3B.5.7 Repair, Change, or Replace a (Broken) Unicycle

This discussion has an associated proposal. View Proposal Details here.

Comments about this discussion:

Started 24 Jun 07:35

Comment 25 Jun 10:47

Thank you for starting the discussion about whether the “Repair, Change, or Replace a (Broken) Unicycle” rule needs adjustments for the Criterium or Time Trails. I find it a bit impractical to have the changes exclusively in the official proposal, so I suggest that we discuss the additions and changes here, so I'll copy the proposed additions here:

Extension of the existing rule “Repair, Change, or Replace a (Broken) Unicycle” by the following paragraphs:

5. For time-trial records, outside assistance for repairs and adjustment of equipment is allowed, but the rider must use the same unicycle for the duration of the record attempt. Parts of the unicycle may be replaced only if damaged during the record attempt. Damage is defined as equipment failure which may impact on the rider's performance or safety. An exception is made for crank changes, which can be made without damage sustained.
6. In event of the unicycle being damaged beyond repair, a replacement unicycle may be used, but the wheelset must be exchanged like-for-like. That is, a 29" unicycle must replaced with a 29" unicycle, and a geared 36" replaced with a geared 36" unicycle with the same gearbox ratio.

To 5: Since the Rulebook is not only written for records, I think it is questionable to include rules that only apply to records. Why are you proposing this rule exclusively for records and not for all Time Trials?

Comment 29 Jun 01:28

Because I tried to make similar proposals in the world record committee but you said it had to addressed in the rulebook committee to make them consistent.

One of the discussion points can be about whether it applies to all time-trials, or just time trial records. To me, a time-trial is a race, and should follow racing rules, whereas time-trial records include several endurance efforts. It seems rather mean to have no outside support for the 100mile or 24 hour records. Either way, there is no rule covering time trials currently.

Comment 30 Jun 04:40

> Because I tried to make similar proposals in the world record committee but you said it had to addressed in the rulebook committee to make them consistent.

Exactly, as the World Record Guidelines also only apply to records - so the question is basically the same: why should these rules only apply to records? In my opinion, it makes more sense to keep record and competition rules consistent wherever possible. Because in the end the records should be linked to the competitions we have.

Comment 02 Jul 07:21

There is a big difference between doing a 10km time-trial in Unicon competition, vs riding around in circles for 24hrs.

I also believe there is a distinction between a time-trial race (competing against many others) vs a time-trial record (competing against yourself, the person before you, and the person after you).

Not sure why it is questionable to have rules that apply only to records. The UCI have an entire section dedicated to their Hour record (3.5.026-035)

https://www.uci.org/regulations/3MyLDDrwJCJJ0BGGOFzOat#part-iii-track-races

Either way, the simplest solution would be to use some form of distance mark where we allow external support.

Comment 02 Jul 07:41

> Not sure why it is questionable to have rules that apply only to records.

Because it is strange to hold a 10 km time trail competition under different conditions than a 10 km time trail record - this would mean that a performance from a 10 km time trail competition might not be suitable for a 10 km time trail record. I personally think that's very strange and incomprehensible.

> Either way, the simplest solution would be to use some form of distance mark where we allow external support.

Do you mean that we allow external support for time trails / races exceeding a certain length? That sounds sensible from my point of view.

Comment 07 Jul 15:33

On a short race or time trial, a stop to repair equipment has more impact on the overall result than on a very long race or time trial.
The slightest stop on a 10km race is a complete waste of time, whereas on a 24-hour race, you can rest and eat while someone repairs or modifies your unicycle.

I don't see why the rules could be more flexible on a 24h time trial. I think it would be fairer if there were no help at all on a 24h attempt. The bigger and more skilled your team, the better your chances of a good performance.

In my opinion, this rule should simply be simplified to its essentials: no category changes.

Comment 08 Jul 02:08

> In my opinion, this rule should simply be simplified to its essentials: no category changes.

That would be fine for me - a simple and consistent rule.

Comment 08 Jul 12:00

I've approved the proposal so that everyone can see it.

The thing that questions me is the fact of leaving the possibility of changing unicycle to change crank, because it's faster (while remaining in the same category). If tomorrow there's a race with 50km of flat that ends with 10km of uphill, it might be tempting for a standard rider to change unicycles (from 29“/89mm to 29”/150mm) rather than cranks. In a race, this could create a significant advantage.

I think we need to simplify this rule by removing the part about having to carry your own tools and limiting assistance. It seems absurd to me to require you to carry your cranks, when another competitor could have custom cranks with an 89mm position and a 150mm position (to use my example). As for changing unicycles, I think it's better to keep the constraint of a mechanical problem. Whereas, in my opinion, assistance with changing cranks, or any other type of repair or adjustment, should be allowed. Competitors who win competitions don't spend time making adjustments and repairs during the race. And as long as we don't plan to use races to test competitors' repairing skills (glass breakage and nail passes?), I don't see the point of limiting assistance.
In the event of a change of unicycle, the replacement unicycle must be of the same category (and if possible, the same wheel size and crank length).

Comment 09 Jul 01:57

I would follow that approach.

If we revise the proposal I would like to consider spliting it in individual paragraphs like we did in all the new rules or the other revised rules :)

Comment 13 Jul 05:24

"I don't see why the rules could be more flexible on a 24h time trial. I think it would be fairer if there were no help at all on a 24h attempt. The bigger and more skilled your team, the better your chances of a good performance."-- Simon

It's an ultra-endurance effort. I don't think anyone has attempted a 24hr race or record attempt without support crew. You can do 12hrs without external support, but 24hrs is in a different league.

"In my opinion, this rule should simply be simplified to its essentials: no category changes" -- Simon

That could work, but needs to be more specific. There is nothing in the existing wording in the old rule that says you can't swap unicycles, whether during a race or a world record attempt.

So if racing in standard class, you can have a 29"/89mm unicycle for the flat part of the course, and a 29"/125mm unicycle waiting for you at the bottom of a hill, provided no outside assistance is provided.

For unlimited class, you can start on a 36" geared unicycle for a 24hr record attempt, then swap to a lighter 29"/89mm unicycle as fatigue sets in. Because it is unlimited class, no category change was made.

Comment 13 Jul 09:21

> That could work, but needs to be more specific. There is nothing in the existing wording in the old rule that says you can't swap unicycles, whether during a race or a world record attempt.

We agree. In my last message 5 days ago, I added "As for changing unicycles, I think it's better to keep the constraint of a mechanical problem. whereas, in my opinion, assistance with changing cranks, or any other type of repair or adjustment, should be allowed."

Comment 14 Jul 09:08

one quick aside: the crit may have a prelim and final format. Do we want our rules to require no unicycle change between them? I would say no (aside from remaining legal in categories, obviously).

Comment 16 Jul 04:28

> one quick aside: the crit may have a prelim and final format. Do we want our rules to require no unicycle change between them? I would say no (aside from remaining legal in categories, obviously).

I see no reason to add a specific rule for the Criterium. As the course is the same in both prelim and final, I see no advantage in changing unicycles.

Ken> Can you update the proposal? If not, I will.

Comment 20 Jul 09:48

Adjustments still need to be made to the associated proposal so that it fits in with what we have discussed here!

Comment 21 Jul 06:23

I would agree with the proposed simplified version of the rule. I think it contains all the important aspects and remains simple.

Comment 25 Jul 04:57

"Ken> Can you update the proposal? If not, I will." --Simon

Apologies, I've had a very busy two weeks!

Thanks Simon for updating- it looks good, but some things to think about:

1. Riders are allowed to modify or adjust their unicycle during the race. Assistance from others is permitted at any time, including tools and hands-on help.

This would permit a wheel swap. However, it is possible that this can form part of someone's race strategy. For instance, they race their 29" standard unicycle, then swap to a 24" for a steep climb. If you have a quick release wheel (when one it is developed!), and support crew waiting, it could be done in a few seconds.

I am not against this rule as it is written though

2. Unicycle replacement is permitted only in the event of mechanical problems or damage. The replacement unicycle must belong to the same category as the original and should ideally have same characteristics (wheel size, crank length, hub). The Referee must confirm that the situation was unplanned and was indeed accidental.

We have to define what is permitted as a 'mechanical problem or damage'.

If I UPD and scratch my unicycle, can I then swap for a new unicycle? (I would say no)

If the bolts on my aerobar loosen, can I swap to another unicycle while my support crew tightens them up? (I would say yes).

Perhaps we need to have an extra line that says:

"The mechanical problem or damage must be sufficient to impair the function or safety of the unicycle"

Does having the word 'ideally' dilute out the intention of having a unicycle with the same wheel/crank/hub characteristics? Another hypothetical situation- someone can race a 36" geared unicycle, intentionally crash before a hill and push their aerobars out of alignment, then hop on a lightweight 26" Unicycle for the climb.

Comment 26 Jul 03:28

> This would permit a wheel swap. However, it is possible that this can form part of someone's race strategy. For instance, they race their 29" standard unicycle, then swap to a 24" for a steep climb. If you have a quick release wheel (when one it is developed!), and support crew waiting, it could be done in a few seconds.

For me, wheel replacement is more than just a modification or adjustment. If necessary, we can specify the exception of a wheel replacement.

> Does having the word 'ideally' dilute out the intention of having a unicycle with the same wheel/crank/hub characteristics? Another hypothetical situation- someone can race a 36" geared unicycle, intentionally crash before a hill and push their aerobars out of alignment, then hop on a lightweight 26" Unicycle for the climb.

Let's just say that it's not always easy to find an identical replacement unicycle. The sentence requiring the referee to confirm that the change was not intentional seems to me to be sufficient to prevent this kind of situation. In the end, we can modify :

2. Replacement of the unicycle or wheel is permitted only in the event of mechanical problems or damage.

Comment 27 Jul 03:07

> 1. Riders are allowed to modify or adjust their unicycle during the race. Assistance from others is permitted at any time, including tools and hands-on help.

I think the modified paragraph 2 now covers this case clearly – which I think makes perfect sense. For me personally, however, replacing the wheel would not have been a modification to the unicycle, but rather a replacement of the unicycle, because basically the wheel is what makes the unicycle what it is.

> Let's just say that it's not always easy to find an identical replacement unicycle. The sentence requiring the referee to confirm that the change was not intentional seems to me to be sufficient to prevent this kind of situation.

I can understand that, and for me, the sentence is fine as it is.
However, I would also have no problem with defining mechanical problem or defect in more detail.

Comment 29 Jul 03:51

Another thing I noticed: Paragraph 1 no longer states that a unicycle must still belong to the same class/category even after modifications have been made. I think we should add something about this?

Comment 29 Jul 05:15

To be clear, I'll add a separate point to clarify that the unicycle must remain in the same category whether it's a modification or a replacement.

Regarding the mechanical problem, I don't know if defining mechanical problem is needed. Sometimes, a very small problem can become unbearable if it can't be resolved. It seems to me that the most important thing is that the unicycle replacement is unplanned. To use Ken's example, if a family member is there at the bottom of a hill with your favorite unicycle to ride uphill, it's highly suspicious, even if the first unicycle was damaged by a truck. Especially if the truck also belongs to a family member... I would emphasize that a unicycle replacement must be reported to the referee as soon as possible after the end of the race, providing proof that it wasn't planned.

Comment 29 Jul 06:00

"For me, wheel replacement is more than just a modification or adjustment. If necessary, we can specify the exception of a wheel replacement."-- Simon

I had considered this situation during my record attempt- and I'm sure you did with yours also. If you get a puncture, it would be time critical to get back up and running as fast as possible. Trying to fix a puncture on a 36" (depending on the rim/tyre combo) can be incredibly difficult, even with assistance.

In my opinion, we should be allowed to do a wheel swap for a puncture. It qualifies as a situation that 'impairs the function or safety of the unicycle' As long as it's not done for strategic reasons (eg swapping to a lighter/smaller wheel before a hillclimb), I would say it's ok.

Comment 29 Jul 08:31

> I had considered this situation during my record attempt- and I'm sure you did with yours also. If you get a puncture, it would be time critical to get back up and running as fast as possible. Trying to fix a puncture on a 36" (depending on the rim/tyre combo) can be incredibly difficult, even with assistance.

Of course I thought about it and decided not to take a spare tube or spare wheel (I only have one G36 wheel). A puncture would have just ended my attempt.

> In my opinion, we should be allowed to do a wheel swap for a puncture. It qualifies as a situation that 'impairs the function or safety of the unicycle' As long as it's not done for strategic reasons (eg swapping to a lighter/smaller wheel before a hillclimb), I would say it's ok.

A flat tire is a mechanical problem. That's why the unexpected nature of the mechanical problem seems more important to me than the type of mechanical problem.

Comment 29 Jul 10:37

>To be clear, I'll add a separate point to clarify that the unicycle must remain in the same category whether it's a modification or a replacement.

Your updated proposal is fine for me.

> A flat tire is a mechanical problem. That's why the unexpected nature of the mechanical problem seems more important to me than the type of mechanical problem.

I would agree with that 100%. A puncture clearly constitutes a defect/problem, so that the unicycle or wheel can be replaced in accordance with paragraph 2. So I would say, that this situation is perfectly coverd by the proposed rule.

All in all, in my opinion, the proposal is fine. I'm not a big fan of parentheses “( ... )” in the rules and would rather try to replace them with a different wording or leave them out, but that's more a matter of personal taste and I would also agree with the proposal as it stands.

Comment 02 Aug 07:55

> I'm not a big fan of parentheses “( ... )” in the rules and would rather try to replace them with a different wording or leave them out, but that's more a matter of personal taste and I would also agree with the proposal as it stands.

It's true that there are several elements in parentheses like in the current rule. Maybe it's not so important. If no one else has any comments, I'll put it to the vote.