Does anyone have a straight forward answer why the UCI ruled that a bent was not a bike. My answer is the the bike mfg at the time bought off the members of the UCI, because it would have cost the mfg a lot of money to tool up for bent frames.
So does anyone here have any other reasonable answer as to why the UCI ruled the way they did.
So does anyone here have any other reasonable answer as to why the UCI ruled the way they did.