Crashes, what can be done?

[Billie]

It's good to see that the riders are starting to realise that their behaviour is the main problem. Let's hope we start to see this change in mindset converted in their behaviour on the road.

It's them who take the risks but it's also on them to control how much risk they take. The bikes are A LOT faster than 10 years ago. They have to adapt and take this into account.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

My bad, I missed the word rarely.

Indeed the risks were much higher because the environment was more dangerous. So we currently have an environment were the riders feel quite safe in, which pushes them to take more risks, because the chance of it going very wrong, is lower. I'm saying to alert the riders that we are moving into a more dangerous territory, just like a gravel road is very dangerous which they then noticed themselves.

So it's race organisers' fault that riders are getting complacent and causing accidents?

Look, where the organisers' negligence or fault causes an incident, like the cones on poles several years ago, then we can blame them. When the organisers' negligence is not responsible for an incident, but exacerbates it, like the Groenewegen/Jakobsen crash in Poland, then we can hold them into account for their bit.

Here, the extent of the organisers' culpability is not doing something like stuffing that culvert with hay bales.

In your example above about the gravel road being more dangerous by default, you credit the riders with enough intelligence to understand risk and make their own decisions about how much risk they are willing to take. Why do you then feel that they no longer have the capacity to understand risk and make their own decisions when the road is paved?

 

[Berniece]

So it's race organisers' fault that riders are getting complacent and causing accidents?

In your example above about the gravel road being more dangerous by default, you credit the riders with enough intelligence to understand risk and make their own decisions about how much risk they are willing to take. Why do you then feel that they no longer have the capacity to understand risk and make their own decisions when the road is paved?

That's not what I'm saying at all.

Because in most cases when the road is paved, it isn't as dangerous as it was now. Most roads don't have tree roots underneath pushing the road up. When this is the case you put a sign there that it's a dangerous area.

Just like most roads don't have obstacles in the middle of the road, but when this is the case we put a person with a flag and a whistle there to make the riders aware of it.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

That's not what I'm saying at all.

Because in most cases when the road is paved, it isn't as dangerous as it was now. Most roads don't have tree roots underneath pushing the road up. When this is the case you put a sign there that it's a dangerous area.

Just like most roads don't have obstacles in the middle of the road, but when this is the case we put a person with a flag and a whistle there to make the riders aware of it.

If you look at the replay you will see a yellow barrier with sharp corner signage in the corner which looks organiser-installed.

 

[Berniece]

@Libertine Seguros I can't quote your message since it's just quoted messages. So I'll tag you here.

That yellow barrier says it's a corner. Says nothing about slowing down because the road, the tarmac, is dangerous. So as a rider you see that yellow sign, you think alright I have to slow a bit down because the corner is quite sharp. And then suddenly your wheel moves underneath you because of bumps.

That barrier doesn't indicate or is interpreted as the tarmac is dangerous.

 

[Bolder]

the 'ideal' prep won't be there, that's for sure. Remember when some (including me) said Remco should just go to the Tour last year, arguing that Remco's excuse of not having the ideal prep is maybe something he will never get, so he should better go?

I said many times Remco should have done the Tour in 2023. But, he never listens to me!

It's good to see that the riders are starting to realise that their behaviour is the main problem. Let's hope we start to see this change in mindset converted in their behaviour on the road.

It's them who take the risks but it's also on them to control how much risk they take. The bikes are A LOT faster than 10 years ago. They have to adapt and take this into account.

Agreed, there has to be some collective responsibility, but my view is that the organizers should have padded those obstacles, at the very least.

I don't see how you enforce limiting risk-taking, though -- there's always going to be a Mohoric or Pidcock who lets it all hang out. I guess you could put a speed limit on certain road sections, but that's kinda counter to the spirit of bike racing.

As for tech, my carbon/disc bike on 28 mm tires lets me descend probably 33 percent faster than my old steel/rim brake bike on 23s, and certainly lets me go deeper into the corners. And that's just on dry tarmac. I definitely feel a lot safer, so if I hit a tree root heave I'm going to be going a lot faster and probably get hurt worse...

 

[Libertine Seguros]

@Libertine Seguros I can't quote your message since it's just quoted messages. So I'll tag you here.

That yellow barrier says it's a corner. Says nothing about slowing down because the road, the tarmac, is dangerous. So as a rider you see that yellow sign, you think alright I have to slow a bit down because the corner is quite sharp. And then suddenly your wheel moves underneath you because of bumps.

That barrier doesn't indicate or is interpreted as the tarmac is dangerous.

But if they heed the warning sign the riders should be going slower and be better equipped to deal with the risks they face, no? Road users exercise their ability to manage risk every time they use roads.

Or are you advocating for a large and complex language of signs warning of road conditions that riders can look at as they travel? If so... don't roads already have those?

 

[RedheadDane]

Or are you advocating for a large and complex language of signs warning of road conditions that riders can look at as they travel? If so... don't roads already have those?

I suppose a lot of road signage is targetted for cars.
For someone in a car, the road surface being slightly uneven because of roots might not be that big a problem...

 

[Berniece]

But if they heed the warning sign the riders should be going slower and be better equipped to deal with the risks they face, no? Road users exercise their ability to manage risk every time they use roads.

Or are you advocating for a large and complex language of signs warning of road conditions that riders can look at as they travel? If so... don't roads already have those?

I'm advocating for using a different sign at that location, because the currently used sign is interpreted as a sharp corner. Which the riders interpret correctly, but if the road is also not up to standards of normal roads, you aren't made aware of this.

We already have multiple different types of signs for riders, so maybe there's already one that says the road itself is dangerous.

 

[Bolder]

I'm advocating for using a different sign at that location, because the currently used sign is interpreted as a sharp corner. Which the riders interpret correctly, but if the road is also not up to standards of normal roads, you aren't made aware of this.

We already have multiple different types of signs for riders, so maybe there's already one that says the road itself is dangerous.

A big, temporary bright orange sign with "dangerous curve " and/or "uneven surface" posted 200 meters ahead would be an improvement!

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

I'm advocating for using a different sign at that location, because the currently used sign is interpreted as a sharp corner. Which the riders interpret correctly, but if the road is also not up to standards of normal roads, you aren't made aware of this.

We already have multiple different types of signs for riders, so maybe there's already one that says the road itself is dangerous.

I suspect that riders pretty much blank out standard road signs: most are obviously meant for vehicular traffic and do not apply to them, and are at a height that is not where they are generally looking.
So this would have to be some kind of mobile signage, flashing lights or other high visibility feature, sufficiently rare that riders don't come with time to ignore them as routine, and yet not something that riders become so dependent upon that they are at a greater risk in lower budget races where they are not present. I'm not saying that there could not be a place for them, but they are only at best a very partial solution.

 

[Berniece]

So this would have to be some kind of mobile signage, flashing lights or other high visibility feature, sufficiently rare that riders don't come with time to ignore them as routine, and yet not something that riders become so dependent upon that they are at a greater risk in lower budget races where they are not present. I'm not saying that there could not be a place for them, but they are only at best a very partial solution.

Indeed, we already have such signages. Seen them multiple times during Flanders Classics races. They were mostly used to indicate that the road would get smaller, or make a weird turn, a bit like a chicane.

 

[Brullnux]

I really have no idea how the itzulia crash fits into your thesis because no one was fighting for position. Some riders overcooked the corner and others made it round just fine. The only reason it was a big deal was the collective salary of those who went down. The actual injuries were very minor at the end of it. Roglic quit the race with nothing worse than a few scratches. I mean c'mon. Would a domestique be allowed to walk off the job like that?

Were the injuries "very minor"?! You had two people with broken collarbones, two people with broken vertebrae, punctured lungs, a broken sternum, a broken scapula, several fractured ribs, and a concussion, all in the same crash. I would be surprised if Vine and Cras race again this season, Vingegaard and Evenopoel might be out until June/July, and Cepeda will also have a verg long time off the bike.

How many recent crashes have had such an extensive (and serious!) injury list?

 

[ashhutch1997]

It's good to see that the riders are starting to realise that their behaviour is the main problem. Let's hope we start to see this change in mindset converted in their behaviour on the road.

It's them who take the risks but it's also on them to control how much risk they take. The bikes are A LOT faster than 10 years ago. They have to adapt and take this into account.

I disagree on the whole 'bikes are a lot faster now' statement. These modern bikes aren't as fast as made out, for example, the Specialized Venge from 4 years ago is faster than the SL8 they are using now, Specialized even admitted that.... In fact, a lot of manufacturers have stopped producing areo bikes. If anything, I'd say these bikes of today are slower, but that's IMO, there's a lot of marketing BS out there.. But again, this is my opinion, I actually sold my 'modern bike' and brought a much cheaper one from 6 years ago for this reason.
Now yes, the speeds are very high, but I would put this more down to nutrition, sports science, training and clinic related issues.

 

[Andy262]

Not possible to make 157km safe. This was just bad luck, didnt look like a dangerous part of the route.

And yet not a dissimilar situation to last year’s tragedy in Switzerland. A deceptively sharp bend on a fast, wide, downhill road. Given the concrete culvert and boulders I think we should count ourselves lucky this wasn’t even worse.

 

[Keldergoat]

MVDP spittin' truths again. 'The most dangerous thing about cycling are the cyclists'.

Van der Poel glashelder over veiligheid in koers: 'Meest gevaarlijke aan wielrennen zijn de coureurs zelf'

Veiligheid in het peloton: het is één van de meest

www.indeleiderstrui.nl

 

[EliseeReclus]

I do feel like one thing that's missing when it comes to crashes (maybe only particularly dangerous ones or involving multiple riders) is some kind of neutral/independent report into what caused the crash so that it can actually be figured out what can be done to rectify it. Otherwise we end up with lots of pontificating and hobby horse suggestions that sometimes aren't really that relevant. It feels slightly like this thread (and indeed the discourse more generally) is caught in a loop of throwing blame at riders, organisers and the UCI when really we have no idea how to attribute fault for what's going on in a race or crash. In this instance we seem to have competing ideas around whether it was the riders racing in a way that is not especially safe, the tree roots in combination with riders riding on the hoods, unsafe course design and I'm sure some other ideas. It would be helpful if there something that balanced these different explanations so that some output and changes can be made subsequently.

For instance if there's a race that has multiple crashes from what is deemed as dangerous course design - the UCI can demote the race's status or put it on a warning that it has to improve their safety.

If a particularly dangerous stretch of road has caused crashes it can be taken out of the race, have mandated safety measures to amend the course or have the stretch neutralised if it needs to be used.

If a specific rider is consistently causing crashes they can be fined, or there can be some equivalent of F1 Racing's license system to restrict the types of races they can compete in until they have demonstrated a level of safety.

If a team's tactics or team actions are regularly causing crashes they can be fined or some kind of sanction can be taken against the DS giving the instructions.

Finally, if it's the fault of something outside of these like the race caravan, fans on the side of the road or how emergency services react to crashes then some kind of control measures for these instances should be introduced.

 

[Mayomaniac]

According to Sobrero, who was near Roglic when the crash happened, the road wasn't really dangerous and sich a crash could happen everywhere on a stage. He also mainly blames the fighting for positions and trying to be near the front all stage long.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

You don't have to put signals on the side of the road for each corner. Only for those corners that are dangerous. In this case, Itzulia is a WT race, there's a standard to uphold too.

There is an argument to make, at the same time, that actually this kind of signage would be more important at junior and amateur ranks where riders are less experienced or aware, whereas elite WT pros would be expected to have learned the skills to read the road.

The flip side is that in the junior and amateur ranks, the difference in levels between the best and worst rider in the bunch is far greater than at the WT level (and with the increasing Premier Leagueification of cycling, that is reducing yet further) and so you don't have a huge péloton hitting these parts of the course. That's kind of why you need a selective parcours. The descents in País Vasco are for the most part perfectly safe to negotiate... in smaller sized groups that we are used to seeing in this race where there is more visibility and time to react to situations as they transpire on the road, not a full pack.

 

[Berniece]

There is an argument to make, at the same time, that actually this kind of signage would be more important at junior and amateur ranks where riders are less experienced or aware, whereas elite WT pros would be expected to have learned the skills to read the road.

How can you read that tree roots push the street a bit up in some areas when you are going 50-70km/h? But I agree that the ranks shouldn't have an impact on how much signage should be placed.

 

[scribers]

Yesterdays crash is possibly the most consequential and dramatic crash I can recall in terms of who was involved and the seriousness of it.

 

[awavey]

I'm advocating for using a different sign at that location, because the currently used sign is interpreted as a sharp corner. Which the riders interpret correctly, but if the road is also not up to standards of normal roads, you aren't made aware of this.

We already have multiple different types of signs for riders, so maybe there's already one that says the road itself is dangerous.

Road surface issues or problems of that kind are usually noted in the roadbook route instructions.

teams are also perfectly capable of recon of their own on a route.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

How can you read that tree roots push the street a bit up in some areas when you are going 50-70km/h? But I agree that the ranks shouldn't have an impact on how much signage should be placed.

Local knowledge (either your own or consulting others), recon rides, studying the roadbook, going at a speed that enables you to react to changing conditions on the road. Mikel Bizkarra posted about it; Pello Bilbao said that he knew that that corner was coming up and the speed they were going was potentially dangerous, so he hung back. Bilbao is a guy who is known for some great and high-speed descending, so maybe when you see a guy like that - racing on his home roads - taking precautions, it might be a hint that there's a reason for that coming up. Matteo Sobrero was right up alongside Rogla at the time and said that there was nothing out of the ordinary about that corner and it was just something that could happen on any road at any time. Away from those who were there or who have the local knowledge, Lilian Calmejane has raised that the bikes, the modern 'finishing bottles' and rider attitudes need to be discussed as they're causing crashes, and Mathieu van der Poel has said that the biggest danger is the riders, not the courses.

But some people who have signage to sell and a populist fanboy shill who tried to hide that he was being paid by the team whose leader crashed out yesterday somehow managed to warn everybody about the dangers of this particular corner before the route of the race was even announced, and Twitter only understands the language of outrage, so they sell that it's all the race organisers' fault.

 

[Berniece]

Local knowledge (either your own or consulting others), recon rides, studying the roadbook, going at a speed that enables you to react to changing conditions on the road. Mikel Bizkarra posted about it; Pello Bilbao said that he knew that that corner was coming up and the speed they were going was potentially dangerous, so he hung back. Bilbao is a guy who is known for some great and high-speed descending, so maybe when you see a guy like that - racing on his home roads - taking precautions, it might be a hint that there's a reason for that coming up. Matteo Sobrero was right up alongside Rogla at the time and said that there was nothing out of the ordinary about that corner and it was just something that could happen on any road at any time. Away from those who were there or who have the local knowledge, Lilian Calmejane has raised that the bikes, the modern 'finishing bottles' and rider attitudes need to be discussed as they're causing crashes, and Mathieu van der Poel has said that the biggest danger is the riders, not the courses.

But some people who have signage to sell and a populist fanboy shill who tried to hide that he was being paid by the team whose leader crashed out yesterday somehow managed to warn everybody about the dangers of this particular corner before the route of the race was even announced, and Twitter only understands the language of outrage, so they sell that it's all the race organisers' fault.

Local knowledge and recon rides are indeed important, but it's the area of the organizer. They drew out the route. It's easier if the organizer checks these things and warns the riders on the road, than that every team separately needs to do a recon of every possible route and warn their riders.

Also how could riders in the front know that Bilbao was staying a bit back to take precautions? Should they all look back more? Or for each route they must first determine who knows the are well, and then make sure to keep your eyes on them? Those are all ridiculous things of course, when it's just easier that the people that drew out the route, who went over the road, could just check if it's dangerous, and then notify the teams, riders, etc of this.

 

[Izzyeviel]

Yesterdays crash is possibly the most consequential and dramatic crash I can recall in terms of who was involved and the seriousness of it.

why are GC contenders trying to win the race on a descent before the final climb? Cyclists need to change their attitude and approach to these races. 'You can't win the race at the first corner, but you can sure lose it.'