It's Time to Take On The UCI- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 33 of 33
  1. #1
    Team NFI
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    5,302

  2. #2
    No. Just No.
    Reputation: Circlip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    5,179
    From Zinn's commentary;

    "Only then can it be overthrown and replaced with an elected governing body whose directors can be replaced by vote of its membership when it overreaches, as I, for one, believe it already has."

    Does Zinn actually have a clue? Election of UCI directors by its members (the national federations) is exactly how it already works. If you want to have your voice heard in voting at the UCI, all you need to do is to influence the voting within the UCI Congress voting at your national level (CCA in our case) which is in turn elected by vote from provincial members (such as OCA), whose board of directors you can vote for directly at the AGM to direct policy for staff.

    Other than this technical issue I like his sentiments though.

  3. #3
    Evil Jr.
    Reputation: garage monster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    6,859
    I was actually at the OCA AGM where we elected this year's board. It was extremely SPARSELY attended.

    What was that about how if you don't vote you don't get a say?
    Please enjoy seeing this terrible collection of me - something wonderful is about to happy.

  4. #4
    Team NFI
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    5,302
    Quote Originally Posted by garage monster
    I was actually at the OCA AGM where we elected this year's board. It was extremely SPARSELY attended.

    What was that about how if you don't vote you don't get a say?
    There was a meeting???

  5. #5
    Evil Jr.
    Reputation: garage monster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    6,859
    Quote Originally Posted by Enduramil
    There was a meeting???
    Yep. At the Bike Show. There were ballots and everything. There's even a system for proxy voting if you couldn't be there in person. I think there were maybe twenty voting members in attendance.
    Please enjoy seeing this terrible collection of me - something wonderful is about to happy.

  6. #6
    humber river advocate
    Reputation: singlesprocket's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    6,391
    the way i see it formalized racing is on a downward trend for mtb's... thus the inbred rules regulations etc... it's such a waste of resources and a diservice to the riding public in general.

    on the plus side general bike ridership is up.
    broadcasting from
    "the vinyl basement"

    build trail!

  7. #7
    Evil Jr.
    Reputation: garage monster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    6,859
    I hear what you're saying but none of it really matters if you're not a license holder.

    The point is that the UCI (and the CCA and the OCA) is governed by its members, the racers. If you don't like how they organize certain aspects of the competitive side of our sport, you get to vote but few people actually bother.
    Please enjoy seeing this terrible collection of me - something wonderful is about to happy.

  8. #8
    No. Just No.
    Reputation: Circlip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    5,179
    Quote Originally Posted by garage monster
    I was actually at the OCA AGM where we elected this year's board. It was extremely SPARSELY attended.

    What was that about how if you don't vote you don't get a say?
    That's the way it's always been at every OCA AGM I've ever attended, and also in recent years for me in B.C. here also. Sad but true. As I understand it, even in prior years before my time of getting involved that was still the status quo.

    Same goes for clubs also though, or even recreational organizations that my kids are involved with. The bottom line is that AGMs aren't really much "fun" and people don't see the benefit (exercising right to vote) as being equal or greater than the cost in time (of sitting through a meeting). Apathy is the Canadian way!

    Not that I like the meetings, but I figure if I'm going to be there anyhow I might as well pay attention and try to absorb anything that may be of value later on, or participate in relevant discussions. Sometime a pending course of action is influenced heavily by discussion among attendees at the AGMs.

  9. #9
    Evil Jr.
    Reputation: garage monster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    6,859
    Quote Originally Posted by Circlip
    Apathy is the Canadian way!
    For our club AGM, we offer members free food and one beer. Predictably, that got the MTBers out but not so much with the roadies (not that I'm trying to draw lines within the club).

    Funny thing is though, it ends up having a dramatic effect on the direction of the club. With small numbers, every vote has a significant impact. Same goes for the OCA AGM.

    Take Angry Johnny for example (I was wedged between him and Mark Summers at the meeting). I think he brought three proxies with him. Every time he voted, he set like 20% of policy. Not too shabby!
    Please enjoy seeing this terrible collection of me - something wonderful is about to happy.

  10. #10
    Team NFI
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    5,302
    Quote Originally Posted by Circlip
    That's the way it's always been at every OCA AGM I've ever attended, and also in recent years for me in B.C. here also. Sad but true. As I understand it, even in prior years before my time of getting involved that was still the status quo.

    Same goes for clubs also though, or even recreational organizations that my kids are involved with. The bottom line is that AGMs aren't really much "fun" and people don't see the benefit (exercising right to vote) as being equal or greater than the cost in time (of sitting through a meeting). Apathy is the Canadian way!

    Not that I like the meetings, but I figure if I'm going to be there anyhow I might as well pay attention and try to absorb anything that may be of value later on, or participate in relevant discussions. Sometime a pending course of action is influenced heavily by discussion among attendees at the AGMs.
    One point not mentioned about BC. The AGM's usually occur guess where in Vancouver. To put in perspective that would be like the OCA holding the AGM in Windsor. So for people out of town they are facing in some cases a 5 plus hour drive to get there.

    Unless one is living near the locations this becomes a cost negative exercise.

  11. #11
    Team NFI
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    5,302
    Quote Originally Posted by garage monster
    I hear what you're saying but none of it really matters if you're not a license holder.

    The point is that the UCI (and the CCA and the OCA) is governed by its members, the racers. If you don't like how they organize certain aspects of the competitive side of our sport, you get to vote but few people actually bother.
    Actually it's not just racers who are members. There are other memberships one can have. To say that it is only racers who have a say is basically turning anyone who has a general or citizen membership into a ATM for those select few.

    And that is a problem. Why? Go by OVA in the same building. They have finally woken up to the reality that engaging the non competitive members is just as important as the racers. Even more so.. as one OVA rep I know mentioned. It's the money from the regular beer level members who help fund the competition/high performance aspect. If we treat them poorly we lose that money. And that is something that seems lost on the OCA especially since that is the group new racers comes from.

    And to say what OCA does only matters if one is a license holder is an easy out. The reality ignored is that bad press spreads faster then good press. Look at this forum, you think all this rule enforcement about say a pair of sucks is going to encourage people to come out? No, people want to come out and ride against others for fun and against the clock. The minute they read about this it starts to sound no fun.
    Last edited by Enduramil; 05-09-2011 at 10:57 AM.

  12. #12
    Evil Jr.
    Reputation: garage monster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    6,859
    Citizen's permit holders are not voting members (not sure about a "general" member). The OCA is a governing body for racing, not a club. If you're looking for advocacy or grass-roots development, I think IMBA is a better bet.
    Please enjoy seeing this terrible collection of me - something wonderful is about to happy.

  13. #13
    Team NFI
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    5,302
    Quote Originally Posted by garage monster
    Citizen's permit holders are not voting members (not sure about a "general" member).
    Thank you for proving my point.


    Quote Originally Posted by garage monster
    The OCA is a governing body for racing, not a club. If you're looking for advocacy or grass-roots development, I think IMBA is a better bet.
    Actually no. Racing is part of what they do.

    From the google

    Provides information about cycling in Ontario, including safety, advocacy, competition, clubs and tours.
    And looky.. not even racing,

    http://www.ontariocycling.org/can-bike/

    If the OCA is for racing only they better dump Canbike fast.. because that sure is not racing.

  14. #14
    Team NFI
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    5,302
    Quote Originally Posted by shirk
    Come on you know the population distribution here in BC. Vancouver has the highest concentration of population. Holding the meeting there is not like holding it in Windsor, it's like holding it in Toronto.
    Come on.. I'm trying to put it into perspective for Ontario.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,831
    Quote Originally Posted by Enduramil
    One point not mentioned about BC. The AGM's usually occur guess where in Vancouver. To put in perspective that would be like the OCA holding the AGM in Windsor. So for people out of town they are facing in some cases a 5 plus hour drive to get there.

    Unless one is living near the locations this becomes a cost negative exercise.
    Come on you know the population distribution here in BC. Vancouver has the highest concentration of population. Holding the meeting there is not like holding it in Windsor, it's like holding it in Toronto.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,831
    Quote Originally Posted by garage monster
    For our club AGM, we offer members free food and one beer. Predictably, that got the MTBers out but not so much with the roadies (not that I'm trying to draw lines within the club).
    Just one beer? You guys need to find a better beer sponsor.

  17. #17
    No. Just No.
    Reputation: Circlip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    5,179
    Quote Originally Posted by Enduramil
    One point not mentioned about BC. The AGM's usually occur guess where in Vancouver. To put in perspective that would be like the OCA holding the AGM in Windsor. So for people out of town they are facing in some cases a 5 plus hour drive to get there.

    Unless one is living near the locations this becomes a cost negative exercise.
    Not strictly correct. The standing directive is to hold the AGM outside of Vancouver 1 out of every 3 years. I believe you'd find that to be a fair treatment based on the geographic distribution of members (the highest concentration of which will be in Vancouver). Not that it really matters, since no matter where the AGM is held to accomodate some members, there will always be other geographic pockets of members (not limited to those in Vancouver) for whom it increases the travel distance. I've seen lots of people make significant trips from other regions in both provinces. They just make plans to combine it with some other activity or trip to serve multiple purposes, instead of travel purely for attending the AGM.

    People who are motivated to attend will do so in person or else submit questions and proxy votes in absentiam, while people who want to whine about how they were not give a voice will always find an excuse about how it's too hard. The HTFU concept is in full effect here.

  18. #18
    Evil Jr.
    Reputation: garage monster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    6,859
    Quote Originally Posted by Enduramil
    If the OCA is for racing only they better dump Canbike fast.. because that sure is not racing.
    All I'm saying is that if you're looking for the OCA to be something it's not, you're barking up the wrong tree. Nobody HAS to join.
    Please enjoy seeing this terrible collection of me - something wonderful is about to happy.

  19. #19
    Evil Jr.
    Reputation: garage monster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    6,859
    Quote Originally Posted by shirk
    Just one beer? You guys need to find a better beer sponsor.
    Once Labatt's bought Lakeport, Hamilton was left without a brewer...
    Please enjoy seeing this terrible collection of me - something wonderful is about to happy.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,831
    Quote Originally Posted by garage monster
    Once Labatt's bought Lakeport, Hamilton was left without a brewer...
    Must be some craft brewery looking for some exposure. http://www.ontariocraftbrewers.com/index.php

  21. #21
    No. Just No.
    Reputation: Circlip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    5,179
    I'm not sure how that is archived on Google's search results, but I'd like you to find that text anywhere on the OCA web site. To the best of my knowledge, it was voted (by the members attending the AGM) to drop any mandate for general advocacy about a decade ago, as the organization's resources simply weren't significant enough to make any serious inroads on the advocacy front being a vast and sprawling topic. The reasoning was that if they couldn't do a good job of it (due to lack of resources) then it shouldn't pretend in its mandate that it was a goal of the association.

    Quote Originally Posted by Enduramil
    Actually no. Racing is part of what they do.

    From the google

    Actually no. Racing is part of what they do.

    From the google

    Quote:
    Provides information about cycling in Ontario, including safety, advocacy, competition, clubs and tours.

    And looky.. not even racing,

    http://www.ontariocycling.org/can-bike/

    If the OCA is for racing only they better dump Canbike fast.. because that sure is not racing.

  22. #22
    Team NFI
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    5,302
    Wait a second... what we are arguing about is not even what Zinn wrote about.

    Back on topic. Like other sports like ski racing the national and provincial bodies do not set the rules on equipment That is what the UCI and FIS types do. And the only way us lowly serfs find out about these equipment rules is when a memo comes tumbling down from on high.

    It's the CCA and OCA who get the fun of enforcing those rules. As well as deciding which rules and at what level to enforce. The problem there is some will be way to eager to enforce those rules.

    Nothing new really. Dealt with the same crapola ski racing in BC. Though thankfully FIS over the years has spent way less time about equipment and more time arguing about safety systems.

  23. #23
    No. Just No.
    Reputation: Circlip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    5,179
    Quote Originally Posted by Enduramil
    Wait a second... what we are arguing about is not even what Zinn wrote about.

    Back on topic. Like other sports like ski racing the national and provincial bodies do not set the rules on equipment That is what the UCI and FIS types do. And the only way us lowly serfs find out about these equipment rules is when a memo comes tumbling down from on high.

    It's the CCA and OCA who get the fun of enforcing those rules. As well as deciding which rules and at what level to enforce. The problem there is some will be way to eager to enforce those rules.

    Nothing new really. Dealt with the same crapola ski racing in BC. Though thankfully FIS over the years has spent way less time about equipment and more time arguing about safety systems.
    Hey, I'd love to punt the UCI in its current form but like just about everyone else I'm not willing to commit any time to a grassroots movement to do so. That's also ignoring the fact that Canada probably has a very minor role, or often no role at all within the various UCI committees. The traditional road powerhouse nations like Italy, Belgium, France, etc. are in the driver's seat when it comes to steering future directions for equipment regulations, etc. Canada's representatives will not have any material input into most of the UCI's machinations now matter what the common sentiments of our members are.

    MTB is just along for the ride (pardon the pun) within the overall umbrella of the UCI anyhow. If we're going back to Zinn's commentary as the reason for this threaad, then I don't even know why you're worrying about it coming at it from a mountain bike perspective, since the regulations imposed on the design of mountain bikes for use in UCI events are almost nil compared to road bikes. 'Cross is another matter, of course.

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    220
    I agree that the UCI technical people are on crack.

    The latest outrages have to do with banning time trial shifters with a "return to centre" feature (no matter what angle "centre" might be) and the banning of the Bont Cronus shoe.

    I thought the SCCA tech people were nuts, but the UCI guys are outright bonkers.

    DG

  25. #25
    Evil Jr.
    Reputation: garage monster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    6,859
    Quote Originally Posted by RecceDG
    I thought the SCCA tech people were nuts, but the UCI guys are outright bonkers.
    Technical homologation in F1 is even crazier and teams push for every possible advantage while sticking to the "letter" of the regulations. Last year it was double diffusers and f-ducts and teams that were using them didn't know until a third of the way through the season whether their early results would be nullified.

    This SRAM shifter thing is months old and teams knew they were playing with fire by installing them horizontally. I think it was the Shack mechanic at the time who was like "let's see what they say at tech inspection". Nudge, nudge, wink, wink.
    Please enjoy seeing this terrible collection of me - something wonderful is about to happy.

  26. #26
    Sweet Monkey Tuesday!
    Reputation: Biff Pedachenko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    151
    Quote Originally Posted by Circlip
    Hey, I'd love to punt the UCI in its current form but like just about everyone else I'm not willing to commit any time to a grassroots movement to do so. That's also ignoring the fact that Canada probably has a very minor role, or often no role at all within the various UCI committees.
    I have the solution! The MeCI - no board of directors or international representation, just me sitting at the bar coming up with random regulations for no apparent reason other than to ensure that I clean up at the races. I'm thinking two categories - one with regulations so stringent the only possible way to ride is to clone my personal bike (beat the rush and order your leather saddles and mountain drop bars now) and an open category where anything goes (I'm thinking fully-faired recumbents with rocket boosters). Now I just need everyone to support the MeCI...

    ...or we could just say screw it, be thankful we're not roadies, and go ride.

  27. #27
    Bored
    Reputation: bigwheelboy_490's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    1,982
    I think the first thing the UCI needs to do is call themselves by the English name - no more UCI - now ICU - International Cycling Union - It just sounds better in English.

  28. #28
    Team NFI
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    5,302
    Quote Originally Posted by garage monster
    What was that about how if you don't vote you don't get a say?
    Quote Originally Posted by garage monster
    Citizen's permit holders are not voting members (not sure about a "general" member).
    Hmmm... so you say as a Citizen racer I should attend a meeting where I'm not allowed to vote?? That would be like me going to vote May 2nd then being told unless I paid $8,000 in taxes in 2010 I can't vote. Then you complaining that I didn't vote.

    You are aware that there was this little revolution just south of us that occurred because of the same thinking right? They called taxation without representation. So why would people who do not want to chase points therefore don't need a $100 license. Participate in a system that excludes them? But is willing to take their money yet not allow them to have their say.

    I have attended and voted at two OAT AGM's. Way less of this nonsense of unless you paid this much you get to vote. Though the whole drafting argument is entertaining.

    Hmm.. elitist wouldn't you say. Maybe it's time for the OCA to take a step down for a second and see what other sports are doing to encourage people racing.

  29. #29
    Evil Jr.
    Reputation: garage monster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    6,859
    It's a bit of a stretch to compare a government to a governing body for a sport. This is closer to being a shareholder/corporation relationship in structure.

    There are thousands of boards in this country where non-voting members are allowed to attend and still have their voices heard (sometimes they call it a delegation). For instance, I went to Hamilton Cycling Committee meetings for a year without being a voting member and I would say that I still had a significant influence on how they made decisions.

    Participation comes in many forms. Voting is just one of them.
    Please enjoy seeing this terrible collection of me - something wonderful is about to happy.

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,831
    Quote Originally Posted by Enduramil
    Hmmm... so you say as a Citizen racer I should attend a meeting where I'm not allowed to vote?? That would be like me going to vote May 2nd then being told unless I paid $8,000 in taxes in 2010 I can't vote. Then you complaining that I didn't vote.

    You are aware that there was this little revolution just south of us that occurred because of the same thinking right? They called taxation without representation. So why would people who do not want to chase points therefore don't need a $100 license. Participate in a system that excludes them? But is willing to take their money yet not allow them to have their say.
    Uhhh UCI rules are applied to UCI sanctioned events, the citizen's class does not usually fall under the same rules. Please correct me if I am wrong.

    This whole thread is a joke. The article is about small frame builders and their beef with the UCI. What percentage of bikes in what percentage of events does this really affect? And of those that it affects it's going to cost them $450.

    So a grass roots movement to turf the UCI over a few fame builders needing to pony up $450? Make an extra rigid 29'er with swoopy tubes for a hipster and they have this covered.

  31. #31
    Evil Jr.
    Reputation: garage monster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    6,859
    Quote Originally Posted by shirk
    Uhhh UCI rules are applied to UCI sanctioned events, the citizen's class does not usually fall under the same rules. Please correct me if I am wrong.
    That's the way I understand it. That's why we can race O-Cups with a Citizen's Permit in single-speed. We're not a recognized, um, discipline (more of a side-show).
    Please enjoy seeing this terrible collection of me - something wonderful is about to happy.

  32. #32
    No. Just No.
    Reputation: Circlip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    5,179
    Quote Originally Posted by Enduramil
    So why would people who do not want to chase points therefore don't need a $100 license. Participate in a system that excludes them? But is willing to take their money yet not allow them to have their say.
    Seeing as how most of these people that b!tch about the once per year difference in cost between a citizen vs. UCI license own one or more bikes and related gear costing many thousands of dollars, and spend a wad of money on gas and munchies for many of their rides and riding trips, I can't really muster up any honest sympathy. Boo hoo.

  33. #33
    Team NFI
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    5,302
    Quote Originally Posted by Circlip
    Seeing as how most of these people that b!tch about the once per year difference in cost between a citizen vs. UCI license own one or more bikes and related gear costing many thousands of dollars, and spend a wad of money on gas and munchies for many of their rides and riding trips, I can't really muster up any honest sympathy. Boo hoo.

    Sorry.. was to busy racing a free race, with no OCA approval or red collar to pay attention.

Members who have read this thread: 0

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2019 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.