USA Cycling considers ban on helmet cams and junior carbon use

[2be]

http://velonews.competitor.com/2010/11/news/usa-cycling-considers-ban-on-helmet-cams-and-junior-carbon-use_148051

Not sure if cameras should be the main focus of this plan, the lights mounted on helmets that we all use in night riding events present a much bigger problem waiting to come to the surface. I was thinking that it's only a matter of time before event organisers have to tackle this issue from a liability point of view, since most event organisers encourage (and rightly so IMO) the use of them. I imagine that there is a potential market out there for a standards approved integrated helmet/light that is tested to be safe. Anyway I can see this becoming a real issue in the future.

 

[Mattydv]

Banning carbon in juniors because people don't like seeing other kids ride something they can't afford for their kids?

If you race at a national level (with intent to win) you've got to expect it to get expensive. Stupid notion imo.

 

[Dozer]

What a load of shit. Yeah, a helmet cam could puncture your helmet and cause damage but so coul a pedal or a rock or a guard rail.
Maybe they should invest their time in working on things that will help the sport, like banning 29" mountain bike wheels.

 

[T-Rex]

I'd be more worried about doing a belly flop onto a chest mounted camera, than landing on one that was attached to my helmet.

 

[driftking]

If they want to go blow money on carbon thats upto them
"It’s becoming the bike and not the rider at that age level"-the bike can only do so much for your time it is always the rider. the only argument is that their bikes are lighter and therefore faster, but does that mean they will eventually bring in a rule for a standard weight as all frames and components have differant weights.
pretty stupid and pointless rule IMO

I cant see the bikes components like carbon rims doing alot for junior riders unless they are at a national/international level of racing and then it would be expected they run top of the line expensive parts.

UPDATE: I read the article but when i replied I related it to dh riding not track/velo haha. Probably should have paided more attention.

In terms of track I think it would be a good idea to implement rules requarding carbon use or even a standard weight limit range for the bikes.
therefore dont pay attention to my initial answer.

 

[Turner_rider]

If they want to go blow money on carbon thats upto them
"It’s becoming the bike and not the rider at that age level"-the bike can only do so much for your time it is always the rider. the only argument is that their bikes are lighter and therefore faster, but does that mean they will eventually bring in a rule for a standard weight as all frames and components have differant weights.
pretty stupid and pointless rule IMO

I cant see the bikes components like carbon rims doing alot for junior riders unless they are at a national/international level of racing and then it would be expected they run top of the line expensive parts.

I think you've missed the point on the possible carbon ruling. At the junior levels many cycling bodies throughout the world want to promote an even playing field so that the best rider wins not the one with the most money. Carbon can make a big difference when you are a junior.

Cycling Australia already has limits to what junior track cyclists can use equipment wise so really its no big deal.

Note also that all of this (helmet cams etc) is all about competition cycling in the USA, it may have flow on effect here but equally it may not.

 

[driftking]

I think you've missed the point on the possible carbon ruling. At the junior levels many cycling bodies throughout the world want to promote an even playing field so that the best rider wins not the one with the most money. Carbon can make a big difference when you are a junior.

Cycling Australia already has limits to what junior track cyclists can use equipment wise so really its no big deal.

Note also that all of this (helmet cams etc) is all about competition cycling in the USA, it may have flow on effect here but equally it may not.

yeah i read the article but when i replied I related it to dh riding not track/velo haha. Probably should have paided more attention.

In terms of track I think it would be a good idea to implement rules requarding carbon use or even a standard weight limit range for the bikes.

 

[Turner_rider]

At some point in the future, cycling federations may also impose similar rules to level the playing field in DH competition too.

There is already a minimum weight for road bikes in racing and thus with technilogical development its quite feasible that a mimimum weight may have to be introduced for DH at some point too.

Edit: At this point in time the DH bike doesn't make as much difference as the rider (relatively speaking), however if someone developed product X that cost $15k and slashed 30 seconds from the average riders time then its not hard to see someone saying that should be outlawed for junior categories.

 

[Ryan]

At some point in the future, cycling federations may also impose similar rules to level the playing field in DH competition too.

There is already a minimum weight for road bikes in racing and thus with technilogical development its quite feasible that a mimimum weight may have to be introduced for DH at some point too.

Edit: At this point in time the DH bike doesn't make as much difference as the rider (relatively speaking), however if someone developed product X that cost $15k and slashed 30 seconds from the average riders time then its not hard to see someone saying that should be outlawed for junior categories.

Not to mention product Y that categorically slashes 31 seconds from the time of anyone who uses it.

Unfortunately, just like product X, it doesn't fucking exist.

Which makes these rules the human embodiment of retardation. "Johny, don't like gettin' beat by kids on $20000 bikes just because he's shit at riding bikes, so we's gonna outlaw us some $20000 bikes n hope the kids who was done riding them ungodly expensive bikes all of a sudden get shit at riding 'em"

Way to improve the breed, USAC.

 

[driftking]

At some point in the future, cycling federations may also impose similar rules to level the playing field in DH competition too.

There is already a minimum weight for road bikes in racing and thus with technilogical development its quite feasible that a mimimum weight may have to be introduced for DH at some point too.

Edit: At this point in time the DH bike doesn't make as much difference as the rider (relatively speaking), however if someone developed product X that cost $15k and slashed 30 seconds from the average riders time then its not hard to see someone saying that should be outlawed for junior categories.

that is a fair point but with making a dh bike light comes disadvantages as well as advantages, just like having a heavy bike over a lighter bike they both have there pros and cons. for track however there isnt any advantage of running a heavier bike, and with upgrades and better performance on a DH bike the times wont increase by 30 seconds mabey 5 secs is more reasonable.
With the more advance parts you need to already be fast and push there limits to gain any real significant benifit out of it.
going from a old beater bike to a 12k bike will be a bigger difference however the differance say going from a stock glory to a kitted lapierre will mabey give you a few seconds unless you push the bike and use its ability.
Although a few seconds is a big advantage in DH ultimately the rider will decide who wins the race.
when comparing average DH bikes to top DH bikes you tend not to gain much of a advantage unless riding at the top level where 0.01 of a second counts and you are supassing the limits of average bikes.

Therefore although the expensive bikes might help, the help will be minimal and because they dont have the skill level the other riders will still beat them and supass them as they get older still giving the real skilled junior riders the chances to go further into the sport.
IMO

 

[scotty beefs]

Carbon rule - pfff.

Why not make under 15's hardtail only, if the tweens and younger want to ride their carbon v10s then make them ride U17 or higher categories? In the end the parents would have more cash to take kids to races, less on going maintenance costs, less "scene" for kids that can't afford duallies to compete against and they will be far better riders for it in the end.

If they are that young and can handle a high end duallie then they will compete at U17 level. If they, or mum and dad, can afford the bike but can't handle that class of racing then a year or two racing hardtail would be good for them.

 

[kona_kona]

I think a lot of you completely missed the part where it says it's related to track/road cycling only - it's nothing to do with MTBing.

As a result - I completely agree on the Junior carbon idea. A huge number of sports already have restrictions on Junior competitors to make the it a little bit more about the player (and having fun!) and not they size of the wallet their folks have.

As for the helmet cams - again I agree although it IS getting a little picky. It's road cycling and if they really feel the need to film it, a discrete bike mounted option would suffice. It's not like MTBing (at least concercing DH) where the riders are spaced apart and generally don't crash into each other. Not to mention DH requires a FF helm.

I don't really care all that much in the end because it's 1. USA related 2. Road related.

 

[driftking]

I think a lot of you completely missed the part where it says it's related to track/road cycling only - it's nothing to do with MTBing.

one of the previous post mentioned that they may not be surprissed if this happens to MTB thats why the debate about MTB is going on.

 

[Josh Seksy]

I honestly have to agree with the restrictions on juniors.

I'm a juniour myself, and I remember as I begun XC racing, turning up on my stock as a rock norco hardtail and lining up against kids riding top of the line giant anthems and scott scales!

Its under 15's for gods sake!

Not only was it demoralising (yes I know, tear tear) but it really didn't help with attracting new riders.

Same story at nationals, I watched U17 riders go past on XX bikes, Bloody loaded parents, did it make a difference to them? probably not, so why was it required?

I know this sounds a bit like a rant, but I do believe junior catagories should be restricted in some way, so that kids can be level and enjoy competing, its only at elite level that $20K bikes are actually necessary, where their level of performance is so close that its about the only thing that divides them!

End rant.

 

[2be]

the 200lb gorilla IMO is the issue of helmet mounted lights. Sooner or later this will become an issue that will need to be addressed by event organizers. Don't get me wrong I have no plans to rip apart my 'night' helmet and stop using it, I'm all for it and couldn't ride at night with out it. My point being helmet mounted anything has the potential the cause injury unless some sort of standard can be established. Event organizers encourage the use of a helmet mounted light and also insist that you have public liability coverage( usually in the form of MTBA membership). Sooner or later this will end up being an issue that will have to be addressed, much the same as the Americans are doing with the cameras.

 

[Turner_rider]

Not to mention product Y that categorically slashes 31 seconds from the time of anyone who uses it.

Unfortunately, just like product X, it doesn't fucking exist.

There was a point in time in the past (mid 90s) where available dollars did make a massive difference to where you finished in a DH race. Yes that was the past, and its not the case now, but unless anyone here can predict the future then there is nothing to say it won't happen again.

As for the helmet camera use well I actually think that makes sense in many respects as there have been helmet failures and head injuries caused by helmet cams. Yes lights could have the same issue, but lights are a safety issue in themselves as you need them to ride in the dark. In my opinion there's nothing wrong with a cycling body saying Hey Mr helmet cam or light maker please show me that your design won't cause a brain injury to a rider by causing the helmet to fail where it wouldn't normally.

 

[cramhobart]

Because I love an argument...
Sweden has a massive club rally scene, with lots of people participating and
developing high levels of skill long before they are old enough to get a drivers license.
One of the rules is if I ask to buy your car you have to sell it to me for a nominated amount, around $3000.This prevents technology wars and keeps the sport ACCESSABLE and FUN, unlike motor sport in aus. Sailing dingy racing lost massive numbers of participant's when carbon fiber/ composite construction became available and junior boat costs when from hundred's to thousands and tens of thousands. Anything that prevents this happening to MTB has to be good for the sport, really who has 10k lying around for little johhny to buy a competitive downhill rig.

 

[Mattydv]

There was a point in time in the past (mid 90s) where available dollars did make a massive difference to where you finished in a DH race. Yes that was the past, and its not the case now, but unless anyone here can predict the future then there is nothing to say it won't happen again.

But why are we making rules in prediction of the future? Change the rules when they need to be changed.

Sweden has a massive club rally scene, with lots of people participating and developing high levels of skill long before they are old enough to get a drivers license.
One of the rules is if I ask to buy your car you have to sell it to me for a nominated amount, around $3000.This prevents technology wars and keeps the sport ACCESSABLE and FUN. Anything that prevents this happening to MTB has to be good for the sport, really who has 10k lying around for little johhny to buy a competitive downhill rig.

Competitive racing isn't about fun (accessibility, yes. But only to an extent...). I see your point, but we're talking about the beginnings of careers, not a club scene for enjoyment. Also remember that if the junior really is a good rider, and will benefit from a bike that's 1-2kg lighter for a national series, than chances are they would be sponsored, and it parents won't have to fork out 10k for the bike.

 

[Turner_rider]

But why are we making rules in prediction of the future? Change the rules when they need to be changed.

Which is exactly what they are doing. The issue has been highlighted and they are considering changing the rules.

All I was saying is that its naive to suggest that all forms of competive cycling won't be subject to similar reviews in the future.

 

[S.]

There was a point in time in the past (mid 90s) where available dollars did make a massive difference to where you finished in a DH race. Yes that was the past, and its not the case now, but unless anyone here can predict the future then there is nothing to say it won't happen again.

As for the helmet camera use well I actually think that makes sense in many respects as there have been helmet failures and head injuries caused by helmet cams. Yes lights could have the same issue, but lights are a safety issue in themselves as you need them to ride in the dark. In my opinion there's nothing wrong with a cycling body saying Hey Mr helmet cam or light maker please show me that your design won't cause a brain injury to a rider by causing the helmet to fail where it wouldn't normally.

All vehicle racing sports have that developmental period at first, where the designers haven't really worked out the fundamentals yet, and design hasn't settled down to subtle refinements - look at motocross 40 years ago vs today, or F1 from 60 years ago vs today. To say that anyone is going to make something that'll make monumental inroads to bike racing these days is like saying it's possible to travel faster than light - it might be, but for practical purposes it's not going to happen any time soon. There's just not that much to do to road bikes other than make them lighter, hell even if they weighed NOTHING that'd only be 6kg lighter than they are now - which is less than the difference between a big rider and a small one anyway.

As for the helmet cams thing, have you actually seen this happen or are you just generalising? Cos I've landed on a helmet cam myself, seen numerous other people do the same (same with lights actually), and you know what happens? The camera gets snapped off its flimsy little plastic mount.

Seriously these rules are just retarded. Ban everything and everyone.