I came to the conclusion that must have been curtain rules prohibiting types of wood because some wood is way less fragile then others and will give your opponent a unfair advantage. My question is what type of wood must have been?
"Jousting in Medieval and Renaissance Iberia" by Noel Fallows is an excellent resource, discussing 3 Spanish jousting manuals: one from the late 15th century, one from the mid 16th, and one the late 16th. Pine is widely discussed as the preferred material for jousting lances, and ash (and to a lesser extent beech) are noted as woods better suited for warfare, and that varieties of pine and firs are preferred for jousting as they are less dangerous and more likely to splinter (which is itself dangerous, but a different type of dangerous). Likewise, Chrétien de Troyes, way back in the 12th century, writes frequently of ash lances being used in warfare: in Cliges, it is noted that the character Cliges struck an enemy squarely in the chest with an ash lance, and while the lance remained intact, the opponent was knocked from his horse. He doesn't write about jousting lances as tournament jousting wasn't really a thing at the time, but makes it quite clear that ash is a good wood for lances designed to kill. In John Waldmann's "Hafted Weapons in Medieval and Renaissance Europe" he indicates that all variety of woods (from ash to oak to pine) are found in surviving pole weapons, but it is not specifically broken down by warfare vs tournament lances.
Inventories will at times specify armours designed for tournaments, or texts will describe the process of arming for tournaments as opposed to war, but the specifics of tournament lance construction doesn't seem to be quite as well-documented.