UCI considers gear ratio limits to reduce speed in cycling races

UCI president David Lappartient reveals potential gear restrictions to address rider safety concerns amid rising speeds.

Norway's Jonas Iversby Hvideberg of Uno-X Mobility (R) lies injured on the road with others following a crash during the men's race of the 113th edition of the Scheldeprijs, a 202.8 km one-day cycling event from Terneuzen, the Netherlands to Schoten, Belgium, on April 9, 2025. Photo by Tom Goyvaerts/Belga

By Anna Fadiah and Hayu Andini

The Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI) considers gear ratio limits as part of an ongoing conversation around safety in professional road cycling. UCI president David Lappartient revealed in an interview published Friday that the organization may test new gear restrictions before the end of the year. This comes amid growing concerns over the rising speeds of modern races and the increasing risk of crashes, especially on downhill segments.

The idea that UCI considers gear ratio limits is not a new one, but it now appears to be gaining traction at the highest levels of the sport. The interview, given to French media, sheds light on the delicate balance between preserving the thrill of road racing and addressing the very real dangers that come with ever-faster bikes and more aggressive riding styles.

Calls for change after a series of high-speed accidents

Over the past few seasons, the professional cycling community has witnessed several serious accidents—many occurring at high speeds during descents. These incidents have sparked a debate over whether the sport’s governing body should step in with concrete measures to reduce risks.

Among the suggestions proposed by riders, teams, and race organizers, one of the more technical—and potentially controversial—solutions is the implementation of limits on gear ratios. By restricting how large a gear a rider can push, the UCI could effectively cap the top speeds achieved during races, particularly in descents and final sprints.

According to Lappartient, the issue is under careful review, and a trial run is being considered. “A test is planned for the end of the year, at a competition,” he said. The event for the test has yet to be selected, and even the UCI president expressed some hesitation about the feasibility and fairness of the proposal.

A complicated fix for a complex issue

“Generally speaking, reducing speed is somewhat antithetical to bike racing,” Lappartient noted, acknowledging the core tension in this debate. The thrill of speed is one of the defining aspects of professional cycling, and any effort to reduce it must be handled delicately.

Lappartient pointed to the diversity among riders as another complicating factor. “I have a lot of reservations about limiting gear ratios,” he admitted. “It could also change the characteristics of the riders between those who are able to pedal fast in smaller gears and those who are able to push big gears.”

In other words, introducing gear restrictions may unintentionally favor one type of rider over another. Sprinters who generate power through higher cadence in smaller gears might benefit, while time trialists or classics specialists who rely on high torque could be at a disadvantage.

Equipment and efficiency driving the trend

There’s no denying that cycling has become significantly faster over the past two decades. While athletes themselves have become more powerful and better trained, much of the speed increase can be attributed to advances in bike technology. Lighter frames, aerodynamic components, improved rolling resistance, and more efficient gear systems have transformed what riders are capable of achieving.

“Races are going faster and faster, in particular because the equipment is much more efficient,” Lappartient explained. But does that mean limiting gear ratios is the answer?

“Some people think so,” he added. “In any case, behind that, there’s the question of limiting speed.”

It’s a dilemma that reflects a broader struggle in professional sports: how to embrace technological evolution while maintaining safety and fairness. In cycling, where seconds can define careers, and crashes can end them, the stakes are high.

Data, testing, and the challenge of conclusions

Even if the UCI does go forward with a test later this year, Lappartient acknowledged that it will be difficult to draw solid conclusions from a single event. “What’s complicated is carrying out tests and drawing conclusions on an event, even if it’s a stage race and not very long,” he said.

He emphasized that reliable data requires a large sample size. “Because, by definition, statistics are based on volume and not on a single competition,” he pointed out. This makes the upcoming test—if it happens—more of an exploratory trial than a definitive proof of concept.

In other words, even if gear ratio limits are implemented temporarily, any decision about making them a permanent part of the rulebook will likely require extensive analysis across multiple races and conditions.

Resistance within the peloton and the cycling world

While safety is a shared concern, the idea that the UCI considers gear ratio limits has already sparked resistance within the cycling community. Riders are notoriously protective of their freedom to choose equipment and strategies that best suit their style. Gear ratio preferences are deeply personal and often adjusted based on terrain, weather, and tactics.

Introducing mandatory restrictions could therefore disrupt long-established habits and routines. Teams and bike manufacturers may also raise concerns, especially if new rules interfere with product development or marketing narratives focused on speed and performance.

Furthermore, there’s a fear that gear limits might make races more predictable and less exciting. In an era where cycling’s global popularity hinges on television rights and thrilling finales, any measure that potentially dulls the spectacle could be a tough sell.

A turning point for the UCI?

Still, Lappartient’s remarks suggest that the UCI is at least open to new ideas and willing to explore options outside of its traditional scope. Whether that results in a formal policy shift remains to be seen.

Some fans and analysts see this as a positive step—a signal that the UCI is listening to concerns from inside the peloton and acknowledging the risks faced by riders. Others worry that the organization is tinkering with one of the sport’s fundamental qualities: speed.

Ultimately, this conversation reflects a broader evolution in the world of professional cycling. With modern races pushing the limits of human performance and technology, the need for a reassessment of safety protocols is both timely and necessary.

If the UCI decides to proceed with gear ratio limits, the outcome could reshape the dynamics of racing in the years ahead. But for now, all eyes will be on which event will serve as the testing ground—and how the riders will respond once the gears are, quite literally, changed.