6 Working Gears At Comps........

[PaRtZ]

oh...he complained but there was nothing he could do about it so he got on with it, more reason to get into masters

I personally would like to be allowed not to use gears, mainly because its going to be a pain swapping between parts at biu and uci comps.

how about f*ck the drivetrain completly. That would solve everything

[rugbyman]

oh...he complained

i was led to believe he was fine with it

and you're right this year i think it wont matter

[Ali C]

he was disapointed he couldnt run his frame, but being a sportsman he went with the rules, doesnt mean he cant have a badger about it with mates

[rugbyman]

he was disapointed he couldnt run his frame, but being a sportsman he went with the rules, doesnt mean he cant have a badger about it with mates

oh for more of them

well done iolo!

[F-Stop Junkie]

Ok, this is something of a pet subject for me. I appreciate that for a lot of riders, running singlespeed makes life easier especially if they have a single gear they run. If set up properly, it can also extend chain life and reduce the chance of chain breakage.

That said, trials competitions - the majority anyway - are run to BIU rules. Any rider in expert or master is obviously a rider of some skill and experience, and should follow any and all rules exactly, or risk being protested by another rider following those rules.

It's true that 26" and 20" bikes are converging, and it's not difficult to see a situation in the not too distant future where 26" bikes are singlespeed, seatless, and with a bashplate fitted. At this point there will be no difference between the two classes except wheel diameter.

Mountain bikes should be just that, not 26" mod bikes. I firmly believe that 26" bikes have now moved so far away from what normal mountain bikers could recognise that this has hindered trials's progress in the mainstream media. The only rider really getting publicity these days in MBUK is Larsen squad's Chris Akrigg, and he rides a bike that is recognisably a mountain bike. The more that can be done to differentiate the two classes, the better.

I do believe however that the number of bikes produced to qualify for higher classes should be reduced. It should probably be nearer 10 or 20 than the 50 I believe it currently is. There should be a limit to stop superlight prototype or ultralight frames being used for special events, but it should be low enough for any niche builder (Triton, Iolo, Leeson) can easily get their bikes into competition.

[boon racoon]

mountain bike trials? mountain bikes have gears?

i still don't see how it's a disadvantage, set them up properly and it's a mere hundred gramms of weight.

[robster]

mountain bike trials? mountain bikes have gears?

i still don't see how it's a disadvantage, set them up properly and it's a mere hundred gramms of weight.

EXACTLY !!

[Mark W]

Not all mountain bikes have gears? And personally, I don't really get why there's a need to put trials's position in the media about the progression of trials itself? People are going bigger and more technical than ever, and the bikes are reflecting that. Just because some chump who rides whatever bike MBUK tells him is fashionable to ride now doesn't think trials is accessible enough doesn't really worry me. If we sacrifice the progression of trials, then what's the point in getting people interested in it anyway? If it doesn't really have scope for progression because there are some arbitrary rules people have put in place because they've decided that "this" is what a mountain bike is, there's no point getting people interested in it anyway. Besides, wasn't Chris riding a Belaey frame or something like that when he was competing last? Or was that some other similar rider... With regards the inaccessibility of it by making stocks less like MTBs, how come people keep starting to ride mod? There are no bikes that are similar to mods, yet people still get on them and ride them? I just don't really see that there's a problem. The market caters to riders of either style of stock ("tech" or "old school"), so there's no issue with not having a stepping stone into trials.

Either way, I think the rule should be dropped. Yes, it's "The Rules", but it wouldn't be the first rule that's been altered or modifid in the BIU or UCI rules, so why kick up a big fuss about that? Saying "They're the rules so we should accept them" seems a bit stupid too, if people applied that to every walk of life, we'd all be in a far worse situation than we are currently.

[F-Stop Junkie]

Aye Carumba Mark! Right, let's roll up the old sleeves...

Correct, not all mountain bikes have gears, but XC singlespeeders are generally weirdos who go on about zen, trail flow and weird stuff like that.

Chris Ratcliff - 1996 Junior Singlespeed British Champion. Sad, but true.

You could say that some 20" wheel bikes have gears, so why do mods not have gears?

My concern with 26" bikes is not that we should limit development and riders, but that by removing some aspects such as gears, we remove the differentiation between bike categories and we make trials bikes even more idiosyncratic. What's wrong with having gears? You set them up right, you don't touch the shifter, and nothing is different to a singlespeed setup in terms of function. Yes, you can damage the mech or have a cable snap, but it's the same for everyone.

I also think that this rule should only be applied in expert and master classes. These people could have desires to ride at the world championships, and as hence would need working gears there. British championship events are part of training for bigger events, so should follow the same rules.

Trials is now so specialised that it does put some people off trying the sport. People do get into it through other means - especially the motorcycle world where 20" bikes are well known - but I'm not looking just for MBUK to give more coverage. The more accessible trials is (and by that I mean both in terms of understanding and relating to it, as well as actually trying it) then the more interest can be generated. More videos sold, more external sponsorship, more paid riders pushing the sport forward, and more chance for trials to get the recognition it deserves. As this happens, then more people get into it, and the sport grows, more manufacturers get involved as a result and so on. It's a positive spiral, and one that would only benefit the sport.

Can you imagine how trials looks to some people? Wheeled pogo sticks compared to the style and impact of BMX or DJing.

A lot of normal mountain bikers look to trials with admiration and respect, but with a feeling they could never do it. The more they feel they can try it, the more likely they are to enjoy and progress within the sport. These arn't people we're trying to get off a skateboard or attract from a non-extreme sports background, but people who are keen bikers. People who are used to riding bikes and may want to explore technical riding more. If these people believe they need some long and low, singlespeed, dual disc, seatless wonder then they'll never get past trackstanding on their current bike. Comps are a small, but visible, part of trials, and should be treated as both a sport, and a public shop window for trials.

[Mark W]

Yeah, I'm not denying that comps are as important as you're suggesting, but it just seems like it's the same as saying that DH bikes should be limited to 4" of travel, because the average pikey on a full susser would be worried they couldn't have a go down Fort William unless they have their own height in coils front and rear. It just seems a bit strange to impose a restriction on something purely to get people into doing it, when if they want to, they would anyway? Most people on here will have started by just trying to do stuff on a regular bike, I think even you wrote a piece on here about how just riding technical stuff is trials (maybe? I know someone did...), and then you get more into the sort of 'scene' - as it were - and see the specialist sort of bikes you can get. All I'm getting at is that to impose rules at these sort of arbitrary points seems a bit weird. You don't see track riders saying "You can only use this type of frame/wheel/gearing" or something along those lines just because there's a lack of people getting into velodromes, clipping in and falling off in new and unexpected ways? It's the same with anything, you know that as soon as you get into a hobby you're going to have specialist gear. Even in, to pick something close to your heart, photography - some of the best shots you'll see are taken by equipment that could buy you a decent family car, yet people still pick up crappy point and shoot digital cameras and give it a go. I just don't really see how "6 working gears" is really a prerequisite for a trials bike to be a trials bike. They phased out the BB height rule that was put in place before because frames started using different geometry, and in UCI comps they don't force you to use singlespeed now (as far as I know?), and that hasn't dramatically impacted upon the amount of people getting into trials? To be honest, how many people are going to see Vincent Hermance do a massive gap to front or ride a super tech rock line and just stop and go "Wait a minute, he's only got one gear, but on my bike I've got 27!"? I get what you're saying about the bikes potentially being off-putting because they're 'different' to the norm, but equally that might make some people want to get into it, due to the look? Similarly to pikey kids getting their parents to buy them those Shogun and other cheapo brand trials bikes 'cos they like the look of them, it may even be a draw.

Going to your point about the style of trials compared to BMX - even when trials riders dress their bikes up to look like BMX, with the exception of about 3 or 4 people out of the hundreds who do it, they still don't really get the point. Trials is fundamentally different to other cycling disciplines, and it just needs to find it's own identity. At the moment, that identity is for seatless, low bikes, simply because that's what works best. MTB street riders also seem to be in this position where they just blindly copy whatever other sports do (Mainly BMX), and it's not benefiting them at all, so maybe within trials there just needs to be the confidence to do whatever, without really minding if people are following or not? They will inevitably, and this is only one small aspect of trials anyway, so I don't think that enforcing a 6-gear rule (why 6 anyway?) has any point or relevance.

Kudos for the Brits Champs win though Aren't trials riders just like those "weirdos who go on about zen, trail flow and weird stuff like that", only regarding sidehopping technique, BB height and tyre pressures?

[Sketchy]

My concern with 26" bikes is not that we should limit development and riders, but that by removing some aspects such as gears, we remove the differentiation between bike categories and we make trials bikes even more idiosyncratic. What's wrong with having gears? You set them up right, you don't touch the shifter, and nothing is different to a singlespeed setup in terms of function. Yes, you can damage the mech or have a cable snap, but it's the same for everyone.

No matter what you remove from a stock bike, its never going to have 20" wheels.

[F-Stop Junkie]

No matter what you remove from a stock bike, its never going to have 20" wheels.

So why not put a bash plate on a 26", and have the bikes identical except the wheel size?

[Mark W]

Bashplates are shit enough on mod, let alone on stock

[boon racoon]

even so i care not about comps, i don't see any reason to ditch the rule until someone gives me SIGNIFICANT reason why well set up gears should be ditched. i remember a friend of mine telling me they actually NEEDED a harder gear at the brits in order to get between sections/distance between them within the time limit!

then i will stand corrected

Edited February 23, 2007 by the boon

[Sketchy]

So why not put a bash plate on a 26", and have the bikes identical except the wheel size?

Have to agree with Mark here, no one wants a bash plate on a stock.

I've never seen this done before so dont see how that can be a plausable argument....in the nicest possible way.

Although i am arguing that you should have the option to run gears if you want, i also understand that there are old* rules that trials bikes have to abide. You have to take into account the fundimental basics of the trials bike; mod (modified) and stock (standard). Although a standard trials bike is kind of contradictorty, but that has nothing to do with the point im trying to make.

*big emphasis on old here, as trials has changed so much..leaps and bounds anyone?

A large amount of people now run single speed, why not make it legal? doesnt have to be THE rule, but optional. If you choose to run singlespeed and you cant get to the next section in time, you loose buddy - your choice.

I think that trials needs some change in rules to accomodate the trials of today. Even father/mecca/founder (whatever) Monty shook things up with a 25" rear wheel. However, im willing to stand corrected should someone bring any major points up to sway my opinion.

Go,go,go

[BikeTrial Federation]

Just looking to asses the situation;

There seems to be a number of riders that would like to attend the Nationals but their 26” wheel bikes don’t meet the criteria laid down in the rules. Those involved with running the British Championships are looking at ways to involve those with single speed Bikes.

Many of those that ride Master and Expert will compete at the Worlds, single speed gives a competitor an advantage as there is less risk of skipping through damage and failure through damage. Those that wish to compete on an International basis need events that mirror what they will experience at the Worlds.

So what should we do to accommodate single speeders?

Ride on a no point’s basis?

Introduce a cover all class? (What route would that be over)?

Your ideas please, come up with the one that keeps all the people happy all the time and it could happen.

Fred Savage.

[Sketchy]

Just looking to asses the situation;

There seems to be a number of riders that would like to attend the Nationals but their 26” wheel bikes don’t meet the criteria laid down in the rules. Those involved with running the British Championships are looking at ways to involve those with single speed Bikes.

Many of those that ride Master and Expert will compete at the Worlds, single speed gives a competitor an advantage as there is less risk of skipping through damage and failure through damage. Those that wish to compete on an International basis need events that mirror what they will experience at the Worlds.

So what should we do to accommodate single speeders?

Ride on a no point’s basis?

Introduce a cover all class? (What route would that be over)?

Your ideas please, come up with the one that keeps all the people happy all the time and it could happen.

Fred Savage.

Can you elaborate?

[hugh_b]

i"m not sure how much effort it would be but a real championship class where single speed 26" bikes could be used for the experts and the masters would be great, obdviously just riding the usual red and yellow routes. Thats just my opinion but i thought that would be a good idea. thanks-hugh

[Ash-Kennard]

Just looking to asses the situation;

There seems to be a number of riders that would like to attend the Nationals but their 26” wheel bikes don’t meet the criteria laid down in the rules. Those involved with running the British Championships are looking at ways to involve those with single speed Bikes.

Many of those that ride Master and Expert will compete at the Worlds, single speed gives a competitor an advantage as there is less risk of skipping through damage and failure through damage. Those that wish to compete on an International basis need events that mirror what they will experience at the Worlds.

So what should we do to accommodate single speeders?

Ride on a no point’s basis?

Introduce a cover all class? (What route would that be over)?

Your ideas please, come up with the one that keeps all the people happy all the time and it could happen.

Fred Savage.

yeah, but they dont get the advantage of changing gears...

[Sketchy]

yeah, but they dont get the advantage of changing gears...

Hah, too true!

[Mark W]

That's the whole point - you choose your bike setup for what you think is best. It's like saying people have to use risers instead of flat bars 'cos there's a slightly lower chance of a riser bar snapping or similar. It just seems like it needs to be phased out, as it doesn't really make much sense any more. When almost all riders used to use gears, then yeah, fair enough, but now there's a much wider range of bike setups out there it seems a bit dated. It's a trade-off: you save some weight from not having the mech, shifter, etc., but you lose the ability to change gear. It's your call, and not a sanctioning body.

I can see how BiketrialUK would be in a tricky situation though, what with havin to prepare events that give national riders a stepping stone into world-class events, but maybe it needs to change from the top-down, rather than the other way?

[liam-pantera]

firstly im glad that most uci comps have abolished this rule as iam know a mod and stock rider but to be honest it doesnt matter if some guy has gears or not if hes better than me a bit of cable and a shifter is not going to change that it will probably help him win if anything as when i rode gears for 3 weeks i found that 18-15 tooth was perfect for taps were as 18-16 is perfect for gaps and pausehops .

my opinion is that the only specification should be wheel size aka 26" 20" i used to hear rumors of a front freewheel rule for mod about 2 years ago but that never cought on thank god.

but as to what robbie was saying he thinks the rule should be cept the same but that contridicts his opinion because he rides mod in wich gears are not a issue also how many people will be riding at british championships there are thousands of trials riders and 200 good enough to enter regardless of category and arnt the british teams selected by a comitte thats why england is represented by the likes of danny butler and ben savage who have erned elite status for there efforts .

all in all it makes no differnce and the spec of your bike shouldnt determine what competitions you can ride only wheel size .

well thats my opinion feel free to give yours .

[nmt_oli]

Now I havn’t personally ever ridden a comp (although am hoping to this year) but this rule seems to have been causing debate for years, and I am genuinely surprised It has lasted this long when you consider how many riders it affects.

I used to HATE single speed with a passion, I only changed 1 1/2 years ago (have been riding for far to long considering my ability lol). This was because I actually used most of my 8 gears, and my saddle! I used different gears depending on the obstacle I was riding, and used my saddle and the high gears for getting to riding spots. I mainly couldn’t stand the thought of single speed as if I wanted to ride with my mates in Salisbury, I had to ride 4 miles each way! Until I got a car it just didn’t seem an option.

It definitely has its advantages, having gears is useful if you can use them. I moved onto single speed as it was simpler, and I didn’t have to ride as far anymore. I do still miss gears at times. I do agree that it should be up to the rider with their personal style and preference whether they get on better with single speed or gears, both should be allowed.

On the subject of putting people off who are new to the sport, I actually found the 6 gear rule has put me off competitions. It doesn’t seem welcoming at all.

I ride a very very streety leeson, and I know there will be people competing on long low and silver barges (probably most). I don’t care if I’m competing against them, I don’t see it as an advantage for them cause there allowed a bike that looks less like a mtb than I’ve got, so might be able to tap higher because I cannot ride long low bikes! Everyone has what they like, and tend to stick to it, or maybe change slowly over time- that’s called progression.

It does seem that the stock side of trials is spawning much more variation than the mod side. As far as I have noticed, a mod is a mod pretty much, apart from a couple of short ones which could be considered ‘streety’ – but there still most definately a mod.

Stock bikes go from big BMX look-alikes, through old school MTB look-alikes, through to unrecognisable parallel tubes.

Maybe the answer is something else all together, has anyone ever considered splitting the stock category? Maybe into Stock Stock and Mod Stock. Limit on wheel base /bb rise or something? Just an idea to throw up.

Now I understand all you people saying “Rules are Rules, we should stick to them, they are good for us!”

Well, yes I do agree, but only to a point. Again this is where progression comes in, the age of the rule is clearly shown by the minimum number of gears – 6, its been a while since that was the common number of gears at the rear of a bike on anything above kids + halfords specials.

When a rule starts to cause rifts in that sports community, and appears to be limiting not only the progression of the sport at the top levels, but the ENJOYMENT of the sport at all levels the governing bodies need to stand up and take note something’s not right.

IMO enjoyment is the main factor for me riding trials, its different, its challenging, it keeps me fit and I love it. I’ve been riding on and off for 5 or so years and I’m still crap (relatively speaking), and you know what, I don’t care! I’m still progressing, although slowly, I’ve made really great friends along the way and I’ve had a right good laugh, as well as burning off some fat.

I’m to trials what a Sunday pub team is to football. They know there never going anywhere major, but they enjoy it. This rule effectively relegates me to the bench- I can train and have a kick about with mates, but I’m not allowed on the pitch cause I’ve got the wrong boots.

That is how I feel.

Edited February 23, 2007 by nmt_oli

[Sketchy]

Amen to that brother

6 gear rule has defintely put me off before now.

[BikeTrial Federation]

The BIU have listened to the opinions of their Delegates and taken other matters into consideration. It is interesting to note that some manufacturers and influential forces within cycling media wish the rule to be retained. All views have to be considered.

That said, the problem we have to face up to is that there are those whose hobby for some time has been pseudo Trials activity, not competition. A situation exists where by we have a core of dedicated competitors who have always accepted the rules as they stand and another group of interested riders who have honed their skills on the streets, possibly unaware of the rules and regs that exist at comps, the Bikes the latter group ride will not have been built with a focus on comps.

It makes good sense for the UCI to allow single speed. What do have in a UCI final? 10 or fewer riders competing over 8 sections with a time limit of about an hour, very exciting, very fast, but no time for repairs, so the risk of mechanical failure should be kept to a minimum.

In BIU comps there is time to effect a repairs, the potential winner is unlikely to miss the podium due to 10 minutes spent changing a mech hanger.

So, what do forum users want at British championships?

As it stands the gear rule will remain for the BIU British Championships, but the comps are there, the sections are laid out, why not accommodate single speed Bike riders. If together we can come up with a workable solution it will happen.

Some suggestions;

1) A street class for single speeders, over a cocktail Red and Blue Route sections?

2) Single speeders may enter the Red route, appear in the results, but do not gain Championship points but contest a street class?

Fred.