Why is the UCI Fighting Time Trial Helmet Innovation? | THEMOVE+
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 5 июн 2024
- Johan Bruyneel and Spencer Martin from the Beyond the Peloton Newsletter break down the UCI’s recent controversial decision to ban a key piece of the Specialized time trial helmet's aerodynamic design, as well as announcing a decision to re-examine its own rules, likely it an attempt to roll back the increasingly radical time trial helmet designs cropping up across the top teams. Johan and Spencer attempt to figure out the logic behind the process and speculate if this will deter future sponsor investment/innovation and what the landscape for aero helmets will be when the dust finally settles.
WEDŪ: wedu.team
Shop WEDŪ Men's Apparrel: wedu.team/collections/mens
Shop WEDŪ Women's Apparrel: wedu.team/collections/womens
WEDŪ Travel: wedu.team/pages/themove-classics
Instagram: / wedu
Facebook: / wedusport
Twitter: / wedusport 
Спорт
![BETA SQUAD vs AMP FOOTBALL MATCH [OFFICIAL STREAM]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/ChEmvP52p0U/mqdefault.jpg)
The thing I find surprising is that any of these helmets were approved in the first place. This has got nothing to do with whether I like them or not, but when you look at all of the other rules that restrict aero devices on bikes and clothing, keep the shape of bike (fairly) traditional etc, these helmets are way out there.
the uci just needs to pick a date janurary 1st or whatever and make a cutoff. i believe their statement is reasonable these helmets are not doing their primary function which is to protect the head of the rider. look at kung at worlds etc.
If the helmet is conform all rules and already aproved by the UCI, than Visma is only smart (And once again ahead of the others) to create a helmet that is so aerodynamic. The UCI does have no rules about a helmet not being aerodynamic.
@@swissbiggy that is incorrect, the UCI does have rules, it’s why the weird sock thing that Remco and his team have been wearing has been banned. The rules say something about needing to have a purpose such as safety. There’s a whole history of aerodynamic devices getting banned. Also Visma aren’t the only smart ones because there’s several teams running crazy new aero helmets, it’s just Visma has the one that looks the stupidest which is why people are talking about it
@@MattSwain1 And the helmet from Visma is approved by the UCI. It is within all regulations and safer than previous helmets, since it does have a bigger visor and riders can see more (thus safer). On top of that the helmet did pass the necessary crash test, thus it does apply to all safety regulations.
And some people find it an ugly helmet and others not. But that can never be a reason to change the UCI rules.
If cycling is not about innovation we can return to bicycles without gears and riders racing in wool sweaters, just like the old days.
Cycling is always about innovation and marginal gains, why else are we now racing in carbon bikes and all using ketones... Why do we shift electronic etc etc etc ? Not because we keep living in the past..
Carbon bikes, electronic shifters, ketones etc etc etc have shit to do with safety and everything to do with time gain only...
And these helmets are just the next step. We aim"t living in the 90's anymore after all. 😉✌️
@@MattSwain1 P.S wearing a sock around your neck has shit to do with safety, but wearing a helmet on your head is. That is quite a difference if I may say so.
All respect for your vision on this matter of course. But let's agree that we disagree this time. 👍✌️
I see Rick Moranis in Spaceballs when I see the new helmet😂😂
I think it's more of the Alien head from the movie.
Wait until the teams figure out that a rider growing a full beard and waxing its down so that it creates a aero shroud between the head and chest. it'll be known as the ZZTop effect.
Also, the UCI rule does not allow for a fairing on the bike, so will the UCI now come out with a rule regarding placing a fairing on the rider?
Master riders in every major city in the world, who treat their local weekly ITT as the World Championship, will all rush out to buy this helmet.
Ah yes all the doctors and dentists who lack fitness try to buy free speed wherever they can. Sad!
@@paddymurphy-oconnor8255 We are not talking about overweight people or people who have zero stamina. We are talking about the tens of millions of people who train whole year long and who love to compete at lower level competitions. In many parts of the world you have Amateur/Master competitions several times a week, although not many ITT will be part of such competitions (I give you that. ✌). People who participate in such races do train the whole year and are often part of Amateur cycling teams. Even those teams are spending money on better material, ketones, better food programm etc etc etc.
You can't race all kind of amateur races of +/-200 km in all kind of weather, and on all kind of profiles if you don't train for it. Such an idea is just dumb, it's like saying that you can run a marathon without having to train a full year for such.
It’s a rich man’s hobby @@swissbiggy
I know I'm in the minority here and will (some say rightly) get slated for this but....... I really like these helmets and will be annoyed if they are banned. I like innovation. I like when clever people use their brains to go faster. Everyone is saying they're ugly and this is damaging the image of the sport. They are saying that if cycling looks a certain way, the average public isn't going to relate to it. NEWS FLASH: in our spare time we choose to shave our legs and ride around in colourful tight lycra! The general public already thinks we are a bunch of weirdos! If the UCI doesn't want innovation, let's make everyone ride around in woollen shorts and jerseys on steel bikes with few gears and crappy brakes because "that's what Merckx rode". Everyone laughed at the GB team in 2011 when they showed up to the world road championships in skin suits....... Until they won and then suddenly the aesthetic of the peleton changed. Anyone in TT helmets looks silly no matter which one they ride in. We lost the right to say what does and doesn't look good a long time ago. I want to see the pinnacle of the sport pushing the boundaries of what's possible. We compete in a sport where it is impossible to separate the advancements in technology from the athletic performance. We've seen what happens when the UCI rolls technology back when they bought in the athletes hour record. They killed the hour record for a decade. No one was interested in seeing people ride slowly. Stifling innovation kills the sport.
Yea, you know people are heavily biased against you when your sport demands that you wear skin tight bodysuits with no underwear and the publics response isn’t to sexualize you. Literally every other sport has recieved this treatment, swimming, volleyball, etc. but not cycling.
If this is the case there is nothing you can do to convert normies over. If anything, space age helmets might actually get the general public interested.
it's more about are they actually protecting your head too. if they arent doing their job (kung at worlds) then it's ok to dial it back a bit
They almost make cycling uniforms look cool!
Same feeling overhere. I can only admire that a team is willing to invest so many time and money to go for such a innovative design which is conform all UCI regulations.
Hat off, or should I say helmet off.
😉
Well said 👌
Funny, I said the same thing Spencer said about all time trial helmets should look like the Ineos Hemet by Kask.
If it's an official rule, then it's a rule and everyone should respect it. But even more importantly, the officials must enforce it in a consistent manner that is the same for everyone. But changing rules just because people don't like something or because of so-called aesthetics (which is in the eye of the beholder and is certainly not an objective given or fact) should never be the case.
Yes, but the UCI thinks the riders still must look as much as possible like Fausto Coppi. Not very forward thinking.
@@royoser9956 Exactly that !!! Nothing against our French friends of course, but when it comes to cycling they are still living in 1960. UCI is ruled by French, ASO (Organiser of the Tour, Vuelta, Paris-Nice, Dauphiné and many more races) is French, if they would realy want to change something they would change the earning model of cycling. It is not of this time anymore that a team that does win the yellow jersey, green jersey and six stages in the Tour de France does get payed so bad by the ASO, that the team can barely pay the costs that are made to participate at the Tour. Two years back Jumbo-Visma did earn a little more than $ 1.5 million, Vingegaard won the polka-dot jersey and the yellow jersey, van Aert took the sprinters jersey and the team won six stages if I do remember correctly.
Teams need a sponsor to survive, without those sponsors the cycling sport would not exist. There is almost no price money to earn in the sport... In the meantime ASO get's very well payed by every city or village where they finish and start, and don't forget the huge amount of money they get by the different broadcast organisations world wide.... But the people who are competing get nothing....
Maybe that this was normal 60 years ago, but this can't go on like that of course. It is one of the reasons why teams have to merge or just stop existing from one season on the other....
And I condemn the French organizers/directors for this. They live in a bygone era, and do not see that it is time to renovate the sport. Cycling is extremely popular worldwide, but the revenue model is completely wrong.
Former Dutch UCI chairman Hein Verbruggen (1991 until 2005) tried to address this, but that led to war between the UCI and ASO. It then got to the point that the ASO almost decided to set up their own competition outside the UCI. At that point ASO wanted to oblige teams and riders to participate in 'their' races, otherwise they would not be allowed to participate in the Tour de France.
What do you mean abuse of power ?!?!?
Apparently the time wasn't right for it at the time, but now that we have Arabs putting $250 million on the table to buy the sport, our French friends from ASO and the UCI should start thinking about how the sport should move forward. . Because the current financial concept is outdated.
The new "Revange of the Sith" helmet by Visma was specifically created for Jonas...
If some how you find the only 1 or 2 pictures of him online or the unbroadcasted footage of his TT, you'll see it fits him perfectly...
🤙🇺🇸🇨🇴
Jonas and Vout
What’s much more worrying is that they are not changing their rules but changing the interpretation of their rules.
It has a shape similar to the head of an Orca (killer whale), (look at 3:33 mark) so I can understand why wind tunnel tests and so forth must heavily favor this design. Mother Nature crafted this ideal aerodynamic shape over time.
"innovate or die" - Robert Noyce.
Go for it Johan, I love that you dont care what they do, well said!!!!!!!!
Hey Spencer - fyi you might have a lot of listeners who do triathlon so watch what you say. FYI we have helmet rules too. You do know lance started as a triathlete right?
Lets not forget the leather (retro) straps helmet. UCI should force these back on the peloton. They are light, good protection and airflow, all win win
The only valid reason for banning the Visma Lease a Bike is for safety reasons and if it breaks the rules which it didn’t because UCI approved it in the first place. Make UCI pay for the R&D and manufacture of these helmets if they decide to ban it.
Great storage possibilities in the frunk 😉
I would hope at some point they allow enclosed recumbent bikes to race . Lets see how bizarre they can make it.
to be fair, they are becoming giant fairings you can wear...so yea i'm not shocked UCI banned them. If non-pros want them, they should have at it
Then they should all go back to doing time trials on their regular bikes and helmets. Otherwise they should create rules from now going forward and not go back and ban as that is totally bad business and rule making. Then, the teams will have say a year to meet the new rules
I think rules are written without the imagination of engineers (and cheaters) in mind, so they don't foresee how they will be broken or bent. I think it's perfectly reasonable to revise the rule if the execution is moving outside the spirit of the rule.
I think the helmet is fast, but I also think that that bulbous piece in the front is not safe if a rider was to go down at speed. There’s a reason why helmets are designed the way they are in the front.
Looks like a wrong hit in front could be a neck snapper.
Yup. Anyone that has face-planted after an endo knows that helmet is a neck-breaker. That's why I started wearing a helmet with a chin-shield, after almost breaking my neck with just a visor on my helmet. Tucking and rolling would be impossible with that phallic monstrosity!
UCI is doing everything they are allowed to do. They are reviewing the rules in which these helmets were allowed under in the first place. I think that is fair. They aren't going after them because they are ugly, but rather stuff like the excessive amount of foam in the forehead. Seriously look up one of the photos of that Giro helmet without the visor on and you'll see the absurd amount of foam they had to shove there. Even if that is as safe is it really worth requiring the end consumers to pay the extra cost of that extra product? They are right to look at it since it won't be a radical change like forcing people onto velomobiles/road bikes but still keeping the TT discipline in a respectable area. Adding a couple of additional lines in the rule book that makes sense to be in there like forehead / distance to shoulders and not doing something dumb like the helmet has to look exactly like a road helmet or making the restriction so small that no one complies with them.
The head sock, it is like a mesh legging material and I'm still a be confused with how that is considered aerodynamic. I'm guessing compression is its main benefit but even then it is still stretchy. I'd say the problem with it is that it was part of the helmet product and not acting as an article of clothing that coexists with the helmet. I could probably see a better argument if they tried to get it from a head wear perspective of using it like a Hijab or sunblock or even as an oversized chin strap. But it was clear they weren't even bothering with that angle so the instant ban makes sense there.
People on social media laughing at the Visma Lease a Bike helmet did NOT cause UCI to review the safety. The UCI rescinding this helmet after they approved it should have to pay Visma for the cost of the R&D and the helmet manufacture (if they ban it).
All of these helmets look great and should not be limited in any way.
JOHAN RULEZZ
Top amigos
Good looks, speed and PPE, all rolled into one...🤣
Marketing and advertising people are responsible for the confusion and division in the United States currently. From my short time at Fuji bikes, the worst thing you can do is let marketing into product management. They are experts at making promises to the executive looting ranks for their smoke and mirrors. TT should be Merckx rules. Road race gear only, in my opinion.
Virtual cycling? Seriously? An indoor training tool will be a competition? That’s as crazy as so-called e-sports.
I think that the UCI should establish measures of what is aesthetically pleasing. Anything outside that range will be deemed guilty of Aeronautical Doping. Helmets, socks, webbed skin suits, etc.
New Movie from the director of "space balls" "Gear Balls" STARING ONE ball lance armstrong!
Asthetics are one thing but if a company can offer a team a product that gives that team an advantage like 5 seconds for every 10k than that doesn;t seem fair to other teams
In my view, if Grand Tours allow TT bikes then they might as well allow silly helmets for performance etc.
I’m in favour of using Road Bikes for TT stages… as prefer the rider making the difference.
This is nothing new. 30 years ago, Graeme Obree’s hr record was negated by the UCI and his bike and riding position banned, because of how it looked.
One of the helmets looks like vader’s helmet, one looks like from the movie Alien, and another looks like a helmet from the movie Spaceballs. U can’t make this stuff up. 😂
Fairings that are not structural or functional have never been allowed in UCI, and helmet designers should have known this wouldn't fly. No sympathy for them- they can still sell to triathletes. Looks like UCI might ban hookless rims for road too, which they should. Just use a dann clincher hook-bead tubeless - much safer, though not as safe as tubulars.
I'm pro innovation in cycling and like the new bikes, but I still prefer to see most of the face of the rider to see the psychical suffering and look in their eyes. Back in the days you could also see more of the legs and muscles of the riders and I prefer that from a emotional point of view from a spectator in the game of winning and overcoming a cycling challenge. I've followed cycling all the way back to the Hinault-Lemond era.
Those helmets look like funny as hell. 😂😂😂
What's happened to outcomes???!!!!
👏👏👏
The UCI has been fighting innovation of all types since at least the 1930s. The whole thing is ridiculous.
are those helmets safe???
safer than bunch sprints, yes.
This is the problem of hierarchy in general wake up
At the end of the day, the UCI cannot get out of its own way of destroying cycling as we know it and that’s just the bottom line! Note to UCI, sometimes a helmet is just a helmet and it’s really not gonna give you that much of an advantage so it’s not cheating
Aren't these super aero helmets just fairings? I thought it was already against the rules to use fairings. Aside from being ridiculous looking, the helmets act just like a windscreen on a motor cycle. The rider is essentially hiding behind a huge dome carried by the head.
All helmets are fairings though. They have to cover the head there is no way around that, and its weird to say that slightly shaping it to be more aerodynamic crosses the line when every helmet raced gets shaped for aerodynamics.
UCI is holding back innovation. It's frustrating..When a helmet passes all the impact testing standards and approvals then it's good to go. This particular helmet shape in question is very similar to my own personal designs for a least the last 20 plus years.
Innovation is fine, but what is the point of TT tech, when only a small number of cyclists worldwide will benefit? A waste of time, money & resources....that has very little relevance.
Alien 👽 tech
I don't like the helmet aesthetically but I don't have to like it and guess what, teams and companies put in money and time to make equipment faster so they could win freaking races. The people asking for the UCI to ban these helmets are a joke and the UCI is a perpetual joke!
I want to see the helmet with the colors and commercial images of red bul ¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡
How about everyone wears the exact same model helmet. Then there's no need to innovate. Ditto for the bikes.
I’d like that, but the reason they don’t do it is because the bicycle makers will be pissed off with that. At the end of the day these races are just advertisements for the bikes.
They should do what Formula 1 does and force mandatory safety gear to be the exact same for maximum safety, and then build in wireless cameras to the helmets so they can broadcast views from inside the peloton.
Watching go pro footage of a cat 5 races is so much more entertaining than watching aerial footage of a pro peloton.
Yeah, if anything needs innovating, it's the way these races are packaged as a TV product. There's much room for improvement.. @@WARnTEA
Spaceballs.
Ban it. It’s not a helmet, it’s a faring and would be dangerous in a crash.
DOWN WITH THE UCI, LET'S GO LANCE
#helmetwars
The helmet is great. Why all the fuss if it’s approved 🤷🏼♂️. Fcuk keyboard warriors.
Ban it.
It's fucking ridiculous
Rules for racing whether it's the professional road cycling or F1 are always open to interpretation and equipment can and should be banned even if it's safe and within the rules. Part of the reasoning is to keep it from becoming a farce, if this ridiculous giant Giro TT helmet is allowed it's only a matter of time before Trek, Specialized, Lazer, etc will come out with an even bigger even more aero radar dome helmet, and then the cycle will repeat. At the end of the day it actually helps Giro and the other helmet companies develop helmets that 99% of their customers will buy.
For the first time ever I agree with the UCI on this one
Remco can always go play football....
there's a lot of ways the uci is holding cycling back
Simple solution: Eliminate TT bikes and TT helmets from the race entirely. Make them use their standard bikes and helmets. The more the TT tech develops, the further away it gets from the reality of cycling for the vast majority of people. It only gets more ridiculous every year. Wouldn't it be more interesting, and more telling, to see the riders doing time trials on their road bikes? Most riders don't even seem to be able to handle their time trial bikes properly anyway. It's embarrassing for the sport.
Edit: I wrote that before hearing Spencer make that similar argument towards the end. I would love to see that policy implemented.
Ban most of this TT tech which has no benefit for most of the cycle buying public.....It's completely irrelevant.
Save money by having all TT's on aero road bikes, and aero road helmets.
Let the track and Triathlon use this tech......it has no point on the road.
UCI is exactly like FIFA. Shame on them.
We are looking for the best bike riders.... Not the best airflow scientists.
uci sux
yeah cyclists arguing aesthetics as a ruling argument ... I love triathlon.
When has any pro cyclist suffered a head injury in a time trial (1900-1995)?
Zero
UCI is like the WHO. They think they know whats best for the riders/teams....
BAD analogy (your politics are showing). You don’t understand medicine apparently. The WHO mostly uses epidemiological research to make their recommendations for populations not individuals. So by definition, their recommendations (NOT RULES) will apply to the majority of people rather than at an individual level. Most good for the most people…
Seriously - it's like someone watched Star Wars and came up with the most ugly variant of helmet possible. It's gotta stop - Rick Moranis would be embarrassed. Marginal gains has a limit. Rule time.
UCI has its problems but in this case its right.
I mean just think about all the ugly designs there have been over the decades. It seems far fetched.
Sigh. Another example of the UCI interfering with the growth of the sport to protect their turf.
The helmets are waay too much wtf
Poor introduction
Only because its so ugly should be banned.
probably because it looks stupid
Many TT helmets are absurd and should be banned. Well done UCI. Ban TT bikes too. The best will still rise. That’s proper sport. Furthermore, if something looks stupid, it will discourage participation and viewership, which is not trivial.
That assertion “if something looks stupid, it will discourage participation and viewership,” is absurd. I don’t ride my bike because of the type of TT helmet one pro team wears. Years ago (1980s) Americans sniggered at Lycra shorts. It didn’t stop TREK from selling bikes or people coming into the sport after Lance Armstrong won 7 TdF titles - just an example. The US Postal team wore some outlandish TT helmets too. Throngs of fans did not turn away from the sport, but rather the opposite.
Yes, they should ban electric shifters. Or better yet, go back to single speeds…. Better yet, you have to fix your own flat, like 100 years ago. Would that make you happy again Jonathan?
As well as safety, the UCI is also about protecting the image of professional cycling - I would argue that the Visma Lese Bike helmet falls foul of protecting the image of the sport. I hope the UCI will ban it, and instead provide a more stricter interpretation of the rules etc.
I am with the UCI on this. The purpose of a helmet is safety and not aero gains. This shit should be stopped and banned.
Most changes for both road and tt helmets the last 15 years were in favour of aerodynamics, not to make it safer. Why did they allow previous new helmets and why is this banned.
Only reason if these helmets are banned is because they don't like the aesthetics and nothing else.
Who care what these dopers and bully’s has to say. Bye!
Apparently…you!