With last weekend’s road bike championship still waiting for an official men’s winner, social media debate over exactly how the event should be regulated has seen it been labelled ‘the most pointless competition’ ever.
Midlands man George Fox was fastest on the day, riding the 22.4-mile Cambridgeshire course in 46.28 – 41 seconds faster than Alex Dowsett’s 47.09. But so far Cycling Time Trials has stopped short of crowning Fox the winner as it considers a complaint made against him. It pertains to either his riding position or his bike, but Fox has already said he has not been informed which.
The issue could be traced to the deliberately light-touch guidance around ‘road bike’ time trial entries: on the plus side, they are designed to be inclusive – but this does mean room for plenty of envelope-pushing when it comes to the most determined competitors in elite-level championship events.
In a nutshell the rules specify that the bike must have drop or straight handlebars with no clip-ons, a maximum 90mm rim depth and 12 spokes or more. Riders cannot wear teardrop-shaped TT helmets and may not ride in a ‘puppy paws’ position.
It does mean, though, that riders can perfectly legitimately attempt to simulate a time trial machine and position in all but the tri-bar clip-ons. Indeed, Fox was riding an Argon 18 E-119 triathlon frame – again, perfectly legitimately. He wasn’t alone in riding time trial type frames designed for super-aero riding positions. Coupled with 90mm section rims, these bikes are clearly some way from the ‘standard’ road bikes the rules had in mind when they were devised.
As the man who drafted the regulations, Dr Bryce Dyer, told Cycling Weekly last week: “The concept I had was essentially ‘do a crit on Friday, do a sportive on Saturday and do a TT on Sunday on the same bike’. But I know full well that it does give a fair amount of room.”
If a rider can achieve an all but identical position on a road bike as they can a time trial machine, does that then give credence to the idea that it is a ‘pointless competition’?
You can see where the sentiment comes from. I’d argue, though, that the Road Bike Championship is vital.
Without it, the whole road bike category takes a major credibility hit and is relegated to a second-rate sideshow. And without the road bike category as a whole, the whole niche of time trialling takes a big step backwards to a place where you need to spend out on a time trial machine in order to feel as though you’re competing on an even remotely level playing field.
Sure, it’s easy to argue that a playing field featuring someone like me pulling a 10-year-old sportive bike out of the garage and taking on someone like George Fox is anything but level – but the same could be said of a rider buying a lower-end time trial bike and competing against an elite rider with the most expensive machine and skinsuit and wind tunnel experience.
The key difference for most riders is that drop handlebars look relatable. A full-fat time trial bike doesn’t.
Recall, if you will, that time trial participation fell by 46% between 2017 and 2022. Last year, with the help of the newly-launched road bike category, that decline was slowed significantly, with road bikes adding new participants: 1,198 new riders registered to ride in 2023, with the vast majority of those – 964 – entering an event on drop bar bikes.
The rules may not be a perfect fit in all scenarios, and the answer isn’t obvious. But time trialling needs the road bike category and ergo it needs the road bike championship. Let’s be patient with it – it’s already proved an intriguing watch.
