Thought I’d pass this along to anyone who competes in MTB
http://usacycling.org/news/user/story.php?id=4545
That shit pisses me off. Also… u lads hear about the new aerobar rule for collegiate?
No bars offering forearm support in ANY race. ITT’s and TTT’s. It fucking sucks ass because now people who have spent money on designated TT bikes have to redo the entire cockpit in order to compete on essentially a heavy aero frame.
USAC for collegiate is becoming the UCI.
[quote=EivlEvo]That shit pisses me off. Also… u lads hear about the new aerobar rule for collegiate?
No bars offering forearm support in ANY race. ITT’s and TTT’s. It fucking sucks ass because now people who have spent money on designated TT bikes have to redo the entire cockpit in order to compete on essentially a heavy aero frame.
USAC for collegiate is becoming the UCI.[/quote]
Also no disc wheels.
They’re trying to keep costs down, I can respect that.
I didn’t hear/read about the no disc wheel nonsense?
You know Heath… I’m not so sure what I think about this now… all of my teammates (myself included) that have now designated paperweights shaped like TT bikes wre wholeheartedly against it.
But honestly… I don’t think I’m that against it now, it does more or less “even the playing field”, but originally I started typing about how it shouldn’t be for every category. Like maybe A riders should be allowed, since they may go pro or olympic, but realistically speaking… if they did, they would get “sponsored” anyways and thus get new equipment at that phase.
Hmmm… but then why (recently) allow TT helmets? and other such nonsense like why not do it for regular USAC races???
don’t most collegiate racers also do other amateur racing (where aero equipment is allowed)?
i don’t see the point
What’s annoying is no lead time. People could have held off buying expensive aero stuff in preparation. Also considering that aerobars are the least expensive part of a TT setup, it seems a little odd to me to ban them in the name of cost cutting. Aero wheels I understand (though people will just use 1080’s, which aren’t cheap).
EivilEvo, your bike is still fine, you just need to throw drops on it. Which is what everyone will do. A P4 with drops and 1080’s will still cost a bucket of money, be marginally faster than a road bike with a Fast Forward seatpost on it, and be totally legal. I generally tend to think trying to level the playing field in cycling is pissing in the wind. There’s always going to be legal expensive stuff, and it will always make a marginal difference.
I totally agree with pissing in the wind… also… my post was slightly misleading. My designated TT bike is my road bike since I blow at TT’s. I use clip ons and some reynolds stratus. I meant “(myself included)” as being against it.
But it does sort of suck… I think they should have maybe gave a 4 year runup to this so that people who have them can still use them and people who don’t can evaluate the purchase price of one.
In other news tho… maybe some sick deals on ebay on TT stuff.
They should all just be forced to ride NJS bikes for every singe cycling event.
as i mentioned above, don’t most people who ride collegiate (especially those who do it well, with high-end stuff) also race in other amateur categories?
how about yourself? do you only do USCA stuff?
Isn’t this from UCI rules? (I think I remember hearing that). I would imagine that USAC will follow suit if so.
Oh no… I race in other aspects as well. But TTT’s aren’t my fav or as popular in other aspects of cycling because there isn’t as much of a team focus.
Our team is relatively small and thus we’re all really close. Doing a TTT with these guys is different (at least in Buffalo) being on some shop team where everyone is there to win anyways. We function more as a team.
But for the past few years I’ve done more collegiate racing than “regular” USAC simply because of convenience I suppose.