was only paused because it hurts SRAM’s bottom line.
Wasn’t it paused due to the Belgian court decision in the matter?
The minimum bar width is terrible for smaller riders, but it’s fine because no corporation is hurt
Wasn’t this restriction relaxed to the point of not being that harmful to smaller riders? The initial rule was definitely overboard, but the updated numbers seemed like they could be pretty reasonable.
A rule which relates the number to the physiology of the rider would probably be a better call, though.
Wasn’t it paused due to the Belgian court decision in the matter?
Yeah, SRAM sued UCI 🤣
Wasn’t this restriction relaxed to the point of not being that harmful to smaller riders? The initial rule was definitely overboard, but the updated numbers seemed like they could be pretty reasonable.
Maybe there was some changes, but still many are riding with 36-38cm bars currently that are well under the new limit
Wasn’t it paused due to the Belgian court decision in the matter?
Wasn’t this restriction relaxed to the point of not being that harmful to smaller riders? The initial rule was definitely overboard, but the updated numbers seemed like they could be pretty reasonable.
A rule which relates the number to the physiology of the rider would probably be a better call, though.
Yeah, SRAM sued UCI 🤣
Maybe there was some changes, but still many are riding with 36-38cm bars currently that are well under the new limit