport should be as fair and equal as possible. The difference in ability of riders who are qualifying now is small enough, probably due to the professionalism of the riders and the narrowing of the competitive gap due to new technologies that a top rider qualifying lower down the order wont catch another rider in a race run. Wouldn't it be nice if we could keep Dh real and not make it about money and protecting riders.
I think for 99% of people would be happier with a bike with the same sized wheels.