This is crazy. Will the commissaires decide if the clothes are loose or not? What's the difference between clothes that have 1 mm and 30 mm of "flappyness"?both are loose.

If the aerodynamics make that much difference why the hell do riders still insist on wearing parachute-like "cool" clobber? Surely winning is cooler than coming second so by definition snug-wear is cooler than ice-hockey pyjamas.

Riders spend a small fortune on bits for their bikes but the simple choice of clothing which probably has more bearing on how fast they go is overlooked by fad-victim image-slaves.

Bunch of nutters, both the riders and the UCI, totally unworkable and it will probably drive a fashion shift towards tighter but not skin-tight clothes over the next few years, talk about holding back progress...

I find this utter idiocy, if a rider really cares about their image more than the race it obviously means they aren't committed, therefore don't deserve the advantage. I find it bad to ban the skin suits and tight clothing since that they are a performance upgrade. Are custom valved forks soon to be banned next? Maybe clipless pedals? It's becoming stupid. Open face helmets I can see, since they offer less protection, and the urge for riders to wear neck braces. But to ban something for it's performance upgrade because the other riders are too vain is ignorant.

But hey, at least the Mojo riders won't have to hide behind tents and everything else anymore.

Is it April 1st?? What a bizarre ruling... are they going to specify what haircut riders should have or what brand of mp3 player they listen to?? I thought this was going to be a 'riders must wear body armour' story, but it does just seem to be 'riders must be fashionable'...

Sadly it is the so-called "freeride" mentallity creeping in that also plagues snowboarding. Supposedly we can wear and ride what we like and "there are no rules dude". However these guys are the first to take the p*** when you turn up in your uncool clobber riding your uncool bike.

Daft

Ah, the UCI, the old enemy of cycling progress does it again.

It's all abput increasing branding opportunities for sponsors.

I have mixed feelings in regards to this contentious issue

Sure, aerodynamic clothing helps, but in my view it's more suited to road use

Also, how do skin suits hold up in the event of a gnarly crash? Will the skin suit hold up to a bad downhill crash or disintegrate?

Does it also provide "that much" of an advantage? Does Rachel Atherton believe she could have won the Australian event had she been wearing a skin suit?

The open face helmet decision is a no brainer, the Leatt-Brace makes sense as do the back, elbow, shin, knee protection and long sleeve rules. Remember a lot of youngsters look up to today's DH racers. If we see this amount of protection in competitions, hopefully the kids who freeride / DH will also invest in equal levels of protection for themselves. How often I cringe when seeing some youngster doing a 15 foot drop off with a pisspot helmet and no pads at all.

Why more suited to road use? Aerodynamics is aerodynamics.

Personally I would say that a rider who takes a decent look at the course and realises that the advantage is down to milliseconds and then decides to wear a skinsuit is probably the more experienced rider and a deserved winner.

Tomac and Palmer both raced in skinsuits in their day and you look back at those iconic images and think that this was the coolest mountain biking ever was.

It is not clothing that gives the sport longevity, it is freedom from too many stupid rules!

While track, road and BMX take leaps forward MTB takes a step back.

Anyone else starting to think MTB will always be cycling's poor relation?

I agreee with igamogam, how on earth do you draw the line and define what is a skin suit and what isn't , just merely a little less loose fitting? Does that mean that a shirt that would normally be baggy, but when pulled on over body-armour becomes tight is no longer allowed.

Competely agree about the full face helmet and possibly the neck brace as long as cost isn't too prohibitive, but this clothing one is an unworkable joke. Will they be banning lycra shorts underneath baggies next?

I think this is a step in a bad direction, why not simply state that riders protective gear must confrom to a particular standard, then the riders/manufacturers can design/produce clothing of and cut to meet those criteria.

There will be all hell to pay when a rider snags their jersey and crashes into a sharp rock and bleeds out...

It's funny listening to all you guys bickering! Let's face it, skin suits look gay! DH racers have this unwritten rule that hasn't needed policing and Tracy just broke it so she's getting a hard time. There's only one day for skin suits, the World Champs, and even then it looks wrong.

the uci should wisen up.. let not let mtbs go the way of formula 1 with pissy regualated rules.. what next stipulating the choice of tyres and presures chain ring size etc. if people want to wear skin tight cloths fine looks awful but hey each to there own.. regularing cloths is poor what not short jurseys.. come on. racers know the risks of the sport but please dont dictates the cloths style . protection is a good idea but if your dont want to wear it dont moan when your skin is missing and you are seeing a orthopod and getting metal pins and plates..

enough said.

i'm all for the added protection in dh and 4x. perhaps that couuld have prevented injuries like tara llanes' paralysis. the skinsuit thing however is just plain stupid. this is racing and not a fashion show. let riders wear what they want to go as fast as they want.

Is shaving your legs going to be banned too?

So its OK for UCI to send roadies down decents reaching speeds over 100 kmh on occasion, or fighting in a sprit at speeds above 65 kmh with no protection whatsoever (besides helmet), but when it comes down to DH, no pro is trusted to make its own judgement on the course and his abilities? Don't make sense to me.

I fully agree with the ruling!

No just messing - the clothing ban is a joke. I do however agree with the changes for the protection. Full face helmets and padding is mandatory on every DH run I've been on so why should this not apply for the pros.

The UCI have not thought this through very well. They only needed to upgrade the protection requirements and the skinsuit would have probably died with this ruling alone. I mean, once you have knee, elbow, shin, chest and back pads on, a skinsuit isn't going to provide much aerodynamic advantage - unless you stretch it over the pads, and that would look really wierd!

Good on the UCI in making a snap decision to pi** everyone off again, gotta keep up the reputation after all...

can anyone explain why at the Worlds you HAVE to wear a skin suit yet for all other races you're now not allowed to?

I watch the UCI races on Freecaster and LOVE hearing Rob Warner commentate on how ridiculous riders look in their human condoms. Please don't take that away!!

About time the UCI sorted this one out and they made the right decision. Most riders don't want to wear ballet suits and it seems the UCI have listened. Who cares if skinsuits make a rider faster - they are a joke stretched over body armour and with the new rules to wear the whole protection kit it would have looked even more ridiculous. With every rider now wearing moto gear (which is the right clothing to wear protective gear under) it's back to a level playing field. DH racing needs an image of it's own to promote the sport and it sure isn't dressing up in road racing lycra.

"to wear cool race kit and to make an image for yourself is more important than the odd win here and there," said Atherton.

Loser talk. On so many levels.

which is easy for Atherton to say when she wins by ten second margins anyway! She might have a different opinion when there's some real competition for her

Oh good the UCI about to ruin downhill as much as everything else they touch. Bikes should be encouraged to be seen as the ultimate pinnacle of technology that way it will bring more research to biking in general

Well done UCI, another retarded backward step. It was bad enough what they did to Obree.

Wow... Who would've thought the issue of skinsuits in MTB DH would be such an emotionally-charged issue.

Any esthetic judgement on skinsuits is entirely beside the point. You don't compete to look cool, you compete to win. If sponsors think otherwise, it's their choice and they will put down their own guidelines. The fact that they don't says they want to win, too. Any safety judgement is ridiculous. In the same announcement, the UCI lays out guidelines on the protective gear one would wear under their skinsuit. As for the question on whether the aerodynamics make a difference, of course they do! You just tuck in your elbows and gain 5-8kph instantly. Imagine taking away all the flap-flap.

I don't compete DH so could care less about the announcement. What I really love is to see the bunch of gray-haired aristocrats and politicians at the UCI, who've never put a leg over a full-sus bike for the most part, laying down the law of the trail. That's hilarious!

guys guys guys, stop making fools of yourselves with stupid comments!

Skinsuits - One piece very tight fitting suit.

Normal gear - jersey and moto style pants/shorts, neither of which are baggy when worn over amrour (unless you bought XXL and are 5ft4).

For ANY of you to call the top10 DHers (hell, anyone racing with UCI points even) un-cometative is a joke, these guys are on top of their game and way beyond a level anyone on this forum could ever get near.

So... do you see any DHer's regularly racing or riding in skinsuits? No you dont (other than world champs, that is not the sponsors race, thats each countries sporting body, different race entirely) because none of them want to, and none of the sponsors want them to either, thats not what they sell or who they sell to, this UCI rule IS what the sponsors (and riders) want, find me a magazine ad with a DH rider wearing a skinsuit... cant can you.

DH racing is put up there as a 'cool' sport, and it works, how many kids take up DH/4X now compared to TT/XC/RR? WAY more, and before you all comment on my stance, i race all those and im certainly not bothered by what is 'cool', but ask any of them if they think DHer's should wear skinsuits? i think you can guess the answer.

Rich.

"Fair enough to Tracy if she wants to do that to win, but for the sport and the longevity of the sport, to wear cool race kit and to make an image for yourself is more important than the odd win here and there," said Atherton.

So she is saying that In downhill MTB image is more important than wins?!!

So what are they going to ban next? What more could damage there image!? Fat people? Ginger Hair? This is ridicules! Its not a real sport if this is the case! Buy a Road Bike and do some REAL Cycling! (in a skinsuit)

Chow

Graham Obree designed and made his own track bike out of - legend has it - washing machine bearings amongst other bits. He then started winning races because his design of bike gave him a better cycling position.

The UCI changed the rules to ban his bike design, so Obree designed something slightly different...which was banned again. This was nothing to do with competitive advantage. This was purely about the big bike companies putting pressure on UCI to ensure their kit won races and was sold to the masses.

Despite me being against this skinsuit ban, I admit they don't look "cool" and therefore don't sell bikes. The UCI have been "encouraged" to step in. I wouldn't be surprised if they "encouraged" Honda to discontinue their downhill team simply because the unique bike could not be bought in the shops.

Call me cynical

As usual the "cool rad dudes" will agree with the ruling.

But what absolute s**t this is - all it will create is a "that jersey is slightly tighter than mine thats why you won" situation. You ride the type of bike you want so you wear what clothing you want.

Yes safety equipment is important so the UCI should stick to dealing with that.

this is nonsense.

I could agree in a short term ban if skinsuits were not available to all (as with the bar-end ban way back when) but why would you ever ban a piece of clothing (or bike part for that matter) on the basis of giving a competative advantage? Over who? Over someone who chooses to use something different? Then bikes should all be one-design and issued to racers at the start of the day.

Bloody silly if you ask me, almost as silly as skin suits look.

DH is cool? Right... DH'rs think so, nobody else cares. Some of the posts on this article show just how blinded by image the self-proclaimed "rad" are.

Downhill races are not glamourous, cool or exciting. They are mainly long, boring, cold, wet weekends with dirty smelly self obsessed prima-donnas griping about everything from the up-lifts to the catering and everything in between.

Perception is everything and the vast majority of punters don't differentiate between DH, XC or RR they are all just push-bikers and a bit sad. Loose clothes are not inherently cooler than jodhpurs, wrist-bands or rugby shirts. They go with the game and change with time and fashion.

Try turning up to a DH Ski race wearing baggy togs and see how "cool" you are...

Why not add an "artistic" coefficient ?

You find that silly, don't you ? It is... DH is a matter of time spend to go from one point down to another. Every competitors should try to be the fastest, not the nicest.

After the end line is passed, they may wear what they want on the podium, in order to look "cool"; but in ten years, such a look will surely be considered as ridiculous, and be fashionable again ten years later...