Updated CA CX tech Rules

Anyone else notice these?

Some interesting rules, the course distances min and max for example, I know a few mtb tracks that would be suitable, but making a workable circuit would mean at least a 4km loop?
The ruling on equipment, ie tyre width of 35mm instead of the UCI 32 mm ???
The one bit that does niggle me , is that CA in particular Road and Track are seemingly taking ownership of cyclocross in Australia, this is something I find a bit odd, an equal partnership with MTBA would make far more sense, using their officials and allowing more CX at their events, where suitable?
I hope to get more involved with what I see as a great alliance between MTBA and the state Road and Track cycling bodies, who on the surface appear to be in competition with each other?

the people who wrote and got these tech regs through CA are people directly involved in the running of every cx event in this country, most/all of them are racing at the highest level available in this country, and they have spent an unholy amount of time getting this right - they do actually know what they are doing (if that is your concern)

CA has not tried to steal CX from MTBA if thats what you are getting at

(ps i have a feeling the 35mm tyre limit was so that nobody was turned away from open races with their existing equipment… ie a bit of flexibility because this is a new sport to this country)

CX has more in common with road rather than MTB, because that’s its origins. CX came about so road cyclists had a way to keep riding and stay fit in the off season. MTB’s weren’t around in the early 1900’s when CX began.

^In the context of Australia that argument doesn’t hold water. CX has been a recent development in the local scene and the support base comes from both road/track and MTB riders and clubs. As far as a style of bike goes it has more in common with a road bike, in terms of a course it is more similar to XC MTB. Riding technique would be closer to XC than anything else.

I don’t see this as one discipline is better than another, in fact I would prefer far greater cooperation between them, rather than splitting them at state level into autonomous entities. I often suggest younger smaller kids start at bmx to get their skills up before coming onto road or track. It is also in no way critical of the rule makers or even the rules themselves.
That being said, times have changed, there were no mtb races when I first started cyclo cross, and the majority of circuits were longer than those in the current rules.
Cyclo cross itself changed a lot in the early 90s when the Americans turned it into more of a stadium type of event with man made instead of natural obstacles. These types of events were regularly run else where before, for greater audience involvement, but I am just saying there area some great single tracks I think would make great cx circuits, complete with natural obstacles etc.
If cx had not evolved it may have becoem even more of a fad, under the pressure of the mtb revolution, but it is fun and yes the skills required are more similar to road, especially given that most mtb now have discs and suspension, making them handle very differently to either the early mtb or a road bike.

Long ago it was common in the Uk during the winter to go along bridle paths and off road for at least some of the weekend club run, cyclo cross was just a longer version of these, with a bit of running thrown in, of course it’s evolved, it is so less unpleasant getting muddy and wet in modern fabrics!
Looking forward to far more involvment locally with all disciplines.
And while the cx bike is a lot of fun, single tracks on the dual suspension 29er rocks!

I just posted a link with some observations, didn’t think they were this radical?

does this mean you need a rode license rather than a mtb to race cross? I wish you could race all three on the same license.

CX is currently classified as a hybrid discipline in Australia. MTBA & CA are looking after the inaugural national series.

As a hybrid discipline, pending individual club/promoter approval, BMXA/CA/MTBA licences are all valid for CX races. DDCX/CrossMelburn/PACC/Manly Warringah race series’ are all accepting CA/MTBA/BMXA.

you might see this in the semi-distant future

The history of Cx in Australia is an interesting one…

FWIW ‘officially’ CX was under the guidance of MTBA but this wasnt widely known. As a result races were being run under MTBA and CA clubs. The recent rise has prompted the formalisation of some guidelines so that would be promoters understood the landscape they were working in as well as provide some structure so as the races got bigger that was some standardisation.

The rules exist as guidelines right now, and its my understanding will be reviewed again at the end of this season to see hw they have worked out. Like all rules they exist, but dont have to be followed to the letter if other options exist and the deviance is published (like mentioning that the course is slightly longer), however for the bigger races (National Series/State Champs/etc) you can expect they will be checked. The bogeyman shouldnt appear if as a promoter you use some discretion to produce a better race based on your surroundings etc.

The 35mm rule was definitely included to allow for a wider range of tyre selection for riders. Most of the rest is strongly ased on the current UCI rules (with some local flavour).

You should be assured that Tony Scott is very aware of all of the developments and at least one of the NCXS promoters has a decent history of MTBA races. The issue was more that MTBA has a deficit of resources whereas the one person working full-time on this is currently employed by CA and CA has more overall resources (marketing and administrative) so could better make this all happen.

For more history on how CX races have changed in the past 20 years look into the rise of the belgian/dutch racers vs the swiss/italian dominance of the 80s/90s. My feeling is this has more to do with why its seems more like road than MTB, rather than anything the US has done.