From the UCI with love
Imagine the surprise when a manufacturer's general mailbox contains an email from the UCI (Union Cycliste Internationale) with the announcement that one of their products is illegal. That happened to Bont Cycling about a month ago, but it wasn't an April Fool's joke. It was announced that the aero Bont Crono shoe is no longer acceptable for UCI competition. Slowtwitch had a few words with their CEO Steven Nemeth about this matter.
Slowtwitch: How did you find out about this recent UCI development?
Steven: They sent an official letter to our general email address on the 11 of April. There was no phone call or at least an attempt to contact someone senior in our organization. Judging by the email address used, they simply took it from our website and sent the letter to it.
ST: Had you heard any rumors about this before or came this completely as a surprise?
Steven: The only feedback we had was from the Track Worlds and the feedback was simply that the Crono drew quite a bit of attention, but nothing else.
ST: One would think that an aero helmet and slippery clothing falls in the same category.
Steven: Exactly! Shoes are clothing, that is their classification. The only exception on this is helmet as they argue the safety factor and require helmets to be sent in for approval. In saying this, to be honest if they actually tried to argue safety aspects of aero helmets I think anyone with any knowledge of them would get a great laugh.
The rules basically state; “It is forbidden to wear non-essential items of clothing or items designed to influence the performances of a rider such as reducing air resistance or modifying the body of the rider (compression, stretching, support).
Items of clothing or equipment may be considered essential where weather conditions make them appropriate for the safety or the health of the rider. In this case, the nature and texture of the clothing or equipment must be clearly and solely justified by the need to protect the rider from bad weather conditions. Discretion in this respect is left to the race commissaires.
Equipment (helmets, shoes, jerseys, shorts, etc.) worn by the rider may not be adapted to serve any other purpose apart from that of clothing or safety by the addition or incorporation of mechanical or electronic systems which are not approved as technical innovations under article 1.3.004.”
If you look at their own rules, how do they explain compression clothing under cycling gear, aero helmets, skin suits, shoe covers used in doors, all cycling clothing made from aero fabrics including even standard bib shorts and jerseys, the list is rather long.
When you really look at the situation, all major brands are marketing aerodynamically oriented equipment.
Realistically speaking, every single brand which designs and produces performance products designs them to improve performance which directly contradicts their rules.
ST: Shoe covers on the other hand (unless used in cold conditions) really serve no function on a rider other than for aerodynamic purposes, and the UCI doesn’t seem to have an interest there. Well, maybe not yet.
Steven: Correct, they choose to ignore it. They also have a rule which clearly states that all equipment raced at UCI sanctioned events including world championships, Olympics, etc must be commercially available. Should we look at the long list of products that have been used at such events and have never made it to public arena? Or maybe the long list of products first released and tested in world class events each year, sometimes years prior to public release.
ST: Does this to some degree make you feel really good? Kind of as if the UCI is telling you that you are actually really superb at what you are doing?
Steven: Yes and no. The fact they have done this is a compliment to the product, but it makes me both sad and frustrated that our sport, which we all love is governed by an organization that is capable of such hypocrisy and is run largely with antiquated attitudes and misdirected political agendas.
ST: So what is next for you guys in that regard? Is this decision final?
Steven: There has been a number of subsequent letters between the two entities and we will continue to put our case forward. What they have done is wrong and we will continue to argue our case.
ST: Do you think you'll have a shot of having this reversed?
Stephen: From a legal point considering the precedent they have set for themselves by allowing an endless list of products throughout history to contravene their actual rules, we are in a very strong position.
ST: Triathletes should rejoice though since they do not face the same governing body and they could wear the Crono for sure, although it might not be too practical.
Steven: We actually have some interesting products planned for the triathlon market. We have always been proud of the fact that we are not afraid to be innovators. Our entire process is unique and performance based. Don’t be surprised if you see some interesting triathlon shoe prototypes around at some events in the near future. Just imagine an aerodynamic triathlon of the shoe over a half or full Ironman distance. We do have the technology.
ST: That sounds exciting, but when might we be able to hold one in our hands?
Steven: We are looking at potentially releasing images as soon as the next few weeks.
ST: Anything else we should know?
Steven: Stay tuned for some great new products we have coming out and a very large thanks to all our supporters.
Editor's note: In the first pic Steven Nemeth holds Gen 1 Crono in his hands and in the second pic Gen1 and Gen2, with the lace cover and heel of Gen 2 being slightly different.
