Hello Vital MTB Visitor,
We’re conducting a survey and would appreciate your input. Your answers will help Vital and the MTB industry better understand what riders like you want. Survey results will be used to recognize top brands. Make your voice heard!
Five lucky people will be selected at random to win a Vital MTB t-shirt.
Thanks in advance,
The Vital MTB Crew
The graphics maybe?
My opinion is that if someone is fortunate enough to get picked up by a major UCI Elite team, then yeah, they may have to drop one of their lesser sponsors to get in line with the team. Sponsors drop athletes all the time. Athletes should be able to do the same if it's in their best interest. Being sentimental and loyal to first sponsors sounds wonderful on the Internet, but nothing lasts forever. Peat isn't still riding a GT and Minnaar ain't rollin' on an Orange or a Haro, even though I'm sure those guys had great relationships with those companies while it lasted.
I don't think it is unreasonable for UCI to request team kits be nearly identical. Governing bodies of all other sports do the exact same thing...
Disclaimer: yeah, yeah, I know the UCI is comprised of horrible people who personally hate cycling. And, I fully expect to see Syndicate at all the races this summer in slightly modified kits. No big deal.
Those guys don´t make millions and they don´t even last as long in their sport compared with other sports like football (soccer).
They have to grab what they can get in the short time they are successful.
So calling it unreasonable to not drop a sponsor for being on a team is just wrong.
Even more so, when there is just no reason for this rule. Why do they have to be in matching clothes? They are not acting as a team. They are individuals racing against each other. It just so happens they are riding for the same sponsor.
Why would they limit their support options to just the teams suppliers and/or sponsors?
Would you like to ride in a helmet that fits you poorly or is of inferior quality if you could easily grab a sponsoring deal with a manufacturer whose helmets are of higher quality and work better for you?
Or ride on shitty tires, just because the team happens to be sponsored by them, effectively limiting your performance as an athlete?
It´s just unreasonable. It´s not in the athletes best interest. It´s not in the best interest of growing the sport.
You don´t see stupid regulations like that in other individual sports. Formula 1 pilots have individual sponsors, so do Moto GP or MX riders. Those sports flourish and the athletes are able to make a living out of them whereas downhill is still a sport for underpaid idealists who do it because they love the sport. Then the governing body steps in and basically tells riders to cut their income by dropping sponsors. Way to go and support the riders...
Yes, I believe people use ill fitting equipment all the time because that is what their sponsors have issued them.
I have a hard time feeling sorry for people who get paid to ride a bicycle, even if it's only for 5 or so years (although I can think of several riders whose careers far outlasted any footballers.). Hypothetically speaking, If someone is too sentimental to drop Lizard Skins just because they were the first to kick them down some free grips, then I think they should decline any factory team offers and go it alone as a privateer.
Of course, when signing on to certain Elite teams, people are going to have drop or gain sponsors. I'd wager that in general, that's a zero sum gain/loss.
However, when a team is formed, functions with a major bike sponsor and has been allowed by the UCI to exist in said form (with athletes having different sponsors, kits, etc) and gain the special designation in the Elite category PREVIOUSLY, I'm amazed they revoked the designation this year.
All because of fashion.
The UCI probably loses out here more than anyone as they won't get the trade team fee.
The jersey rule has been in place for years and it was only a matter of time before it was clamped down.
Shitty situation, but the racing stays the same and everyone's hatred for the UCI intensifies.
I don't remember seeing '14 Ratboy replica jerseys available anywhere? If that's "the point" then I'm afraid, you've lost me.
3 different sponsor manafactures, to me this is pretty dam good effort, people dont realise how much work this takes behind the scenes running putting a team together, its a great gig, but as with anything its tough has its challenges, people who say they dont pity anyone being paid to cycle grow up, just jealousy! These guys gals risk alot for what they love, if they can make money good on them!
Most people here sell theyre soul to a souless corp for income, then put boot in to justify theyre own unhappiness with said soulless selled out job! We all do things we dont want to at times, but dont take that away from the lucky few who can, they earned it and work hard for it too. If they love it thats inspirational to the rest of us, slaves to society.
This is just Nazi BS control..
Cant people, see whats going in here! This carry on is hurting the sport, people are trying to grow and expand it which will be better for all, this situation destroys that.
We need rules, but fair and open rules that suit the given disipline of the sport, what works for XC may or may not work for Enduro or DH, obviously did not work for Enduro, as said EWS proves once again, why can people not see with open eyes what works and what dosent, imo far too many in this industry are self promoting and not for greater good at expense of sport in longer run.
dave
Speaking of the pit berm, I suggest that the next Bar Drag Bounty be solely Pit Berm based. One would have to carve the tire berm,then the BB berm, then the pedal berm, and finally the bar berm. Bring it!
Like, it´s ok to get paid shittons of money for working 16h a day, but if you actually enjoy it, you should earn less?
Doesn´t make sense in any way.
Of course people use ill fitting equipment because of sponsoring. That´s just not the point. The point is, if you are in the lucky situation to cherrypick your sponsors, be it for monetary reasons or because of the kit itself (which might actually pay off in the long run because of better results), it is ok for the governing body of your sport to limit your options and therefore your salary?
Despite your own opinion about being lucky and having the opportunity to ride bikes for a living, that is not what´s in the best interest of the athlete. And THAT is what the UCI´s main interest should be. Making regulations to protect and support athletes and grow a healthy invorenment that motivates young talent to enter the professional scene.
Look at it this way. In a normal job, you have a lifetime to climb up the ladder and earn money. It´s no big deal to at some point cut back on salary (= dropping sponsors) and do the shitty job for a few years to prove your value. For an athlete that´s not an option.
I´m not saying they are wrong for enforcing a law that has been there for a long time. Of course the Syndicate could have just submitted three identical designs and streamlined their sponsor list.
I´m saying they are wrong for making regulations like that in the first place.
What the UCI is doing is driving sponsors away from the sport and that´s not good for the sport in general.
Matt5311 - I think most DH riders have enough individuality that you can easily spot them even with the same Jersey... that and the different helmets.
Ive seen a couple people say the kits look alot different, but I have to back up Sess and say they achieved an "overall look" pretty darn well. Alot more similar than last year. And I applaud them for not taking the color out and giving the UCI the finger.
- what´s the point of beeing a Trade team? Besides of having benefits like reserved pit space?
- what´s the point of beeing individuals racing against each other beeing formed in a team?
Beeing a team I guess is about representation. Beeing on that team means representing a team and it´s supporters. Supporting that team means, supporting the people that run the team, supporting the athletes competing in the way of providing funds and material support and probably additional technical "factory" support.
Yes downhill is a sport of indiviual athletes competing against each other - like so many other, actually every sport except teamsports.
Do they need individual kits? - no they don´t.
Could it be nice? - yes it could.
Is it in a TEAMS interest to have it´s members in individual outfits?- i doubt it.
Could a team and its members benefit from that rule? - Hmm, supporting women, juniors and not-(yet)-race-winning racers by bigger funds tied to top-tier-racers come to mind, maybe even funds from outside the industry that come solely for advertising/marketing reasons are more attracted to teams, rather than individuals racing.
Interesstingly all things the Sydicate doesnt do. Maybe for reason?
So maybe the UCI´s decesion to ban them from acquiring trade team status is for reason.
And maybe the Syndicate is just a syndicate rather than an actual Team...
If they do not want to be considered a Team, then hire three individual Managers and be done with it. That's tradition, and that's how things get done. Instead a simple rule as wearing a shirt needs days of time on the Internet and a call for boycott. What a year this is going to be!
Also, it's not like fans of the World Cup don't know which rider is on which team, and any new viewers will quickly learn from listening to commentators anyway.
Downhill is an individuals sport, making this rule completely irrelevant. You never have two riders on the track at the same time so being able to recognise which team they are on is not necessary. In fact, having each rider in a different kit will more than likely benefit the rider in terms of exposure and uniqueness.
It just shows how the UCI blindly applies the same rules across all disciplines of cycling, regardless of the consequences. Either the UCI needs to form a seperate governing body, that is specific to MTB and DH, and understands the needs of these niche sports. Or disciplines such as DH need to break away from the UCI in order to realise their full potential.
Personally, I don't think the UCI likes Rob Roskopp and SC's heavy support of enduro, the syndicate, and Ratboy. They were ok with GM winning world champs, but there is no way the liked that Ratboy was the overall winner and one huck to flat away from winning the double. Look at Rat's jersey last year, it was nothing like anyones and the UCI didn't give a shit because he wasn't consistently on the podium.
This is makes things a little harder for SCS, but I don't think it will be a big deal. Hopefully it pisses Peaty off and he goes out and gets another turn on the top step.
I really don't see how preventing riders having their own personal kit and/or equipment sponsors will equate to more earnings for them. As the most successful team on the world cup circuit for the past decade, SC Syndicate must be doing something right. Their success has done so much for popularity of the sport that I feel this decision is very short sighted.
It is the individual personalities and style of each rider that makes downhill what it is. Look at Ratboy last year - a long haired Mancunian with a wild style totally dominating the world cup, and he has become the most popular rider in a very long time. Imagine if his look and personality had been stifled by commercial intervention and silly rules. These riders are doing this for a living, they are fighting for exposure and to prevent them being individuals is doing them a disservice.
Take the world champs race as an example. How much more media interest is there when each rider turns up with personalised kit and custom bikes/graphics representing their individual countries.
Post a reply to: 2015 Racing Rumours - MTB Musical Chairs