“Can’t wait for speed limits at the next F1 race in Vegas”: Cyclists and motorists baffled by new “April Fools” 20mph time trial rules; Terrible anti-cycling barriers; Breaking (Away) Bad: Oscar Onley’s training/ painting gear + more on the live blog
SUMMARY
Live Blog Disruption Update
If you’re wondering why today’s live blog coverage is somewhat on the lighter side, it’s road.cc’s annual editorial day – which, for the uninitiated, means all of us from road.cc, off-road.cc, ebiketips, and beyond meet up in a room above a pub, drink lots of tea, and stare intently at PowerPoint presentations for a few hours.
So, if you’re waiting impatiently for the latest live blog story, don’t blame Ryan and Adwitiya, they’re both very busy. Blame Dan instead…
Breaking (Away) Bad
When you’ve got an interval session in the morning and a two-bed semi to do in magnolia in the afternoon:
For those wondering what the heat training part looks like… 🥵🥵 https://t.co/BIRRKAmeyK pic.twitter.com/8iv6GOxjTa
— Oscar Onley (@OscarOnley) February 8, 2024
And maybe a crystal meth deal in the evening…
New “car-free” Brompton factory facing delays as traffic authority calls on bike brand to consider those with “no choice but to drive”
Folding bike brand Brompton’s plans for an ambitious new eco-friendly factory and headquarters in Kent are facing further delays after the highways authority raised concerns about the scheme’s impact on the local road network and the lack of any car parking facilities at the site.
Under the travel plan drawn up for the site, no new parking spaces will be also created. Staff and visitors will instead be encouraged to cycle, walk, or use public transport to reach the factory, which will also have a visitors’ centre, museum, and café.
However, the active travel-centred nature of the £100m scheme now appears to have been the catalyst for a series of delays to the project.
“All they do is obstruct”: Cyclists perplexed by pesky cycling gates, allegedly installed by a private land owner
While we discuss the latest episodes of Strictly Come Dancing and University Challenge at the road.cc editorial day (I know, pressing cycling issues right?), here’s some pesky cycling barriers from Thames Path.
These barriers, like the ones that appeared further up the Thames Path, are a sledgehammer to crack a nut. They are bad for disabled people, those with buggies, walkers, joggers, cyclists and tourists. Such hostile and unnecessary obstacles should be removed https://t.co/URsmRH114F
— Greenwich Cyclists (@GreenwichCycle) February 8, 2024
Cycling barriers are pieces of infrastructure that have been widely criticised for their lack of inclusivity by putting people using bikes dedicated for disabled users, or those travelling with cargo bikes or with their children, other than the maybe-obvious anti-cycling aspect of it.
Most recently, we encountered this “Kerplunk-style” barriers on cycle path in Salford which left people wondering if it was actually designed for “ferret slalom racing”.
This recent one, interestingly, has been installed by a private landlord, claims cyclist Calum O’Byrne Mulligan. “I’m urgently seeking their removal on accessibility grounds and as they are an unnecessary and unhelpful obstruction of the public footpath,” he added.
A resident from Blackheath Standrard replied under the post: “I assume a private developer would need permission to obstruct the Thames pathway, which wouldn’t be granted? That’s such a busy part of the river frontage, crazy idea.”
Greenwich Cyclists group quote tweeted the original post saying: “These barriers, like the ones that appeared further up the Thames Path, are a sledgehammer to crack a nut. They are bad for disabled people, those with buggies, walkers, joggers, cyclists and tourists. Such hostile and unnecessary obstacles should be removed.”
Hammersmith Bridge to reopen to bike riders with two-way cycle lane – but only for 10 weeks
Hammersmith Bridge, which cyclists currently have to push their bikes across, is to get a two-way cycle lane from next Tuesday 13 February – although it will only be open for 10 weeks. And unlikely as it sounds, the temporary installation of the active travel infrastructure is in part thanks to the decision of a group of West Ham United fans to travel to an away match at Fulham’s Craven Cottage ground before Christmas by boat.
Hammersmith & Fulham (H&F) council says that “significant damage” caused to a gantry running along the underside of the bridge when the boat became wedged underneath it means that ongoing stabilisation work to the historic structure has been temporarily halted.
The local authority is taking advantage of the pause in works to put in place a two-way, three-metre-wide cycle lane in the centre of the bridge’s carriageway which it says will “allow greater access to residents, visitors and businesses on both sides of the river,” and which is “likely to remain open for around 10 weeks.”
> Read more: Hammersmith Bridge to reopen to bike riders with two-way cycle lane – but only for 10 weeks
Team Jayco-AlUla's rider hit by a car driver during training ride in France
Jayco-AlUla’s 23-year-old recently-turned Australian pro Rudy Porter has been hit by a driver while out for a training ride along the south-eastern coast of France.
Ah, the bleak dystopian future is already here
> Driverless taxi crashes into San Francisco cyclist, injuring rider
Cycling, spawning doping stories like it’s 1999, or 2009, or…: Former Jumbo-Visma and Lidl-Trek Antwan Tolhoek pops steroid positive, as Nairo Quintana’s old doctor faces criminal charges for ‘possession of a prohibited substance or method’
Blimey, it’s been quite the week for cycling fans nostalgic for the constantly breaking doping stories of the 1990s and 2000s.
After Decathlon AG2R La Mondiale rider Franck Bonnamour’s dodgy blood profile raised some red flags earlier this week in the UCI’s biological passport department (waking it from its roughly decade-long slumber), it’s now the turn of spindly Dutch climber Antwan Tolhoek to be slapped with a provisional suspension, this time for testing positive for anabolic androgenic steroids ( how very old school).
The 29-year-old, who emerged as a promising climber for Jumbo-Visma in the late 2010s before moving to Lidl-Trek in 2022, returned the out-of-competition positive on 27 November 2023, just weeks before joining Portuguese Continental side Sabgal-Anicolor for the 2024 season.
Tolhoek has had previous with anti-doping infractions – in 2017 he was previously briefly suspended by the then-Lotto-NL Jumbo team after being found in possession of sleeping pills, contravening the Dutch squad’s internal policies.
The Dutch rider’s provisional suspension was announced by the UCI on the same day it was revealed that Nairo Quintana’s former doctor is set to go on trial in France later this year for alleged criminal doping offences following an investigation which saw the Colombian’s hotel room raided during the Tour de France.
Fredy Alexander Gonzales Torres, who was Nairo and Dayer Quintana’s doctor at Arkéa-Samsic when their hotel room was raided by police during the 2020 Tour, is facing charges of “possession of a prohibited substance or method for use by an athlete without medical justification”, and will stand trial on 2 September in Marseille.
According to Le Télégramme, injection equipment, saline bags, and a tourniquet were found during the raid, though it is believed that Quintana – who recently rejoined Movistar for 2024 after a year in the wilderness following a 2022 tramadol positive – will not face any criminal charges.
Meanwhile, another longstanding doping investigation, Operation Ilex – focused on the activities of Quintana’s compatriot Miguel Ángel López – has faced calls from a public prosecutor to be partly shelved, despite a recent report related to the investigation claiming that many cyclists are still trying to game the anti-doping system.
What year is this? 2006?
“Chronic underfunding” of active travel makes England the “poor relation” compared to Scotland and Wales, says Cycling UK
Cycling UK insists that “chronic underfunding” of active travel has made England the “poor relation” when compared to Scotland and Wales, both of which benefit from much greater investment per capita in cycling and walking.
As a result, people living in England are being denied health opportunities and an improved environment where they live, says the charity, which has backed a report published this week by the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) entitled ‘Stride and Ride: England’s path from laggard to leader in walking, wheeling and cycling’.
Read more: > “Chronic underfunding” of active travel makes England the “poor relation” compared to Scotland and Wales, says Cycling UK
Cyclocross season extends into Tour of Antalya?
The heart wants what it wants, and apparently it wants more cyclocross…
My favourite moment of the day. 🏃 #TourofAntalya #Cyclocross pic.twitter.com/3v0LUtHgs9
— Mihai Simion (@faustocoppi60) February 8, 2024
“Can’t wait for speed limits at the next F1 race in Vegas”: Cyclists and motorists baffled by new “April Fools” 20mph time trial rules
So, it appears that yesterday’s story on Cycling Time Trials’ reaction to the increasingly widespread implementation of 20mph speed limits in built-up areas – which includes forcing participants to slow to the required 20mph during those particular sections – has elicited quite the reaction online.
For those who missed it – CTT, the governing body for that classically British, self-loathing discipline of racing your bike solo against nothing but a clock, this week issued new guidance advising those taking part in its time trials to adhere to new 20mph speed limits, and any other rule of the road, following the default implementation of these reduced zones in Wales, as well as other parts of England, last year.
CTT’s guidance also stipulated that any course with a lengthy 20mph section should not be used if a viable alternative is available, due to concerns over safety for participants and other road users, along with the risk of causing “public outrage” which, CTT says, could put the future of time trialling in Britain in jeopardy.
And how did the internet react to this new safety-oriented, anti-“public outrage” measure? By checking the calendar, apparently.
April fool, it’s a bit early isn’t it? pic.twitter.com/tH5EBSZDHx
— Cyclegranny 🚴♀️ (@anneramsey740) February 7, 2024
“This is either a joke, or the world really has gone mad. Next, rugby players must wear bubble wrap onesies,” said Joe.
“This rubbish is contagious! Time to come to our senses!!” exclaimed Paul, representing the rather odd, sparsely populated central part of the Venn diagram of cyclists and those opposed to reduced speed limits.
“Emailed dropped into my inbox last night. I found the position hilarious. Granted it makes sense but just don’t run TTs on 20mph roads and all good,” said an amused cycling lawyer Rory McCarron.
Tell me this is a parody 🙄
— John Willis (@bugg3r_it) February 7, 2024
“Why? There is no speed limit for bicycles on Britain’s roads,” Adabadang wrote on Twitter, summing up the general attitude of the non-TTing cyclist.
Pointing out the difficulty of enforcing these measures, Shit Cycling Shots wrote: “Marshalls with speed guns in every village? Good luck enforcing this one!”
Others noted the irony of forcing cyclists, during a race, to adhere to a speed limit apparently, ahem, often ignored by other road users.
“Maybe the weekend before the event they should do a speed check on cars in any 20 limit they pass through. Max speed for riders is the highest recorded by a car,” said Stuart.
“Tell drivers to stick to it then you have a deal,” agreed Sebastian, with Dan describing the measure as “kowtowing to the anti-cycling mob”.
“Can’t wait for speed limits at the next F1 race in Vegas,” wrote the Entitled Cyclist, while Eamonn said: “Schrodinger’s Cyclist. Going too fast while simultaneously going too slow and delaying the all-important drivers.”
On the more extreme end of the reaction spectrum, one Facebook user, Shaun, however, reckons time trialling shouldn’t even take place on a road, never mind a 20mph section.
“If you want to TT, get a road closure or do it on a track. Sport shouldn’t take place on the public highway. I’m a cyclist by the way,” says ‘cyclist’ Shaun.
Some, meanwhile, used the guidance to pitch their own, groundbreaking vision for the future of time trialling in the UK.
“They should do the whole route on 20mph roads and disqualify anyone who is even a tiny bit over 20mph average,” said cat-owning cyclist Travis (and Sigrid, I suppose), while Phil described the new world of time trialling as an “acceleration test”.
“Or a time trial in the truest sense of the term. Getting from A to B as close to an allotted time as possible,” said Farrell.
Now, that is a time trial I could get behind…
Help us to bring you the best cycling content
If you’ve enjoyed this article, then please consider subscribing to road.cc from as little as £1.99. Our mission is to bring you all the news that’s relevant to you as a cyclist, independent reviews, impartial buying advice and more. Your subscription will help us to do more.
47 Comments
Read more...
Read more...
Read more...
Latest Comments
Is it because cars and driving are about convenience (for a price), so there is mileage in selling more (quite expensive) related things that are about convenience?
@FionaJJ that's the crux of the issue i guess. Minority causes can have this where the mainstream has the power to steamroll you (figuratively and literally). There's always "fear of angering the giant" (or alienating the decision makers / majority, where any politician has the temptation to gain attention by criticising this. And business salespeople stand to gain by selling "convenience and status" instead). But ... it's also easy to keep getting "small wins" while losing the main argument. (That would be where rules and public space remain suited to or are further modified to reinforce motor dependency and thus reduce active travel - even if perhaps it's now autonomous vehicles and "they're more efficient / much safer than human drivers").
@Secret_squirrel If you put it on the ground, you don't need a "giant solid base". I still don't get the point of it.
@chrisonabike I'd personally prefer it if she were bolder, but on the spectrum of terrible to brilliant options for Transport Secretary, having someone who believes in cycling, but is a bit timid about it, is a net positive. Yes, those of us who can see opportunities missed or delayed will be frustrated, but it could easily have been much worse. That doesn't mean there's not a role for encouragement and constructive criticism. Agreed Chris Boardman has a good approach. He is ambitious, but communicates it in a way that is meaningful to the majority, and makes it hard for all but the most brazen anti-cycling activists to disagree with his ambitions.
There isn’t a ground based version. Because the whole point is the giant solid base that doesn’t fit in a car. The next nearest thing is a trailer tent which is dearer and requires a towbar.
I presume the main sticking point is the cost, and assuming budgets remain tight, perhaps the level of subsidies needs to be reviewed. At £42 subsidy per person per year, and assuming six per hanger, that's over £200k for the existing provision. I'd argue that's excellent value for money when you factor in the benefits to society of a healthier population that comes with more cycling, but being mindful it's not all about me, and that councils are struggling to fund their basic and pressing statutory requirements, it may be they need to reduce the per person subsidy, or restrict the subsidy to particular groups, freeing up budget for more units. But I'd also argue that maintenance costs to Bikehanger reduce as more units are installed in one area, so there may be an opportunity to negotiate a better deal for subsequent units.
@bensynnock given the facts of this case, does your argument work if she had stepped out in front of a car on this road? Would you have expected a motorist to beep whenever they saw some people standing beside a road? Or should cyclists always ring their bells to compensate for their lack of "motor car audio/visual signature"? And would pedestrians know what to do? What about deaf pedestrians? I think we generally have to assume people shouldn't step out into a road in front of a vehicle. That can be qualified though - but I think that is done by "better infra". We already sometimes take measures to block pedestrians crossing "busy roads", provide signalised or even "grade-separated" crossings. And keep them completely away from motorways etc. And I guess there may be expectations that when people see "park" they drop their guard a bit? I do think some kind of "what about cyclists using spaces for racing / training?" argument could be made though.
@FionaJJ "I’d say that being visible is still very useful in a lot of locations where effort has gone into safe systems (like railway tracks). " Indeed ... but while we *do* operate a "safe systems" approach in the railways (and indeed in shipping and air transport) we don't do this in the same way on the roads. So unfortunately what should be the final backstop - given we've also addressed hazards at higher levels - ends up getting promoted as a first line safety measure. And of course safety is mostly out of cyclists' hands * so it's something people *can* do themselves. * After deciding whether to cycle at all, route choice (can I avoid roads altogether / what are the quieter routes), basic road skills. Individuals can't change road layouts and rules, so we simply have to hope that drivers do their part...
Some places are just getting on with it though. I visited Bristol again after about a year and while it's a slightly unlikely cycling venue (very lumpy, the motor traffic is terrible) they really seem to be making an effort. Roads and streets are being redesigned to accommodate cycling and pedestrians. A bit rough and ready? Missing links (especially outside the centre)? Certainly, but I saw loads more parents cycling their children places than Edinburgh and even kids cycling places on their own.
47 thoughts on ““Can’t wait for speed limits at the next F1 race in Vegas”: Cyclists and motorists baffled by new “April Fools” 20mph time trial rules; Terrible anti-cycling barriers; Breaking (Away) Bad: Oscar Onley’s training/ painting gear + more on the live blog”
The best solution would be
The best solution would be for time trialling to be banned on public roads. There’s several off the road (local to me), closed circuits available to hire for time trialling. DB Max run some great TT events at Castle Combe and Thruxton race circuits – traffic free, safe and with proper electronic timing. Best of all, nothing to do with CTT, and around the same price as a typical CTT open event. There must be similar venues around the UK in other areas. The days of these, let’s face it, mainly older men, thrashing around through villages or worse, making a nuisance of themselves on dual carriageways is over or at least, it should be. CTT is an old organisation with old values, ideas and attitudes. They bang on about wanting more women to race at the same time as defending a rule that allows a maximum of 25% spaces in their events for women.
D.Railleur wrote:
OMG why. Thats a terrible idea. Why should something that brings people pleasure and is not illegal be banned just coz certain parts of the organisation are running scared of the Daily Heil?
What is the pleasurable part
What is the pleasurable part of a TT that you couldn’t recreate on a normal bike ride? Is it the riding part or the social, post event cake and banter part? Eating cake and comparing the size of your jockey wheels is the fun part for me but any good club will have loads of club rides at which you can do just that. If it’s the competition element you enjoy, set your lap length on your garmin to 16.093km..then you can do a 10TT anywhere you like. As it’s so often said, you’re only racing against yourself anyway.
Off the road TT’s?
Off the road TT’s? Interesting concept…….
I can’t wait to see a gravel TT in the Surrey Hills, replete with disc wheels, pointy headgear and onesies. Wait ’til the DM reading dog walking community hears about this
Clearly I’m being somewhat facetious, and if I was genuinely worried about road based TTs I’d enter the off road races that you refer to. Personally though I’m not down with drivists and shouty culture war warriors driving legitimate road users off the roads. I won’t let the b*stards win.
D.Railleur wrote:
Glancing at their website, a mere £25 for an 11.78 mile TT round Thruxton, so for a good TT rider about a pound a minute. Not everyone’s got that level of disposable income.
That’s a gross misrepresentation, they mandate that a minimum of 25% of spaces on any given mixed-race-entry TT must be reserved for women, there is no rule that says you can’t have more women than that, just that you must save a quarter of places for female entrants.
The practical reality of the
The practical reality of the 25% rule will always ensure that in an oversubscribed race the male/female ratio will be 75/25. When I pointed that out to the CTT Board, they told me that equality for women wasn’t a high priority, they had much bigger fish to fry – like mandating front lights in broad daylight and stopping riders from putting a drinks bottle down their skinsuit. The CTT board are comical at best.
The last CTT event I entered was £30 for 10 miles so more expensive than DB Max.
D.Railleur wrote:
Why? if the women are entering at the same time as men, there is no reason why it can’t end up as 50/50
wycombewheeler wrote:
Because entry is based on LTS not when you enter. Women are on average slower than men. The reason the 25% rule was introduced in the first place was to ensure that some women actually get in the popular (oversubscribed) races under the LTS system of entry. Positive discrimination for women…a good thing you would think? Yes, when it was introduced it was, but if CTT’s ambition for more women racing was actually a true ambition and not just something say they want, they would demonstrate that desire by setting the women’s spaces to 50%. Refusing to change the 25% rule because other things like front lights and water bottles are more important has put off not just me but many women from having anything at all to do with CTT. When a CTT Board member tells you that your concerns about woman’s racing are not important enough for him or CTT to do anything about, then you too might question why you’re involved in the sport at all. Happy go report I’m now 2 years free of all CTT events (open and club) and loving my TTing more than ever.
Lucky you, there’s nothing
Lucky you, there’s nothing off road near me and looking at the CTT website there’s not much in the rest of the UK either. I could be wrong but I think a lot of TTers would prefer to be off road (I think that whats behind the rise in poularity of gravel bikes) but its not practical to restrict/ kill a good healthy activity to placate Daily Wail readers!
D.Railleur wrote:
Are you talking about SUV drivers again?
Backladder wrote:
no they are normally yomping on the green lanes and byways, {hope this doesn’t result in a court case from a previously unknown clothing manufacturer.)
Huh! The car market has
Huh! The car market has gotten so warped, I forgot that actually capable off-road vehicles fell under the SUV category.
Not a million miles away from the advertising dominance of e-gravel bikes being off-road eclipsing the fact that MTBs still exist
Quote:
Wait until he hears about the Isle of Man TT…
Don’t they close the roads
Don’t they close the roads for the IoM TT? Pretty sure I’ve not seen any motorbikes weaving their way through traffic at 150mph.
Seen any cyclists doing that
Seen any cyclists doing that recently? The national teams would love to hear.
D.Railleur wrote:
Doesn’t matter – “Shaun” said ‘on the public highway’ with no reference to whether said public highway was at that time closed to the public.
Seems obvious from the
Seems obvious that the reference to road closures was there in Shaun’s preceding sentence.
brooksby]
Actually if you read shaun’s quote…
“If you want to TT, get a road closure or do it on a track. Sport shouldn’t take place on the public highway. I’m a cyclist by the way,” says ‘cyclist’ Shaun.
TTs were about before cars
TTs were about before cars Shaun
Tourist trophy, not time
Tourist trophy, not time trial.
The nearest motorsport equivalent to this stuff is when the WRC turn up in Wales for Rally GB. Competitors drive on open roads in full factory spec rally cars between stages and servicing.
They’re fully expected to keep to all applicable road traffic laws, including speed limits, and the police prosecute those that don’t.
Still sport though.
Still sport though.
stonojnr wrote:
Watch out for the service barges though. They are not brightly coloured, do not carry numbers and have to cover greater road distances in less time than the competing cars.
There’s also the Circuit of
There’s also the Circuit of Ireland which is raced over a number of stages both paved and forest tracks. When it was a longer event many years ago the drivers were timed travelling between stages and if they were faster than the official average time they were penalised. There would also have been random stewards at junctions to observe light jumping.
“If you want to TT, get a
Current list of courses on the CTT are in their thousands. How many are on closed circuits? At most 100, but more like 40? Some people also live/work so far from a suitable closed circuit race track that evening races are impossible to attend. Those courses are also sterile and don’t provide a technical test of skills like the slower more sporting or hilly courses some club 10s and 25s are run on. The more challenging courses mean that rider skill plays more of a part in determining results, not just who has the best equipment and the biggest engine.
For the most part (dual carriageway courses deemed too dangerous due to traffic levels aside) Time Trials have taken place on UK roads without major incidents for decades. The practice is legal and authorities are fully liased with to ensure safety, and they have no problem with us being there. This whole dilemma is a lack of foresight for what is effectively a very tiny minority focussed issue – a small corner of the population affected by the new rules at a brief and specific time. Easy to overlook, but now we have to deal with the new situation it presents.
D Raileuer either hasn’t got
D Raileuer either hasn’t got a clue or is stirring. Ignore.
mattsccm wrote:
On the contrary, my clue store is fully stocked. I just have a different opinion to you is all. With 30 years of time trialling under my belt as rider and organiser, I’m well placed to have an opinion on time trialling, particularly women’s timetrialling, and the misogyny hard wired into the rules. You and anyone else are free to ignore me of course. That would be the man thing to do, and many do, which is why I stopped organising and riding CTT time trial events.
I actually do get where you
I actually do get where you are coming from. I got in cycling via triathlon and joined a local cycling club and started doing TTs and to be fair I enjoyed them . They were relatively low cost and for the most part pretty safe as it was pre smart phones etc. Then one day I was driving to me my now wife and came across one on the A14 in Suffolk and as someone looking from the outside thought it looked incredibly dangerous. At the time I quit and ended up rowing for several years. However I still loved the bike but to get my fix of competition I went back to triathlon. The thing is with tri’s and I often discussed this with other cyclists that even though generally they are more expensive they are always better run ( hence the cost) normally more inclusive . I did a few years back step into the world of TTs again for a couple of events and I felt I had gone back in time. Same village halls, same riders and the same cake I cannot see myself doing it again.
There was a TT competitor
There was a TT competitor sadly killed in Kent 4 or 5 years ago (can’t remember exactly) during an event on the A2070 which is definitely not a dual carriageway. So you don’t have to go back decades.
To be fair he was hit by an oncoming driver overtaking a lorry so would probably have still happened had the cyclist been out for a leisure ride instead of competing.
Edit — actually happened in 2017
I hear this fuss about TT
I hear this fuss about TT races and speed limits, but I am a bit confused. Are these TT races on open to motor traffic and pedestrians roads or to closed like the finishes I see on Tour de France, where even pedestrians are behind restricted access tape?
They are open roads. There is
They are open roads. There is live traffic at the point of racing.
There is nowhere near the budget to be able to close roads off for this event, you would be looking at well into £bn territory because there are literally thousands of events every year.
The courses that we use, however are carefully chosen and inspected to ensure that they are as safe as possible for competitors, and without disruption. For instance, courses must not go through traffic lights, and will only take left turns at junctions (excluding roundabouts). Courses on Dual Carriageways are carefully monitored to ensure that traffic levels are reasonable, and that the course doesn’t leave riders vulnerable to merging traffic with blind spots. Courses must be approved by the CTT (Cycling Time Trials – the Governing body responsible for TT racing in the UK) and will be given an allocated code for approval.
Thanks for the clarification,
Thanks for the clarification, I thought they would have restricted access as they do in pro races and big marathons.
To be honest, any kind of race in roads open to motor traffic seem like a Cannonball race to me. I believe the speed limit is a thing to worry but not the most important one, as there will be victory-hungry guys willing to risk anything.
cyclisto wrote:
no need because there is no bunch, there is no jockeying for position, just a load of riders well spread out, each going as fast as they can at speed which (until now) are below the speed limit anyway.
For Time Trials usually at
For Time Trials usually at small club events there are normally 10 to 20 riders (but often space for up to 40), and on the bigger “Open” events (which accumulate league points for riders for qualification to regional and National championships) there are up to 100.
But riders start off at 1 minute intervals and rarely come together on course. Faster riders will always overtake slower riders who set off before them but there’s no big risk.
Marshalls will be stationed at key risk areas, turns etc in case of incident, any rider running foul of Road Laws are DQ’d.
The Road Racing leagues, however, are bunch events. They are usually circuits that are made up of rural roads, and require British Cycling Commissaires to be present. The race will always have a Commissaire car at around 1/2 mile in front of the race to ensure safety, whilst marshals will keep an eye out for dangerous riding. You also can’t ride road races without obtaining your Cat 4 licence – You can’t enter on a Provisional race licence, unlike closed-circuit races such as Circuit Crit series, Cyclocross or MTB.
For both RR and TT safety briefings are given to competitors where necessary.
If you go cannonball and break rules, you will probably be caught.
Quieter rural courses also don’t see heavy traffic. You might see 10 to 20 cars in both directions over a 10 mile event. Dual carriageways are used at times when two lanes of traffic are unlikely to occur – these are mostly used on weekend mornings.
cyclisto wrote:
Yes, it’s a peculiarly British thing that arose because mass start racing on open public roads was banned in the UK in 1890, so in 1895 someone (name escapes me) came up with the idea of time trials instead, and they have remained our primary way of racing ever since.
Rendel Harris wrote:
I believe it was all racing on roads that was banned, not just mass start and it was mandated that clubs organised races in velodromes. The point of the single rider against the clock was that if they were spotted, they were simply somebody on a bike (no skinsuits, no P5X or Shivs back then). This is also why the courses have codes assigned to them, so if somebody found a secret entry list, they wouldn’t know where the race was being held.
On the topic of open traffic, my local 10 mile TT event (P451/10) is held weekly during the season on Tuesday nights, it’s all on NSL A road, around a third of that is dualled, the people I know who do it regularly have said that the vehicles going past at 60-70mph creates an advantageous drafting effect, it’s known as a fast course.
mark1a wrote:
Yes you’re right, I’d forgotten all races were banned. Bizarrely it was not the law that banned racing but the National Cyclists Union, who feared that all cycling would be banned if racing continued. The police were so hostile to racing that mounted officers would charge riders and try to throw sticks in their spokes. It’s interesting to note, in the context of today’s hiviz debates, that the standard TT uniform was black sweater and black tights in the hope that racers would be harder for the police to spot.
The TT thing is so straight
The TT thing is so straight forward I fail to see why people here don’t get it. A cyclist can be prosecuted for unsafe riding and many people would consider exceeding a speed limit un safe. Those who are some what anti towards cycling would love to stop the events. Why give them excuses? Legal and liability reasons are bound to suggest that anyone exceeding limits, even if they don’t apply, are to blame for an incident. If a respondant isn’t familiar with TT rules as some replies suggest then they do not need to reply. Nowt but opinon only. It will affect Welsh TTs , my own club wil lose both it’s best evening 10 course and its money spinning open 25. Thats life.
I see the 20mph rule as a
I see the 20mph rule as a common sense compromise given that last year there was talk of banning tts that went through 20mph limits. Admittedly if a large part of the course is 20mph then it’s not workable but I imagine that there are many which pass through a village which will become a neutralised zone allowing the rest of the course to be used. It’s increasingly difficult to find suitable routes so if this allows some to continue then it’s a good thing. I can imagine the response from the frothing masses if the CTT suggested ignoring 20mph limits…
going to look for any TTs
going to look for any TTs that incorporate 20mph limits so I can cruise past all the aero machine onesie wearers on my regular bike.
I’d had that thought. Could
I’d had that thought. Could we get them excluded for drafting d’you think?
Regarding those bike barriers
Regarding those bike barriers: here in the U.S., you can get a cordless angle grinder for $30 at Harbor Freight. Just sayin’.
Unlike the ULEZ cameras the
Unlike the ULEZ cameras the vigilanted are cutting down in a similar fashion, those barriers are designed to withstand harsh impact a bit better than a lamppost. Cutting them might prove a lot more difficult, and because they are more popular amongst the anti-cycling lobby than ULEZ, they’ll blab harder if they see anything.
Jayco-AlUla’s 23-year-old
Jayco-AlUla’s 23-year-old recently-turned Australian pro Rudy Porter
Wishing him a speedy recovery and hoping he’s not too sore ?
I’m a little curious though, I didn’t know you could “turn Australian” (naturalise sure) I’m presuming he recently turned professional!
Jakrayan wrote:
Side effect of vegemite sandwich doping?
The majority of people
The majority of people baffled by the 20mph thing are those that have no idea how fast this lot ride. You can’t declare 20 zones are for accident reduction and then have xenomorphs flying through them at 35mph barely looking where they are going.
I was puzzled by the 20 mph
I was puzzled by the 20 mph thing until I realised the TTs referred to were held on the open road with no traffic restrictions, then it made a bit more sense.
Planning a race route through a reduced speed zone without closing the road for the race doesn’t seem like the best idea, at the very least the optics are bad since the participants should fairly easily be able to exceed the posted limit.
I’m guessing the events are likely mostly volunteer run and under funded so the extra people or timing equipment needed to set up timing checkpoints on either side of any 20 zone would be prohibitive.
I wonder if Strava or simply GPS data couldn’t be used to calculate the cumulative time across all the >20 zones and determine a winner?
Some of the MTB races I’ve done have used Strava times to determine best times up major climbs or down descents and give additional prizes for those riders in addition to the overall winners.
I realise there are issues with the accuracy of Strava times but these are amateur events so accuracy to the split second isn’t the most important thing.
Kieselguhr Kid wrote:
It’s a time trial, almost all of them are on public roads. There’s zero chance of closing them for a cycling TT. And having part/parts of a TT course nullified through a 20mph zone is simply not going to work.
It’s not just split-seconds. So you’re saying it’s fine if our times are inaccurate because we don’t get paid to race? How is that going to encourage participation? Chip timing is the best solution (where practical), though it’s not cheap and won’t work on public roads.
As someone said elsewhere, perhaps a move away from fixed distances (10, 25, 50 miles etc) is the way forward.