10 ms·
Why not just have the Olympic host supply the same bike model to every participant rather than having each rider bring their own bike?
by etimberg 2y ago
Why not just have the Olympic host supply the same bike model to every participant rather than having each rider bring their own bike?
- RegnisGnaw 2y agoWhy not have the Olympic host supply the same shoes to every participant? The same swim suit to every participant. What's the end?
- hanniabu 2y agoThey really should, that way everyone is competing on equal levels. Less variables means a greater chance the best person wins.
- solardev 2y agoI don't think the Olympics were ever about equal footing or decreasing variables. To really level the playing field you'd have to have a clone army of athletes with the same genes, diet, lifestyle, training, coach, sleep, etc. Equipment is just one variable among dozens, and eventually the rules can change to limit their contribution (like with swimsuits).
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- rhinoman 2y agoOr it would benefit those participants who are best suited to the chosen gear. Taking an extreme example - imagine if we said “everyone must wear size 9 shoes so everybody’s on equal footing”.
- axblount 2y agoI'm not sure how your extreme example is helpful. No one has made a suggestion like that.
- rhinoman 2y agoThe idea is that different equipment is better suited for different individuals. By mandating a specific kind of equipment for all athletes, you'd be benefiting some individuals over others. For example, road bikes have different frame shapes that are suitable depending on your torso length compared to leg length. Of course, the natural next step would be allow some flexibility (different frame size but same material), but you can see how that could be a slippery slope of legislation and lobbying that would end up in a similar situation to where we are today?
- to11mtm 2y agoTBH though... You -should- be able to just mandate Hubs and cranks to get around this. Or make sponsors provide a 'slew' of wheels and cranksets for all their riders (i.e. spares as well) that can get inspected before the race, and are randomly distributed between the riders sponsored. Buuuuut UCI hasn't even figured out doping, so lol
- northwest65 2y agoShould hurdles be made in a range of sizes to be fair on short competitors?
- vintermann 2y ago> The idea is that different equipment is better suited for different individuals. Well yes, but different sports are also better suited for different individuals. It's just making the equipment part of the definition of the sport.
- lmm 2y agoSuggesting everyone should have to use a specific bike is exactly a suggestion like that - bikes have sizes and shapes that are suited to riders of particular body sizes and shapes.
- jaggederest 2y agoEspecially in the context of the original olympics, which were largely conducted nude. The idea that a rich country can field better equipment is absurd.
- Am4TIfIsER0ppos 2y agoYes please!
- rurban 2y agoThat would filter out the US TV market. They would not survive this.
- jaggederest 2y agoProviding standardized equipment? I'm not at all suggesting everyone compete nude, I'm suggesting that circumstances be standardized.
- thesz 2y agoIf you have been training in different gear than is supplied to you by host of the event then you are at disadvantage. Take a look at the variety of weightlifting shoes, as an example of gear for a specific sport.
- Ylpertnodi 2y agoWould you expand that to nutrition, training regime, traing location (altitude), etc? Then limit the amount each country/athlete can spend, make everyone get paid the same by different sponsors?
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- marinmania 2y agoThere was a controversy in curling a few years ago where some curling teams were using new brooms by a new company that had significantly better tech. It was so good it made it unnecessary to have two sweepers. The resolution was to ban it and only allow brooms from certain manufacturers. It seems reasonable that these sports could narrow down the list of approved equipment down to a few approved suppliers every year. https://www.cbc.ca/listen/cbc-podcasts/1427-broomgate-a-curling-scandal https://www.cbc.ca/listen/cbc-podcasts/1427-broomgate-a-curl...
- alistairSH 2y agoShoes had a similar issue when Nike released their first modern super-shoe (Vaporfly, IIRC). The track and field body had to limit shoe sole height and the other brands had a lot of catch-up to do. Same for swimming with high tech, low drag, bouyant swimsuits. Again, the international body had to step in and ban some materials/designs to prevent domination by nations that could sink resources into the engineering.
- notatoad 2y agosame thing happens in cycling all the time too. the UCI bans new equipment all the time, and the rules for what is allowed are very strict, to the point where there's a limit on sock height. there is a limited list of frames that can be used in UCI races, including the olympics but rules around the type of equipment you can use, and the race host supplying specific equipment to all riders, is a very different thing.
- altruios 2y agoExternal supplies, clothing, and equipment... that's the end... we aren't going to be matching used muscles to see which brain pulls on them harder. External influences should be minimized within reason.
- scblock 2y agoThis is not a strong argument. In fact it sounds downright reasonable.
- SoftTalker 2y agoHave everyone compete in the nude, like they did originally. Viewership would break records, at least.
- vintermann 2y agoDid you know that the Olympics used to be a strictly amateur competition? You would get disqualified if it turned out you'd taken payment for your sporting activity. So it doesn't sound as crazy to me.
- solardev 2y agoDifferent riders have different preferences, and there's a lot of money and technology that goes into improving the bikes every year (or at least every decade). The materials, the construction, the electronics, the aerodynamics, the fit, the saddle, the tires... they're all constantly evolving. It's like car races, manufacturer sponsorship is a huge part of it, and the races in turn advertise those bikes. Would it make for more equal footing if everyone had the same model? Yeah, probably, but does that happen elsewhere in the Olympics? Does the host supply skis, shoes, bows, bobsleds, etc.?
- etimberg 2y agoTo me, the olympics are about determining who is best at a sport. It's not a technical problem like a car race where bending the rules with creative engineering is expected and encouraged.
- icoder 2y agoEngineering is part of many sports, skiing, snowboarding, swimming (albeit limited after those floating suits), running. Even if you say they should all be about the sports performance only, there's engineering behind training schedules, equipment, diet, techniques & posture, etc.
- slaymaker1907 2y agoThe trouble is that people have different preferences for different equipment and by mandating one particular bike, you disadvantage a lot people based on who does better on a particular bike and aren't judging people solely based on who is the better cyclist. Consider the absurd extension of using exactly the same equipment where even the size of the bike is exactly the same, saddle height is the same, pedal length is the same, etc. There will be maybe one person who that is ideal with and whole lot more people suffering injuries from riding incorrectly sized bikes. Therefore, since we can't all have exactly the same bikes, we need to come up with a definition of what is "fair" to adjust for the bike that someone races on. Sure, this allows for some degree creative engineering, but is that really a bad thing so long as money doesn't become the determining factor of who wins? It pushes the science of bikes forward and eventually that new tech will make its way to everyone, including amateur cyclists.
- notatoad 2y agoThe olympics don't really set the protocol for any of this. the rules and procedures for each sport are set by their respective international sport organization. for cycling that's the UCI. the olympics is only one event, and only happens once every four years. the rest of the season, that happens every year, is much more important and doesn't have an olympic host to provide bikes. so there needs to be some procedure that catches motor doping at all the races, not just one infrequent race. The olympics is just going to follow the same procedures that are used for all the rest of the worldtour level races. and while the olympics might not care about keeping the rider's bike sponsors happy, the rest of the races do. if riders weren't out there promoting bike brands and riding bikes provided by their sponsors, pro bike racing wouldn't be a thing.
- dmckeon 2y ago> promoting bike brands and riding bikes provided by their sponsors Therein lies an answer - change the disincentives - instead of banning cheating riders, ban all of the sponsors of those riders for a time. Now the onus is on the sponsors to discourage cheating.
- kelseyfrog 2y agoI don't know much about sponsorship. How would a sponsor be banned? What sort of activities or relations would be off-limits during a ban?
- floam 2y agoI imagine they would be unable to sponsor participants in that organization for a time, and their name would be dishonored.
- lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 2y agoMaybe it's a bit circular but the organizers could disqualify the racers being sponsored which would mean either the banned sponsor doesn't sponsor anyone or it's done under wraps. The latter would defeat the advertising purpose the sponsor would have for the sponsorship.
- epanchin 2y agoThat is the premise behind formula E, and no one watches it.
- porkbeer 2y agoBut that isn't why, Spec Miata (for example) is the same and has an outsized following. in fact, single-make racing is nearly as common as mixed.
- anthomtb 2y agoDoes Spec Miata have a spectator following? I have always taken it to be an accessible form of motor racing in which to participate, not something to watch.
- m463 2y agoThere was the IROC-Z and I don't know what the viewership was like, but people recognized the car. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Camaro_(third_generation)#1985 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Camaro_(third_genera...
- xnx 2y agoA big part (possibly the primary reason) is to promote and sell overpriced gear to amateurs. The Little 500 race is run with all riders using standard bikes, so it's not unprecedented. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_500 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_500
- drstewart 2y agoSome random one-off tiny race in the middle nowhere does not make the existence of bike racing an overpriced scam, dear lord.
- hoseja 2y agoNo, it itself makes it.
- ubermonkey 2y agoI'm a very avid cyclist. Kinda quietly making fun of folks who show up on (e.g.) $10,000 road bikes and then get dropped 5 miles into the ride is a whole Thing. True life, I'm not sure there's a good reason for a person spending their own money to buy a new road bike that costs more than $4-5K new. You can absolutely get started for way way less (probably $1500 new retail), but once the hook sets and you decide This Is Something I Like, there are things you'll want. Carbon frames are far more comfortable to ride than aluminum. This extends to handlebars, stem, and seatpost. Lighter-weight wheels -- also carbon -- are an upgrade you can feel IMMEDIATELY. I think it has to do with rotational weight vs. static weight. Nicer wheels have nicer bearings in them, too. Electronic shifting doesn't make you faster in and of itself, but once you've used it you'll fall in love with it. Shifting is effortless, and combined brake-and-shift actions become viable in a way they aren't with mechanical shifting. My Giant was just under $5k, and that's after an upgrade or two (mostly the addition of a power meter). Do I ride with folks on $10-15k bikes? Oh yeah. MOST of them are pretty serious riders, but they're not any faster on that Pinarello than they would be on (e.g.) my bike. It's effectively jewelry at that point. (Now, the exception is if you're shaped in a way that makes off-the-shelf frames difficult. I know a couple folks -- one very well off and very short, the other decidedly middle class and VERY tall -- who got fully custom frames, but for both of them it was really the only way to get a bike that fit. For the middle-class guy, this means his bike is worth more than his car, but it's a forever-bike (titanium frame), and he's an 8-10,000 mile a year guy, so...)
- stainablesteel 2y agodoesn't really seem fair to me if you've practiced on what you own and perhaps have made it custom to fit to your limb/torso ratios for posture, have a handlebar grip you like, prefer the kind of derailleur and shifters you chose etc its all a matter of equipment preference and for sports that involve using equipment i think that would be a personal choice of minor optimizations and preferences that you should be granted given you would have worked a lot with it to get to the olympics
- mvkel 2y agoDefine "bike model." Every rider IS effectively on the same bike. They're either running Shimano drivetrains, or SRAM. I don't imagine the Olympics could spend the millions in R&D to invent their own drivetrain system for a once-every-four-years event. If you were referring to the bike frame itself, it's kind of the least-important part of the bike.
- martinky24 2y agoWhat leads you to believe the frame is the least important part of the bike...?
- shejdb688 2y agoArguably the most important which is why they should be riding identical bikes
- crote 2y agoBikes are sized to the individual rider, even at amateur levels. You can't give a bike designed for a 5'4" guy to a 6'4" guy or vice versa, they physically won't be able to use it. Proportions makes this even worse: the cycling equivalent of Michael Phelps won't be able to use a bike designed for a normally-proportioned person.
- mvkel 2y agoIt's the thing that the entire drivetrain bolts to. Aero matters, but the differences between frames are negligible. If we're talking about emotors, they need to be compatible with the drivetrain, regardless of frame.
- martinky24 2y agoAt the highest level of cycling, what you call "negligible" is known colloquially as "marginal gains", and "marginal gains" are what win/lose races!
- NoPicklez 2y agoThat's because in the sport of cycling, the bike is main part of the athlete and therefore sponsors want athlete's to ride the bikes they ride all throughout the rest of the year. It's purely a branding and sponsorship related piece.
- Aperocky 2y agoThey basically already did, forced the bikes to be heavier than 6.9 kg, killed almost all design innovation that didn't results in 2 triangles on the frame, etc. Everyone is essentially riding very expensive version of the same bike. 90% of riders will be on Dura Ace and equipment that the biggest distinguishing qualities are paint and size.
- ubermonkey 2y agoI was surprised by your 90%-Dura-Ace assertion, so I went looking. https://www.cyclingnews.com/features/tour-de-france-2024-tech-wrap-up-who-won-with-what/ https://www.cyclingnews.com/features/tour-de-france-2024-tec... You're reasonably close to right: 18 of 22 teams ran Dura-Ace, which surprises me because in my enthusiast circles locally the split with Shimano and SRAM is much, much more even. (I personally prefer the latter.) What REALLY shocked me is this: "2024 marks the first year that the Tour de France has been without a team using a Campagnolo groupset. This means that it was a two-horse race between Shimano and SRAM for stage honours." I mean, I know Campy wasn't what it had been. I only know a few folks who run Campy groups, and I don't know anyone who uses the Campy electronic groupset. It's all so expensive, and most shops don't have someone with any experience with their gear anymore, which becomes a death spiral for people who buy their own gear. Still, the idea that the only Euro maker got shut out of even participating in the Tour is amazing to me.
- wiether 2y agoSRAM decided to do something clever : instead of giving money to pro-riders to promote their products and hope regular people will be convinced to buy the products ; they invested in partnership with bike manufacturers, since most groupsets are sold already assembled to a frame. More and more new bakes are sold with SRAM components than it used to be. So people have now more opportunities to pay for SRAM products on a new bike, and afterwards buy replacement parts when required. Also, for each given price category, SRAM is usually a bit cheaper than Shim. Meanwhile Campagnolo is more and more expensive while offering nothing more than the two others. Also less partnerships with bike manufacturers, even Italian ones. And some Asian brands are starting to be more and more reliable.
- EnigmaFlare 2y agoOne downside is that if (when) the equipment fails, it'll be unfair to whoever happened to be lumped with the bad one and it would sometimes be hard to prove if it was the equipment's fault or the athlete's. With their own bike, it's their own responsibility. Another is there would be no pressure on the bike technology so the audience would know they're not performing as well as they could on some consumer bike, reducing the appeal of it. It's already stink that there are weight minimums.
- dyauspitr 2y agoA Soviet model like that would end up killing any technical progress in the space.
- vintermann 2y agoI think maybe society is investing enough into cycling technology as it is.
- wiether 2y agoWhy is that? The actual EV revolution that the Worlds needs is through bikes, not cars.
- dyauspitr 2y agoWell that’s not right either. That only works for people that live in urban areas. Very few people are going to bike 30 miles to work everyday.
- wiether 2y ago> That only works for people that live in urban areas Which is _only_ the majority of the global population.
- dyauspitr 2y agoMaybe technically, but most families in the US live in suburbs which are classified as urban areas but are really not. The drive to the grocery store from an average suburban home is probably 10-20 minutes.
- whakim 2y agoEscape Collective did an article on this (https://escapecollective.com/what-would-happen-if-everyone-in-the-peloton-used-the-same-equipment/ https://escapecollective.com/what-would-happen-if-everyone-i...), and while at first glance there's a lot to like about a "spec series" for cycling, ultimately it would definitely advantage/disadvantage some riders. Plus, people just want to race a bike that works for them, not some spec bike.
- rurban 2y agoBecause the most likely doping they still use is self blood-infusions, as described by Infuentes recently. Not detectable. And those incredible new records by the top riders can only be explained by doping. Faster than with EPO. Mechanical doping is still an additional possibility, sure. Esp. after several riders complained about those motor noises last year.
- RCitronsBroker 2y agoEPO as a Doping Agent is almost useless. The gain in red blood cells is bottlenecked by total volume and the inevitable increase in blood viscosity. This truth, however, is obfuscated by mental side effects of erythropoietin, which tend to convince users of it’s efficacy
- nonameiguess 2y agoSelf-transfusion can be detectable now that they have the athlete biological passport. At least, that's the intent of it. If your red blood cell count goes up faster than is naturally possible, they'll be able to tell. This can't keep you from doing it very gradually, of course. Plus, basically all of these guys sleep in altitude tents now to boost red blood cell production via low oxygen. I don't think anyone has been caught doing it yet, but it's also possible now to use a carbon monoxide inhaler to induce hypoxia and boost red blood cell production that way. Escape Collective did an investigation into a few months ago. That is pretty dangerous, but it's hard to believe not a single person would at least try, and it can't be detected. It's not even actually banned right now, though UCI did ban huffing xenon gas to do the same thing. Detecting carbon monoxide huffing seems undetectable even in principle, though, since it's a naturally occurring pollutant. You'd effectively be banning riders from ever smoking since that would produce a positive test.
- killingtime74 2y agoSailing does this. One design class. Not supplied by host but to a specification
- _trampeltier 2y agoBecause not all have the same size and some like diffrent handles, seats and so on. For racing bicycles are already a lot rules in place. Shape, geometery, weight. That's why some fancy by bicyles are ok for Triatlon but not for bicycle races.
- beAbU 2y agoThere are certain motor racing categories where things like engines (or even entire cars) are provided by the race organiser and teams are not allowed to make any modifications. Formula A1 comes to mind as an example. These categories are much more focussed on the driver, as the racetrack and cars are all identical. I'm pretty sure that something like this can be brought into cycle racing. Everybody gets the same frame, wheelset, crankset and groupset, and you install your own cockpit (saddle and handlebars).
- _trampeltier 2y agoYes things like tyres does not matter, but even in F1, each driver has his own seat.
- beAbU 2y agoF1 Cars are completely custom built by the team, and even different drivers within the same team drive essentially different cars. The suspension setup, handling profile, seat, steering wheel and button layout are all custom done for the driver.