Following September’s 2020 Esports UCI Worlds announcement, the UCI has just published a set of “Cycling Esports Regulations” on its website.
Read the “UCI Cycling Esports Regulations” PDF >
This release is newsworthy if only to show how far Zwift racing has come. As the Zwiftcast’s Simon Schofield said, “We’ve come a long way from ‘let’s meet on the Richmond start line’.” As esport cycling evolves and organizers seek to attract top racers, a globally-defined set of rules and regulations must be put into place to help ensure fair competition. This is the UCI’s first attempt at such a ruleset, and even though it’s a fairly small document, it lays necessary groundwork for further development of cycling esports on the world stage.
As the first esports regulations ever published by the UCI, this document is certainly worthy of discussion. Let’s dig in to the most interesting parts.
Chapter 1: General Provisions
The UCI begins by defining what a “Cycling esports platform” is. It’s worth noting that “Zwift” is not mentioned anywhere in this document. Rather, the UCI keeps it generic, allowing the rules to apply to any esports platform which may be developed.
1.1 – A cycling esports event is held on a cycling esports platform. A cycling esports platform is a software that, when coupled with certain hardware, allows individuals to participate in cycling races in a virtual environment. The cycling esports platform must at minimum provide a form of continuous feedback to the participants as to their progress within the competition as related to other participants
Categories of Riders
1:6 – Participation in races is organised on the basis of the age and gender categories set out in articles 1.1.034 to 1.1.037 of the UCI Regulations.
If you’re waiting for UCI-sanctioned races using “standard” Zwift categories… don’t hold your breath. Races will be based on standard UCI categories defined in their main ruleset, which are based on age and gender. So we’ll have men’s juniors, U23, Elite, Masters, etc. No surprise here! While lower-level Zwift racers enjoy the competition of categories B, C, and D, the UCI is just concerned with the top racers in particular age/gender groups.
Race Types
The UCI defines two types of esports races in section 1.7:
- In real life races, in which all participants and the necessary equipment are verified by a commissaire at the race location.
- Remote races, in which participants and the necessary equipment are not verified by a commissaire at the race location(s).
This is notable because the UCI is leaving the door open for UCI-sanctioned esports events where competitors are remote and therefore using non-verified equipment.
Chapter 2: Equipment
Participants in a UCI-sanctioned esports event must use a UCI-legal bike or a smart bike that is compatible with the platform:
2.1 – Subject to any applicable competition guide and applicable UCI Regulations, bicycles used for cycling esports races shall be (i) bicycles as defined in part 1 of the UCI Regulations in combination with a smart trainer compatible with the cycling esports platform, or (ii) smart bicycles or other equipment compatible with the cycling esports platform.
Heart Rate Required
While the rule leaves it up to the race organizer, by default heart rate monitors are required:
2.2 – Unless explicitly specified in the competition guide for a race, riders must compete using a power meter or smart trainer, paired together with a cadence sensor and heart rate monitor
In addition, up-to-date firmware and proper spin-down/calibration of power meters is required. Some of this language appears to be taken directly from Zwift’s own eRacing Ruleset.
2.3 – Riders shall be responsible for following any manufacturer’s specifications on maintaining the accuracy of their equipment including but not limited to using up-to-date firmware versions and conducting a spin-down, zeroing or other calibration or offset procedure for power meters or smart trainers immediately prior to a race.
Chapter 3: Performance Verification
This section is interesting because of what it does not say. Far from spelling out how performance verification should take place, the UCI merely states here that:
3.1 – The organiser of a cycling esports event is required to have a performance verification system.
This leaves the specifics of performance verification up to the event organizers. Is this the UCI smartly deferring to organizers who know their platform well? Zwift has their own performance verification system set up, although it is still evolving. Does this rather loose rule open up the sport up to platforms that mismanage performance verification? Time will tell, but it seems certain that this section of the rules will be expanded as cycling esport develops.
Chapter 4: Specific Regulations for Cycling Esports Events
Most of this section is dedicated to defining how event organizers must publish a “competition guide” for their event. This would contain details like participation requirements, qualification system, specific performance verification measures, prizes/titles to be awarded, and more.
Nothing unexpected here, but it is clear that UCI-sanctioned esports events are on a much higher level than a typical Zwift race where a rider can sign up from within the game itself and never see a bit of information about the event except the title!
Chapter 6: Specific Infringements for Cycling Esports
This section details specific infringements and the punishments to be given for each. Yes: this includes fines! The maximum fines are 5000 Swiss Francs (~$5000US), while initial fines begin at 200 Swiss Francs. Riders receiving the maximum fines also receive a lifetime suspension.
There are actually three sets of infringements listed, varying from more minor infringements to more serious.
The first set of infringements includes out-of-date firmware, unintentional disconnect from the server for over one minute, and other situations that could be construed as accidental and fairly minor. The sanction defined for these is “Refusal to start, elimination or disqualification.”
The second set of infringements is significantly more serious, carrying definite intention to gain an unfair advantage. This includes:
Incorrect Rider Height/Weight Providing inaccurate information about height or weight. Any information varying by more than 5% from the real measure shall be considered incorrect.
Does 5% seem high to anyone else? That’s over 9cm (3.6″) of height if you’re 183cm (6′) tall. And that’s 3.75kg (8.26 pounds) if you’re a 75kg (165 pound) rider! Probably a much lower number for height, and a slightly lower number for weight would make sense.
Also included here is “Using bots or simulated riders either in-competition or out-of-competition for any reason.” It looks like the UCI learned a lesson from British Cycling/Cam Jeffers here.
This second set of infringements carries escalating penalties:
- First violation: Refusal to start, elimination or disqualification + 200 CHF fine
- Second violation: One-year suspension + 1000 CHF fine
- Third violation: Lifetime suspension + 5000 CHF fine
The third and final set of infringements are the most serious of all: fabricating data, mechanical fraud, hacking/game modification, etc. It also carries escalating penalties:
- First violation: One-year suspension + 1000 CHF fine
- Second violation: Lifetime suspension + 5000 CHF fine
Your Thoughts
Reactions from Zwift Racers thus far have been mixed. Some say the regulations contain a lot of loopholes, others say they want the UCI to stay away from Zwift racing, and still others see these rules as a necessary step toward greater acceptance of cycling esports.
What are your thoughts on the UCI’s new esports rules? Share them below!
April Fools isn’t for a few months.
5% of 183cm is 9cm, not 17…still seams like too much though.
Whoops! Fixed. Was converting units back and forth and things got hinky, methinks.
I
Interesting rule set, obvious they want to avoid a CAM 2.0 desaster. I’am not totally sure who to blame for that, but it would be good to never see that again: 1. A somewhat naive youtube cyclist getting a bike at a time it was perfectly legal, but not chaning it for the finals although he should have known better 2. A obviously overreaching Cyling Association which knitted rules on the fly an decided later to punish a young cyclist severely
Hi Eric- do you think it’s inevitable that we will see UCI sanctioned events on Zwift one day? If so what are your thoughts on them invading our space?
I don’t care for acceptance – I ride for fun. But as in every game I want a fair Match, so rules and Regulation make sense.
But paying fees where nothing is to win? That’s just capitalism.
Ban cheaters as planed but forget about fees in a video game without serious prize pots
Actually that’s a bit tricky. They don’t have the power to come and say : “each esport event now belongs to us, and is constrained to follow our rules”. Or what? They just set out the rules that virtual platforms must follow in order to comply with the regulations made by the UCI.
For example, they say : “The cycling esports platform must at minimum provide a form of continuous feedback to the participants as to their progress within the competition as related to other participants.”
So, what happen if the platform doesn’t respect these rules? (Answer: nothing more than this platform doesn’t meet the condition to be UCI validated).
And does the fact that it complies with them necessarily imply that the platform must comply with UCI guidelines? No, nor would the UCI have the right to come and tell me that when I go to get my bread by bike I have to agree to submit to a doping control. The UCI would only have the right to do this if I have subscribed to its charter (and if its charter stipulates that it can control me in such a case), the UCI is not the universal constitution (which would apply to all countries), and which would be applicable without the consent of individuals once voted.
Must keep the UCI out of Zwift!!!!
Agreed Eric, 5% deviation for weight and HEIGHT! is a bit much. Firstly, height is not going to change for anyone except maybe, maybe some of the U23. And at 180lbs, in theory I can put my weight at 172 (less than 5% deviation) and not get penalized. I think in future revisions we’ll see this change to 3% weight and 1% height. I like that they leave the “Performance Verification System” up the an organizer. Truth is, UCI does not have the expertise to enforce what a good system set-up is, and it allows for these systems to change as the technology changes. I think though if you manipulate your data, it’s a lifetime ban first time; not second.
How I think this will benefit Zwift races is for organizers who adopt UCI rules, plus incorporate Zwift A/B/C/D categorization.
I am a 200lb Male. 5% of my weight is 10lbs. 3 to 5 lbs of that naturally add on during the day. So agreed, maybe 3% is a closer to reality, but there should be room in there for the weight changes throughout the day
It seems you are right but often we forget one thing. Racing in hot summer, in winter too but less, you can see that your weight from the beginning to the end of a race lose more or less two or three kg.
Zwift has so much data, about weight fluctuations, about highs and lows, changes over time. I’ve never understood why weight, especially in a situation where it matters like this, wouldn’t be required to be input via a smart scale and then run through verification once it’s in.
For those that are worried about the UCI invading Zwift, these rules are only for UCI sanctioned events. Zwift will continue to do their events for the mass riders, as they have so far, which will not be governed by the UCI.
Only bigger races, where there’s probably the potential for a prize, may have the UCI involved.
Zwift has had many “Pro” races on there, which are for selected teams.
For 95% of the riders on Zwift, you’ll never have to worry about the UCI.
I’m wondering how long it’ll be until the cyclists race live in stadiums in front of a live audience (I’m thinking like StarCraft in Korea)?
Since Zwift Insider has used bots “for any reason” (speed tests) would that mean you would be disqualified? That seems ridiculous.
Have this been on his main account though? I’m sure there would be some loopholes that could be used.
Disqualified of what? His tests? Don’t confuse “for any reason” and “at any moment of your life, including retroactively to this Regulation”.
The UCI concern races, and not all races; only ones which pretend (and want) to belong to UCI rules. You have a chance to know it if the pre-start categorization fits its own rules : not “A, B, C or D” but “on the basis of the age and gender categories” (see point 1.6), like “category 1.2”.
I’m not too worried. Mostly because I’ll never be in a UCI race! (And yes, it was ALWAYS through a separate account!)
Lol.
UCI doesn’t have the power to regulate like you seem believing it. Cameron Jeffers only was sanctioned only because he had already signed the UCI regulations charter. If zwift does not wish to subscribe to it, or if it does so only in relation to certain races, any other use will not be subject to these rules. And anyone who has not yet signed in order to subscribe to it makes a mockery of the UCI rules.
So, in order for you to be disqualified, you have to:
* Either you have subscribed to the UCI rules regardless of your use of zwift
* Either that (the management of) zwift subscribes to the UCI regulations, that the regulations of zwift are amended accordingly, and that it informs you that these regulations have changed and that you must accept the change by giving your agreement again (thus you are joining the UCI indirectly).
That’s why I was saying that the UCI is not the constitution, it is an independent body to which one subscribes, and not imposed automatically. Whereas the Constitution of a State, for example, is (once voted by its representatives).
I (or you) can’t get up early in the morning, create an organization, write down the rules, and say that everyone should abide by them. You will only do it if you want to, and as far as I know, you haven’t signed anything about the UCI.
So you can rest easy whether or not you want to take part in UCI races in the future. Anything they may sanction will only concern what you do once you have signed their charter.
(The retroactive effect of a by-law can only apply to the amendment of the by-law itself, not to your membership. In other words, they’ll never search what you did before you signed with a retroactive effect. Altough they can search in the past what you did, while you were part of this rule, following the changes of a possible new rule.
You sign today: they can check what you do from today on. And if they do this verification for example in 1 year’s time, they will be able to do it following the rules that will exist in 1 year’s time. If these rules have changed in the meantime, there will be retroaction if they apply these new rules, but this “retroaction” cannot concern what has happened before today).
Just remember that if you have ever signed up for USAC (or any other UCI member) license, probably even a one-day license, you have agreed to submit to the jurisdiction of the UCI and the whole sports law apparatus all the way up to the CAS.
In my opinion, retroactive validity is an open question, there’s definitely an argument to be made for either case. But sure, in principle there’s nothing stopping anyone from doing a whole East German diet either, as long as one does it before getting a license for any organized sport that is part of the anti-doping system. (With an exception for those jurisdictions where doping is a criminal offense as well.)
I think the 5% tolerance sounds like a reasonable starting point – it’s better for them to start flexible and tighten the rules later, especially with weight.
Do they mention anything about how bikes used in a competition should have exactly the same performance levels? When you want as level a playing field as possible in sport and it’s easy to put everyone on the same bike, it makes sense they would do that.
No mention of (virtual) bikes used, no. Presumably they leave that up to the event organizer, along with lots of other stuff.