Meeting during the world championships in Switzerland, the UCI management committee has voted to ban race radios.  Please see this Velonews article for details: http://www.velonews.com/article/98391 Yeah, this is going to be interesting as the teams an riders certainly don’t agree…the soft-pedaling-30kph-protest “races” are already written on the wall.

In response to this news, my UW-Madison Cycling teammate agreed with the UCI’s decision with this post to our listserve:

I’d like to throw out a few questions to everyone. Why does it matter? And who cares?

If certain people start losing races due to radios not being there, does it matter? No, it just means someone else will be winning. It’s not like the UCI said, oh we’re done with all technology on this pro tour thing.

I think the UCI’s stance on technology (more specifically the radio) and how it pertains to keeping the sport’s ‘honesty and integrity’, is an effort to maintain a connection with the fans. I do think the radio ban will make races more interesting and test the riders’ ability to perceive the race themselves instead of having the race director calling some (obviously not all) of the moves. It will also make time trials in the pro peloton even more of a test of personal will.

Ban the radios.

Ban the dope.

However, as a technology enthusiast, I am a triathlete too after all, I disagree.  My response:

I’m just respectfully disagreeing here…

Part of the excitement of cycling for me, and for many other fans and racers, is the innovation.  Radios are a part of that.  They are simply a tool to improve communication, and I doubt that banning them would significantly alter a race outcome.  The UCI pro-tour is made up of the top several hundred riders in the world–the top 1% of the top 1%.  Cyclists simply don’t rise to that level in the physical chess-match that cycling is without being smart.  Pro-Tour cyclists are not mindless drones waiting to be told what to do by their director.  For example, in the break-away shake-out that defines the first hour of most races, teams instantly have to decide if the break has the right combination of riders:  are any of the riders a threat to the GC; are all the major team represented; how does the break impact our objectives today…pull it back or let it go? As the Director Sportif is stuck in the caravan behind the peloton, and can’t see the break forming, this decision is often left to the riders who must react, or choose not to, instantly.  While this may seem like an easy task for those familiar with Collegiate and USA Cycling races, that’s because in comparison to UCI racing, it’s happening in slow motion.

I was fortunate to race–or more accurately, get my ass kicked–at the UCI Tour de Leelanau last year with ISCorp.  An eye opening experience.  The race was comprised mostly of domestic teams and Cat 1 amateurs.  The shake-out was ridiculous and FAR more aggressive that any race I’ve ever done.  The peloton cruised along rolling hills at 27-30 mph, with a constant barrage of attacks at 35 mph.  It was chaos.  Maybe a radio would help it that situation, but by the time you radioed your DS to say these riders are off the front and have a 100m gap, I think it would be too late.

There’s also the argument that radios make races safer because Director’s can inform their riders of road hazards, etc.  But I won’t go into that.

Technology and innovation are a part of nearly every sport, and why shouldn’t they be?  If you take the all technology out of cycling it’s called running. So for you “purists” out there, go ride your penny farthing on a gravel road.  But for me, I like carbon and titanium and my Trek Madone and TTX for the “pure and simple” reason that going faster is simply more fun.

However you’re ridin’, keep on ridin’,

Bean