Lourdes WC

is that the current DQ ruling or the strange temporary amendment from a couple of years back that allowed Rachael Atherton not to be DQd at Windham?

There’s no obvious date on that that I could see though there was an 07 in something iirc so it may well be out of date. At lunch I had a quick look through the rules I could find on the UCI site and didn’t come up with anything else. You’d have to ask an actual commissar (sp?) about the current ruling’s exact wording.

If you look at the footage, Gwin actually completed the full course, all be it on foot! As you say, his bike went AWOL, but he jumped/slid/walked WITHIN the course tapes back down to it!

Only if there is a rule that says the full course must be completed “on” your bike should he have been DQ’d!

(and judging by all the sans-bike flying/crashing going on at Lourdes, quite a few riders would also fall fowl of that rule too 😉

UCI rules doccumentation is a shitefest.
Just hope at the end of the year (wherever they place) it’s a bigger gap than 10 points between Gwin and Bruni in the overall.

I’m still miffed at the decision from Windham in 2012 (Rach A)

As far as I’m aware the times you’re shown on screen and whether the rider is up or down is based on the time of whoever is sat in the hot seat at the time.

If Bruni for example is 2 seconds down at the first check and Hart is in the hot seat then Bruni is 2 seconds down on Hart’s time, nobody else’s that weekend.

If Bruni makes up those seconds and takes the hot seat then the following rider’s time checks (be they up or down) are based on Bruni’s new fastest time…..and so on….if the next rider is Gwinn and he smashes it then all times are relative to the time he just set in his race run.

4.1.035 If a rider exits the course for any reason, he/she must return to the course at the same point from which he/she exited. If the president of the commissaires panel deems that the rider gained advantage, the rider is disqualified (DSQ).

It a shockingly badly written rule, but there you go.

As I understand it at Windham 2012 Rach took a couple of feet off the course, but the panel deemed she’d gained no advantage hence the win. I dunno if Gwin was deemed to have gained an advantage in his quali run, but TBH if he’d have pushed back up, he probably would’ve still started form where he did on Sunday anyway.

I guess by definition a “rider” has to be on a bike. The gaining advantage thing is much less clear.

My interpretation would be that it refers to cutting the course Enduro style rather than crashing off course and getting back on. No-one ever (probably) gained an advantage by crashing.

Rachel’s was an interesting one as she probably didn’t go faster (gain advantage) because of her off.

I really can’t see how they could DSQ Gwinn for that – it does’t fit the spirit of the rules at all and the letter is quetionable.

Rachael’s wee out the tapes excursion at Windham was the first time they’d ever ruled a rider could continue without re-entering the course at the same point they left.
There were many many DQs each year previously for EXACTLY what she did.
They’ve now reverted back to that rule.
Rachael took the lead in the overall points that day by 30pts and went on to win by only 140 pts. The strange decision not to DQ her gave her 250pts of those.

They’ve now reverted back to that rule.

As in most things I tend towards cock up rather than conspiracy.

Who knows what really went on with that decision. :shrug:

really hope wee Emmiline takes the overall this year tho.

Any one of the top 5 women would deserve it TBH, competition in the event is as close as the men

Nah.. but fair enough, that’s your opinion