GPS tracking devices to become mandatory as Lappartient warns ‘UCI will have no option but to enforce’ the technology if teams refuse to collaborate

The introduction of mandatory GPS rider safety tracking to improve race safety has taken a step forward after last year’s dispute over data ownership, with UCI President David Lappartient writing to teams, riders and race organisers to request “concrete proposals” and collaboration on which technology and systems should be used.

Domestique first published Lappartient’s letter to teams, riders and race organisers. Cyclingnews has also obtained the letter.

The need for a GPS tracking system to improve rider safety was tragically highlighted by the death of Muriel Furrer at the World Championships in Zürich in 2024. She went off the road, but her serious crash was not seen, and so no immediate emergency treatment took place.

Article continues below

You may like

GPS tracking systems are already used in other sports and can detect a rider’s sudden deceleration or deviation, which may indicate a crash. A monitoring platform or dashboard can then locate the athlete and the nearest race officials and medical teams.

In his letter, Lappartient pointed out that “the risk of a rider going off course unseen being a fundamental danger to the safety of our riders.”

He made clear that GPS tracking in pro racing will “become mandatory and phased in across event classes.”

The SafeR group, which includes all the sport’s stakeholders, has been trying to implement a GPS rider safety tracking system, and the UCI worked with Swiss Timing at their World Championships in Rwanda.

The latest race content, interviews, features, reviews and expert buying guides, direct to your inbox!

Five major teams opposed using GPS devices during the women’s Tour de Romandie as a test event last summer, after a fallout about data ownership and use. The UCI disqualified Lidl-Trek, Visma-Lease a Bike, Canyon-SRAM zondacrypto, EF Education-Oatly and Picnic-PostNL from the race, but the teams have appealed to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS).

Lappartient went so far as to suggest that the teams were trying to “blackmail” the UCI through their actions. The spat worsened relationships between some major teams and the UCI, as did the UCI-driven SafeR decision to allocate funds to fight a legal battle with component brand SRAM over its gear limit case.

Lappartient has insisted that the UCI does not want to control or commercialise the rider/team data from GPS data devices, as Velon currently does on behalf of the teams. Some teams do not trust the UCI and oppose race organisers having a say in GPS rider safety-tracking systems.

What to read next

Following recent discussions at several Pro Cycling Council meetings and talks at the UCI WorldTour Congress during the winter, the UCI appears to have adopted a more open stance on which GPS-based rider safety tracking system to develop and use.

Lappartient highlighted several times that the creation and implementation of a GPS tracking system is a safety matter, but insisted the UCI should ultimately define which system should be used.

Addressing potential concerns, Lappartient clarified in his letter: “As mentioned on several occasions, the UCI does not seek to impose a specific system.”

“We are striving for the best solution to be found in collaboration with the stakeholders and within the best possible timeframe.”

“Stakeholders can work on the development of a system or tool with the provider of their choice (organisers, teams, riders); UCI’s role shall be to define specifications and protocols for the use of such systems.”

However, he warned: “If a reasonable and satisfactory solution is not accepted by all stakeholders in the context of our upcoming discussions, the UCI will have no option but to enforce effective GPS tracking for the safety of the riders as shall be deemed most appropriate.”

Lappartient wrote in his letter, “This discussion concerns only the GPS tracking for safety and race management (speed + position), mode and purpose of other data capturing and exploitation is not concerned by this discussion; Stakeholders are invited to collaborate in the interest of the sport by identifying potential synergies, and economies of scale to manage costs and human resources.”

One stakeholder source who spoke to Cyclingnews compared the use of different GPS rider safety-tracking devices to teams using different team radio devices. A common platform could then be used to manage and monitor the data, with clear agreements about data ownership.

Lappartient ended his letter and diplomatic tone by saying: “I trust the above gives clarity on the next steps towards a necessary improvement to safety in professional road cycling.”

He asked for stakeholder feedback by 30 April 2026, which will allow a detailed discussion during the 21 May 2026 Professional Cycling Council.

Get unlimited access to our unrivalled 2026 Spring Classics coverage with a Cyclingnews subscription. We’ll bring you breaking news, reports, and analysis from some of the biggest races on the calendar, including Milan-San Remo, Paris-Roubaix and the Tour of Flanders. Find out more.