UCI Gravel Racing – Positive progress or just a trend?

[Words by Jonny Croft]

When Marianne Vos and Mathieu van der Poel claimed victory in the third round of the UCI Elite Gravel World Championships in Leuven, Belgium, questions arose about the nature of the course, how “gravel” it really was and whether the UCI’s involvement was genuine for the good of cycling or simply an attempt to stay relevant by sticking to the latest trend. With British Cycling barely in discussion and complex laws governing cycling in the UK, the question is, where will the British riders stay as the gravel scene evolves?

Gravel cycling has its roots in the United States, where rough, unpaved terrain gave rise to specialty bikes and legendary events like the Belgian Waffle Ride and Unbound (formerly Dirty Kanza). While some argue that the Rough Stuff Fellowship in the UK also helped birth the sport of gravel, it was in the US that gravel-specific bikes such as Salsa’s groundbreaking Warbird (launched in 2013) first came onto the market. The discipline quickly grew in prominence, producing professional riders and spawning high-profile races such as the Life Time Grand Prix, which offers a hefty $300,000 in prize money.

As gravel became more popular in the US, the sport began to spread worldwide, with the first British events such as the Dirty Reiver in 2014. Ten years later, the UCI launched a Gravel World Series and world championships. However, something crucial seems to be missing from the concentration of events – the USA. Although the UCI Gravel World Series is the birthplace of gravel, there is only one event in the US in 2024, compared to multiple rounds in Belgium, Spain, Germany, Australia and the UK. Of the 26 events in the series, 20 take place in Europe and are not represented in Asia, Central or South America.

This imbalance may be due to the fact that the UCI’s gravel business is managed by a private sports marketing company based in Belgium, whose main goal is profitability. This European focus mirrors the model of the fading UCI Gran Fondo World Series, with one key difference: professional cyclists don’t seem interested in becoming Gran Fondo world champions.

For those who have taken the time to follow any of the previous UCI World Championships, the events have not captivated the audience as much as I had hoped the UCI would. The tracks appear to deviate significantly from what many would consider true gravel riding, offering everything from canal path-style tracks to tracks dominated by roads and tarmac that more closely resemble a classic Flanders-style race. If the races are won by riders using cyclocross tires – Marianne Vos, for example, used 33mm wide Dugast tubulars with a self-inflating system – does that suggest the tracks aren’t technical or rough enough? Or maybe Vos would have won regardless of what tires she chose.

[SWpix]

A key factor appears to be the influence of television reporting on course design. Using a lapping format simplifies filming, but also introduces complications, such as drivers of different age groups lapping each other. There have been personal reports from female riders who have complained that competitors are lagging behind male riders in the age group, raising concerns about the current rules and overall race format. These issues suggest that the emphasis on television-friendly layouts potentially undermines the integrity and inclusiveness of the competition.

Looking forward, the UCI World Championships will continue to be heavily Euro-centric, with France hosting the 2025 and 2027 editions and Australia scheduled for 2026. However, the decision to award the 2028 event to Saudi Arabia raises significant questions about how the venues will be selected. Is the UCI really focused on expanding gravel cycling worldwide or is it simply prioritizing those willing to pay the most?

This leads to another question: If the United States is considered the hotbed of gravel cycling, where are the American riders? Despite the importance of the Life Time Grand Prix, none of its top contenders such as Keegan Swenson or Sofia Gomez Villafane competed in the UCI World Championships. To date, no American rider has won a medal in any of the event’s three editions.

Life Time Grand Prix gravel unbound gravel – facebook.jpeg, by Suvi Loponen

It seems that gravel racing is divided into regional styles. The UCI series, for example, is developing into something completely different than the Life Time Grand Prix. Another notable contender is the Gravel Earth Series, which offers a more global reach and includes events in the US, Africa, Central and South America and Europe, including one in the UK.

Each series follows a different championship format. In the UCI series, riders who finish in the top 25% of a qualifying event secure a place in the World Championship, but must cover their own entry fees. While riders have the option to wear their national colors, don’t expect any help from British Cycling if you qualify – as they don’t offer an official jersey, you’ll need to contact a third party if you need one.

So what’s left for British gravel riders? Is it even relevant to the average cyclist? For everyday riders, gravel riding is booming in the UK, with new technology, numerous events and thousands of kilometers of tracks and trails open to explore, particularly in Scotland where access rights are particularly generous.

Battle_in_the_Bowl.JPG, by Matt Page

However, the situation is more difficult for racing drivers. While the UK’s national right-of-way system allows riders to use bridleways, it prohibits racing on them, even if the route is closed to the public – ironically the opposite applies to footpaths. Existing cycling laws focus primarily on road racing and have little provision for off-road formats such as gravel. This means that most races outside Scotland must either be held on lap courses or involve timed sections to avoid the legal complexities that arise when an event requires the use or crossing of a public road or right of way.

Another challenge is the lack of support from British Cycling, which does not officially recognize gravel as a separate discipline. While British Cycling sanctions road, mountain bike, BMX, track, cyclocross and cycle speedway events, gravel remains outside its jurisdiction. This lack of recognition creates hurdles for event organizers, particularly when it comes to obtaining liability insurance and complying with formal rules. There is currently no official British Gravel Championship – the title is self-proclaimed and is not affiliated with British Cycling or the UCI.

At a global level, the UCI needs to take a broader perspective and recognize that gravel means different things to different people around the world, not just in Europe. This diversity is what makes the sport so attractive and is reflected in courses at UCI level. However, we desperately need a world championship in the USA, on a course that reflects the riding style that everyday gravel cyclists are familiar with – not a lap with an average speed of 37 km/h (23 miles per hour) with a few cobble stones thrown in, which give it a rougher appearance. The decision to host the 2028 championships in Saudi Arabia clearly shows that the UCI is choosing venues based on who can pay the most. Unless changes are made quickly, the UCI Gravel World Championships will remain a pan-European event where professional road riders merely swap bikes for a day – or, if the courses continue to be so uninspired, they may not even need to swap bikes at all .

We would like to hear your thoughts on the future of gravel racing and what steps, if any, should be taken next.

You might also like: