A Gritty Take: Take Two

The UCI's version of Gravel Worlds takes place this weekend in Italy.

 Okay, since I wrote that initial post which appears ahead of this one today, (scroll down if you are seeing this on the blog), there has been a big dust-up of discussion and feelings concerning this weekend's events. Let me just say this up front:

In two weeks none of this will matter.

It'll all blow over like the entire "Gravel Beef" thing did and like other dust-ups concerning the UCI and gravel cycling have before that. I just saw something though that reminded me of a meeting that took place several years ago now between a group of the big gravel event race directors and the UCI which I think occurred at the end of 2018, or maybe in early 2019. At any rate, that meeting was set up by the UCI and USAC to see what, if anything, the two organizations could do to get involved in the scene in the USA as it was at that point.

I was reminded of this meeting/event by a Tweet from a former MTB rider that now dabbles in gravel racing since he has "retired" as a Pro racer. At any rate, his name is not important here. It is what he intimated about that meeting that pricked up my ears and connected the dots.

I knew that the RD's of these various events had, in no uncertain terms, rejected any ploy or plan on the part of the UCI/USAC to become a part of their events. Think Life Time's events on gravel, (UNBOUND, et al) and Rebecca's Private Idaho event. The SBT GRVL, and the Belgian Waffle franchise. Those leaders of those events sent a message that, at that point in time, they wanted nothing to do with the UCI or USAC. 

There is a lot to say about the motivations on both sides here, but the point for this time to remember, and the point brought out by that Tweet I saw, is this: The UCI/USAC organizations were scorned and furthermore, with Gravel Worlds trademarking their brand in North America, they were feeling, perhaps, that the North American gravel community had spurned their overtures. 

Perhaps this is why the UCI events this weekend pretty much do not reflect any semblance of the gravel scene in North America. It would make sense. I, of course, am speculating, but if you have a better interpretation of events, or think I am absolutely wrong, let me know. I'm willing to have my mind changed, but so far, most people that have addressed this haven't been considering my points correctly, or at all. 

Some are deriding the critics of the UCI gravel event as being petty, or that somehow it is okay for the UCI to offer an event that is pretty lame in terms of the challenge and has not addressed the gulf the UCI always uses between men's and women's events. Gravel cycling has not been founded in North America in those ways, or in that manner. 

Some say that gravel cycling predates all the North American gravel culture and events of the past two decades. But this viewpoint is arguing a false equivalent. Gravel cycling in the early 20th Century was done on gravel because that was what the roads were. Gravel cycling in the last two decades in North America used gravel because we wanted to, not because we had to. Big difference, and the whole culture and ethos of modern day gravel cycling comes from an entirely different place than paved road cycling did, which grew out of that necessity of the use of gravel to an almost exclusive use of paved roads. The differences in origins are so glaring it almost is ridiculous to have to even defend where gravel cycling came from in the modern era. 

So, anyway, I thought that this debate was going in the wrong direction once I saw that reminder of the UCI/USAC offer to enjoin the North American gravel scene in race promotions. I think there is something to all of that when it comes to feelings of rejection and that the UCI cares little about how it is perceived by those in this still growing and burgeoning gravel scene.