Time Trial / Time Trialling / TT

if the issue is his position

It's not the position per se, but the equipment used to allow him to maintain that position while expending less energy than somebody using an identical position without the prohibited forearm support.

I know CTT don’t play by UCI rules but those bars are UCI legal.

I have zero idea how such is the wording.

Isn’t the solution to put the road bike tts on road bike courses?

I like the quote from that story from the guy who wrote the CTT regs that he thought you should be able to do a crit, a sportive and a TT on the same bike in which case, mission accomplished.

I don't know about sportives but the rider pictured has been racing and winning road events with this position, so certainly agree with this.

I don't really get this. The (intentionally loosely drafted) regs don't say you can't use equipment that makes it easier to do X or Y. It says you can't puppy paws, for example simulate a tribar position by resting forearms.
There are pictures of other riders resting their forearms on handlebars of different types. If the equipment is the issue then there will need to be a lot rider investigations...

It says you can't puppy paws, for example simulate a tribar position by resting forearms.

The reg says "Riders may not...simulate a Tri-Bar position by resting the forearms on the handlebars". The offence is the supporting of the forearms on the handlebars. If the arms were in the same position without support, there's no foul. If the specific bars were used but the rider held the hooks for the duration of the event, there's no foul.

I'm not here to defend the regulations, which are in general and in this specific area an absolute clusterfuck of inept and inconsistent construction, but under any conventional rules of interpretation, the instant your forearm touches the handlebar in a road bike TT, you're in breach of the regulation. The fact that other people were doing it to a greater or lesser extent with different equipment doesn't excuse the main target of the complaints, it means there might be plenty more DQs to come before we get the the final result comprising only those riders who rode in compliance with the regulations.

the instant your forearm touches the handlebar in a road bike TT and you simulate a tribar position, you're in breach of the regulation.

It has to be both.

I read the regulation as banning puppy paws, with the added clarification as to forearm support enabling the position you could adopt using tribars being the basis of puppy paws. It's not a separate area of DQ.

I agree, the drafting is as always, full of grey. If the handlebars George used are the issue, then ban them specifically from the road bike category along with trispokes.

Ultimately, riders complaining about this are those with a lot of watts who turned up on the day and lost by a large margin to someone who dedicated time and effort to riding in a very uncomfortable position, and who posted the equipment he was using in advance of the race...whether he keeps his title or not, the whole episode reflects pretty poorly.

It has to be both.

No, it is one thing. You may not simulate tribars. How do we know you're simulating tribars? Your forearm is resting on the handlebar. That's the test. You can simulate the limb positions all you like, because we're not testing for those, we're looking for a specific contact between body and equipment as the sole and absolute test of whether you're simulating the use of tribars.

I read the regulation as banning puppy paws, with the added clarification as to forearm support enabling the position you could adopt using tribars being the basis of puppy paws. It's not a separate area of DQ.

That's not what OR means, in either logic or legal construction. The list of things, only one of which has to be found for there to be a breach, is

1. Puppy paws
   
2. Any other use of forearm support not covered by 1
   

I think that largely we are in agreement, but you keep saying that forearms touching the bar = simulating a tribar position and that the regs state it as an absolute test - that's ignoring the previous part of the regulation.

If your interpretation was correct then we would need to DQ anyone riding on the drops as this doesn't pass your test, as your forearm touches the handlebar in this position. Although this is presuming you've ridden the drops of a modern handlebar in an aero position, which I doubt most people complaining about George even have.

In any case, I had to DNS due to flu but at this rate I'm going to win the cap given how many riders should be DQ'd by this regulation...

Out of curiosity, how much did he win by?

I love how the only time TTs get talked about is silly helmets, silly handlebars...

39 seconds I think

I slightly disagree with tester - I think the regulation means (or is intended to mean) you can’t ride puppy paws but if you hands are on the hoods then forearms on the tops then fine. I think people are trying to bend the regulations to ban something based on how it looks. They should just regulate the reach allowed on the drop bars but let this result stand imo

that's ignoring the previous part of the regulation.

What, the puppy paws bit? Under ordinary rules of construction and interpretation, we can delete that without affecting the following part because that's how the OR operator works. If the law says "it shall be an offence to kill a person OR to attempt to kill a person", you're still in trouble for the attempt even if it didn't succeed.

riding on the drops as this doesn't pass your test, as your forearm touches the handlebar in this position

Mine doesn't

I love how the only time TTs get talked about is silly helmets, silly handlebars...

Thread has been a bit dead of late. How is the scene?

They should just regulate

The "they" in that sentence is us, and somebody has to volunteer to do the measuring and donate the money to buy the ruler.

How is the scene?

Much the same as ever, as far as I can tell from my bi-annual dip into TTF.

https://www.lfgss.com/comments/17369939/

I love how the only time TTs get talked about is silly helmets, silly handlebars...

Well, I did try to talk about something else in my post above.......but hardly anyone seems interested in actual riding or competition.

When I was an active TT rider (70's - 00's) discussion about kit was fairly limited - we mostly talked about training, fitness and what events we would ride. I think the general view was that kit had a fairly marginal effect and, even if it did, this detracted from one's personal prowess.

I find the discussion about these regulations deeply depressing. There seemed to be some hope, with the road bike concept, that we could get away from obsessing about bikes and go back to thinking about the riders; evidently this has failed.

My suggestion would be to forget definitions and appoint a 'Road Bike Referee' who would have power on the day to reject bikes which were not road bike 'in spirit'.

My suggestion would be to forget definitions and appoint a 'Road Bike Referee' who would have power on the day to reject bikes which were not road bike 'in spirit'

I've considered a similar concept, but with a jury randomly selected from participants. The regulations are for the riders, so they should be by the riders.

Thread has been a bit dead of late. How is the scene?

1 Attachment

my bi-annual dip into TTF

Are you fucking mad?

I've considered a similar concept, but with a jury randomly selected from participants. The regulations are for the riders, so they should be by the riders.

Something along these lines should not be difficult to achieve. After all, we're not talking about anything unduly harsh, like suspensions.

All that needs to happen is that the offending bike/rider would be excluded from the road bike section of the event - so he could still ride in the 'open' section for a time. He would not have wasted his entry fee and petrol.

“The spirit” however is so vague

Whilst I think a tt frame with 1000 quid handlebars designed specifically to give you a tt position whilst looking like road bars is not the spirit with more aero benefits hanging 12 inches off your arse with also what looks like a chest fairing is not in the spirit it is a roadbike for all intents and purposes.

This is why I gave up tt in 2010. It’s just a ball ache of emotion, its way too much of a weapons war than a true test as is the idea.

its way too much of a weapons war than a true test as is the idea.

The 'true test' should be of the competitor as an athlete, rather than their ability as a shopper.

I absolutely can understand why you gave up time trialling - you and so many others!

'The Spirit' is meant to be vague - it should be left up to the referee to decide what's a road bike - that should discourage chancers from turning up with dodgy TT bikes and claiming they've got a road bike.

Yeah I feel a bit conflicted. On the one hand (in my time as a tt-er, so all of the 2010s) it was always about the bike, from nick bowdleresque fairings and xav’s homemade helmet and leg aerofoils, to sawn off bars and drillium in hill climbs. I love the slightly mental nature of wringing everything one can out of a bike. But the problem is that previously it seemed that most of these madcap innovations were “relatively” affordable. Real enthusiasts were out home testing different positions, but it seemed more about an investment of time rather than money. Last tt I did, a near rival turned up with £10k+ of new gear and tunnel time and beat me by 2minutes. It feels like there is nothing I can do with a 2004 bike and second hand parts. Maybe the older hands will say it was always thus but it just feels like a money game now.

Then again, you’re only racing yourself, right?