In making the "Obree Tuck" (aka The Superman) illegal, the UCI has robbed Graeme Obree of potentially, hudreds of thousands of dollars in winnings. Yet they continue to allow Lance to use his patented "Rev 5" helmet almost exclusively. Can someone explain to me how this is fair?

Yet they continue to allow Lance to use his patented "Rev 5" helmet almost exclusively. Can someone explain to me how this is fair?
Irrelevant - what a shocker. He cannot wear that helmet under the new UCI regulations effective this year. I would suggest you get a clue before you post 'stuff' like this - he has worn a Giro Pneumo (with a transparent cover) in every TT he has ridden in this year, as have countless other riders.

" 'I said they refused Jesus too.'
He said 'You're not him'"

The rules aren't the same for everybody.

That being said, the superman position seems a greater change than a helmet. The ruling against it happened at a time when the cycling establishment appeared terrified that some technological advance would change 'their sport' the way the Fosbury Flop changed high-jumping.

I'm not sure what the Obree Tuck is but I'm guessing it has something to do with a wild position on the bike used during decents. If so, UCI may believe this position poses a threat or danger to other riders. If Obree loses control of his bike not only may he get hurt but he has the potential to hurt other riders.

bro

In making the "Obree Tuck" (aka The Superman) illegal, the UCI has robbed Graeme Obree of potentially, hudreds of thousands of dollars in winnings. Yet they continue to allow Lance to use his patented "Rev 5" helmet almost exclusively. Can someone explain to me how this is fair?

In making the "Obree Tuck" (aka The Superman) illegal, the UCI has robbed Graeme Obree of potentially, hudreds of thousands of dollars in winnings. Yet they continue to allow Lance to use his patented "Rev 5" helmet almost exclusively. Can someone explain to me how this is fair?


I'm curious what money Obree would have actually won- I don't think he'd receive many endorsement deals. On the other hand, I'd almost argue they've robbed him of his sanity.

Frankly, many people do not think the UCI treated the Obree situation fairly in the first place.

BroCycler- and you need to get out more- do some research on Obree before posting- it is truly a fascinating story.

Irrelevant - what a shocker. He cannot wear that helmet under the new UCI regulations effective this year. I would suggest you get a clue before you post 'stuff' like this - he has worn a Giro Pneumo (with a transparent cover) in every TT he has ridden in this year, as have countless other riders.
Thanks for clearing that up, I had no idea and was recently given bad information from someone who I thought was in the know. Appreciate it. That begs the question though; How can he justify retaining his winnings from races where he did use it when it was "legal" considering Graeme Obree was afforded no such luxury?

" 'I said they refused Jesus too.'
He said 'You're not him'"

The rules aren't the same for everybody.

That being said, the superman position seems a greater change than a helmet. The ruling against it happened at a time when the cycling establishment appeared terrified that some technological advance would change 'their sport' the way the Fosbury Flop changed high-jumping.
Excellent analogy. I'd have to agree

Bicycling did a great article on Obree a couple months ago, you can find it on the wed at http://www.bicycling.com/article/0,3253,4902,00.html?category_id=363 here you'll also see the Praying Mantis position

Bicycling did a great article on Obree a couple months ago, you can find it on the wed at http://www.bicycling.com/article/0,3253,4902,00.html?category_id=363 here you'll also see the Praying Mantis position

Indeed. Reading the article shows that Obree and the UCI were coming from
totally different areas: the UCI wanted things done traditionally, they saw Obree
as a bizzarre tinkerer, not a true cyclist. What a total joke. Reading the article
will break your heart because he has suffered so much in the intervening years.
IMHO, he was robbed in many ways by their rulings.

In making the "Obree Tuck" (aka The Superman) illegal, the UCI has robbed Graeme Obree of potentially, hudreds of thousands of dollars in winnings. Yet they continue to allow Lance to use his patented "Rev 5" helmet almost exclusively. Can someone explain to me how this is fair?


Also, remember, Lance's Rev5 helmet was designed a built according to the rules (until this year's rule change). He received no special consideration by the UCI. The reason that he had exclusive use of the helmet (although, he allowed a couple of friends to use it, David Miller), was that he personally held the patent / copyright on that helmet. He OWNED the design, and no one could use it without his permission. UCI had nothing to do with it.