• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Crashes, what can be done?

Page 54 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
should pro cyclists and their teams take the initiative and start bringing more protective apparel in the peloton themself? As in your opinion the responsibility is solely on cyclists, then surely its up to cyclists and their teams to make such move and to better protect themself and prevent unnecessary injuries.
You’re assuming these things are all imperatives. They may be for you, but that doesn’t mean they are for everyone.
 
@Libertine Seguros

Should amateur/pro cyclists remove the helmet then too? And if not, as i assume that will be your answer, should pro cyclists and their teams take the initiative and start bringing more protective apparel in the peloton themself? As in your opinion the responsibility is solely on cyclists, then surely its up to cyclists and their teams to make such move and to better protect themself and prevent unnecessary injuries. And when all this starts happening do you reckon for UCI to back them or try to ban such apparel?

Plus a bonus question. Will you change your mind, once the data becomes clear, that is number of collarbone injuries can be substantially reduced in pro peloton with better apparel. Will you use such apparel, considering your bike handling skills might be even worse compared to Rogla. Pun intended.
It's not that in my opinion the responsibility is solely on the cyclists.

It's that you are chasing an impossible dream of a completely injury-free cycling, while simultaneously dismissing - repeatedly - one of the main causes of crashes, which is entirely innocent and innocuous mistakes made by the péloton that no amount of action by the UCI could ever prevent. Most of those crashes are relatively minor compared to sprint pile-ups or things like the Itzulia crash, but injuries still occur. You seem to want to keep riding as hectic and reckless as it is now, but reduce consequence for such riding. I think reducing the number of violent crashes caused by rider recklessness is a better way to combat injuries in the sport.

I would anticipate the UCI will back such apparel once it exists and is practical for use in the péloton. They're not the callous monsters out for blood and the snapping of bones that you perceive them to be, sabotaging the teams and riders' hopes and dreams of safety at every turn. Unfortunately for you, actually the teams and kit manufacturers appear to be more interested in designing apparel around going faster, thus increasing the risk of injury in the case of an accident.

To improve safety in the sport, improved apparel would cost money, time and investment. Changes to rules around course design would require time to negotiate and implement. Changes to barriering and safety equipment would cost time, money and investment. Changes to reckless rider behaviour would cost absolutely nothing bar some egos taking a bit of a dent.
 
I see. Well, no, that is not enough. As a cycling fan you obviously can have such opinion and based on my perception, you are not alone in perceiving riders safety in such way, neglecting it or finding it unimportant.

You want broken bones to be completely eliminated from the world of cycling, even though they - obviously - haven't been eliminated from life in general?
Please don't think that because I don't think broken bones are of the utmost important, means that I don't care about rider safety, I just think the focus should be on more serious injuries.

Should amateur/pro cyclists remove the helmet then too? And if not, as i assume that will be your answer, should pro cyclists and their teams take the initiative and start bringing more protective apparel in the peloton themself?

The thing is... a helmet protects a rather important body part...
 
You want broken bones to be completely eliminated from the world of cycling, even though they - obviously - haven't been eliminated from life in general?
Please don't think that because I don't think broken bones are of the utmost important, means that I don't care about rider safety, I just think the focus should be on more serious injuries.



The thing is... a helmet protects a rather important body part...
Probably the one thing that allows a crash survivor to consider the tactics that got him the gauze-wrap phase of his riding kit.
I've raced against guys in crits that wore some light moto-cross protection for knees and hands. Those measures made them only more aggressive, reckless and completely stupid in their disregard for other riders.

They also don't prevent broken bones unless you're wearing full chest and shoulder protection; then you're off the back, overheated and likely out of the risk zone of injury except passing out from heat stroke.
 
@Libertine Seguros

I never argued that all injuries can be prevented, drastic reduction of injuries on the other hand can be expected with introduction of such technology in pro peloton. I don't feel that the money is problem here, due to manufacturers of such apparel making *** loads of money, once such apparel hits pro peloton and the numbers of its effectiveness get out. On top of that teams are becoming rather rich lately. So money can't really be an excuse any more. UCI doesn't have to do all that much either, what they need to do is to say on this date and on this race usage of such technology will be mandatory or you won't be able to participate.

@RedheadDane

Riders are getting seriously injured, like all the time.

@Froome

It's not important, to me, on whose fault it was. What is important is for injuries to occur less often. Here of course cycling governing bodies are responsible in making that happen, not riders.

1bd707a46a3990b02e87-mezgec-celada.jpeg


Mezgec after today's crash, on where he got up and lead-out Groenewegen for the win. Bottom line safety apparel does work. There is no reason to not introduce more safety oriented apparel in pro peloton in the future. Air bag technology works in other sports and there is no reason it wouldn't reduce number of injuries in pro peloton and among amateur cyclists alike.

And for the people that blame riders and say nothing can be done.


Some sort of yellow card will be introduced, basically from littering to bunch sprints. Riders will be blamed for everything and as such will get punished for it. Now lets see it the number of crashes and injuries will be reduced in pro peloton. If yes, then great, if no, then how to put this mildly, then GTFO.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Lequack
UCI was the last stronghold when it came to doping. Once they gave in now "blood bag" is a golden standard, when it comes to doping prevention. Before that it wasn't taken seriously, nothing could be done.

UCI is the last stronghold when it comes to not improving rider safety. Once they will give in "air bag" will become a golden standard, when it comes to injuries prevention.

From history point of view i guess we have to determine on what finally drove them to it, to change their mind. I assume that will need to be repeated again, when it comes to rider safety.

Was it really Oprah?
 
@Libertine Seguros

I never argued that all injuries can be prevented, drastic reduction of injuries on the other hand can be expected with introduction of such technology in pro peloton. I don't feel that the money is problem here, due to manufacturers of such apparel making *** loads of money, once such apparel hits pro peloton and the numbers of its effectiveness get out. On top of that teams are becoming rather rich lately. So money can't really be an excuse any more. UCI doesn't have to do all that much either, what they need to do is to say on this date and on this race usage of such technology will be mandatory or you won't be able to participate.
OK, let's go through this point by point:

1) I am suggesting we reduce injuries by reducing the number of crashes. You are suggesting we reduce injuries by introducing technology which is both costly and in its infancy right now, with its efficacy not yet known. You're accusing me - repeatedly - of saying "nothing can be done" when all I'm saying is that, in my opinion, you are looking in the wrong places, by insisting the riders don't have any culpability and laying the blame for accidents solely at the hands of the UCI.

2) Yes, manufacturers of apparel make money, but the problem is a lot of their R&D is about making riders faster because if you make gear that is slightly safer in the event of a 1/100 chance incident, but is slower in the event of 100/100 races, you know that the majority of teams and riders are going to be willing to take that risk, right?

3) "once such apparel hits pro peloton and the numbers of its effectiveness get out" depends on the apparel being both affordable and effective. At the moment, both of these things are gigantic question marks, but you have become so married to the idea that you are guaranteeing its success before it is even implemented. Again: protecting the collarbone from a direct blow will in many people's opinion have a negligible effect - because direct blows are only responsible for a negligible percentage of collarbone injuries.

4) teams are becoming rather rich lately, but you know what they're doing? They're spending more money on riders. Why are they doing that? Because the riders' agents know that the teams have more money to spend. So the amount they can give to R&D is probably not that different, and you know where that R&D money is going to be spent? On trying to make the riders faster, not safer. Teams and riders will ignore risk and push the narrative that any accidents are the fault of the UCI and the race organisers, a narrative which you're swallowing like a good little disciple.

Besides, as many studies comparing tackling in American Football and Rugby show, quite often the feeling of increased safety that the helmet and padding in the former provides, results in players throwing themselves around taking more risks and with less respect for their own safety than players in the latter, because they feel like there are fewer consequences to taking those risks. I'm not advocating that we make races more dangerous in order to force riders to respect the road a bit more - but riders and DSes recognising and respecting that you can't go 100% full gas all the time on a technical descent in a péloton of 140 elite riders in the way you would on a six lane straight highway would do more to improve safety in the bunch than wearing an inflatable bib short to protect from a direct blow to the collarbone. Sorry.
 
Riders are getting seriously injured, like all the time.

Yes, and you chooses to focus on... broken collarbones, now having expanded to... broken wrists.
There was a, I'm guessing joking, post about airbags for hips being needed - was it you, @QueenStagiaire? - and honestly, if it was possible to do so without restricting movement, then that would make far more sense than protecting collarbones. Broken hips - and femurs - have been career-ending. Broken collarbones? Well, unless it happens right at the end of the season, they're usually not even season ending.

Mezgec after today's crash, on where he got up and lead-out Groenewegen for the win. Bottom line safety apparel does work.

You keep ignoring the fact that helmets literally protects riders' heads.
 
So it looks like things are slowly moving in the right direction, something is being done. UCI (governing body) accepting initiatives from parties such as SafeR (teams) and they are experimenting at this Tour edition, currently mainly focusing on bunch sprints. Two areas on where i detected changes:

Whenever appropriate by extending the length, above the 3km rule, and by doing that reducing initiative for GC riders to be there.

Today they relegated Philipsen, stage 6. What happened is Philipsen deviated from the line and pushed van Aert into the barriers. Instead of risking it and pushing through, van Aert used brakes, to avoid the crash and Philipsen was relegated after the race.

@Libertine Seguros

We could debate this further but all in i feel the time has come, to start introducing more injury prevention oriented apparel in the pro peloton. So it's important to reduce the number of crashes and based on all the discussion we had i feel that now we understand that injures prevention is just as important.

@RedheadDane

Obviously an inflated air pocket can and should prevent a hip injury too, once the system is there this hot spots can easily be covered. Obviously, most importantly, collarbone and shoulder to be covered ASAP.

@all

Most in this debate agreed on the importance of barriers. Well, air bag, that is a portable barrier. A barrier in between the rider and the obstacle the rider hits, when crashing. So we actually can have 200km+ of barriers. Some on the more exposed sections, such as dangerous road sections on descends, and the portable barriers in terms of injury prevention apparel, compared to standard barrier being very cost effective and much more effective.

P.S. And hopefully UCI takes Vismas confiscated "control center" vehicle and turns it into a safety car. It's time for pro peloton to get a safety car, on where through data analysis riders can get information on things like road surface grip on some section and in real time. It's still up to them then, the riders, on how to tackle it.
 
Last edited:
P.S. And hopefully UCI takes Vismas confiscated "control center" vehicle and turns it into a safety car. It's time for pro peloton to get a safety car, on where through data analysis riders can get information on things like road surface grip on some section and in real time. It's still up to them then, the riders, on how to tackle it.
I have made the following suggestion years ago.

Dozens of GPS navigation apps have a feature to input feedback into the app, that will serve to warn other app users on the same course. Object on the road in 500 meters. Vehicle broken down at the side of the road, reduce your speed. Truck lost its cargo on the far right lane. Etc etc etc.

The technology exists. Every rider has an earpiece connected to a radio. Every course needs to be checked by UCI/ASO/... It's like 1+1+1=0 for these people.
 
Yes. The thing is now they actually have such vehicle in their possession and one of the biggest IT companies behind it, hope they will connect the dots ...

P.S. The graphic on race computer should IMHO be simple, to not overwhelm the riders. Like a symbol for Etna crater would mean that there is a big enough hole in the road approaching capable of crashing the peloton. But for starters something like an indicator signalling slippery road section ahead ... That would likely prevent the Dauphiné mass crash. And to build on that, once all that is working and proves to be effective.
 
Most in this debate agreed on the importance of barriers. Well, air bag, that is a portable barrier. A barrier in between the rider and the obstacle the rider hits, when crashing.

A barrier that the riders will have to carry around.
A barrier that will restrict movement.

Do you think those "airbag devices" are completely flat when not inflated?
Well, here's a picture of one of those airbag helmets:

Ho%C2%A6%C3%AAvding_Felix_gra%C2%A6%C3%A8_019_LQ-1024x683.jpg


And this is supposedly a new "slimmer" version...

You expect riders to have that all over their bodies, for 100+ Ks?
 
@RedheadDane

We already discussed some tech currently on the market and i even posted pictures in this thread. As for your example i don't feel it's suitable for pro peloton. You found it on internet in some motorcycle section? I see it more as potential for neck support and not something that would protect collarbone and shoulder of a road cyclist. As such i agree with you this model is not suitable for pro peloton.
 
I have avoided this thread for quite some time, but for some reason clicked on it this morning.

It seems that 'air bag' garments are being discussed (I jokingly floated that last year). In road motorcycle racing (ie: Moto GP, WSB...) every racer wears them. Everyday JMs can now purchase a variety of vests, jackets, and suits with airbags. Motocross (AMA, MXGP...) racer don't use them because they are restrictive and hot. They are expensive, vest starting around $500, and suits around $2,500 (some are single use, other up to five deployments). Racers still break bones, but then again they are going way faster.

I had the opportunity to try an Alpinestars Tech Air Off Road (rally, desert...) $1,000, and it was considerably heavier than my summer jacket, and a little heavier than my spring/fall jacket. It had low air flow, and this was the tech air version.

Keep in mind, not only do these systems require the air bag itself, they require an inflation canister, and an electronic control system (with batteries).

I can't imagine a racer who eats like a supermodel to keep their weight dangerously low adding a heavy air bag system, that also reduces air flow.


IMO, not happening soon...
 
So it seems nothing can be done about crashes? You would think with more and more money coming into the sport, teams would want to protect their investments, but nothing is changing for the better at all. It seems the opposite, there are more crashes, at higher speeds, and more dangerous.
 
So it seems nothing can be done about crashes? You would think with more and more money coming into the sport, teams would want to protect their investments, but nothing is changing for the better at all. It seems the opposite, there are more crashes, at higher speeds, and more dangerous.
Watching the crash now, I wonder how much brake lights would help in regards to those in the back of the group where it’s harder to see the crash occur.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jmdirt
Watching the crash now, I wonder how much brake lights would help in regards to those in the back of the group where it’s harder to see the crash occur.

Then the riders should have different colour lights depending on their skill level. If Nicole Frain brakes and you see a red light, for instance, you'd know it would already be way too late for you to brake, but if you see Pierre Latour's yellow light in a descent, you can probably wait a little longer before taking action, as long as you don't follow his line.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: jmdirt and SHAD0W93
Watching the crash now, I wonder how much brake lights would help in regards to those in the back of the group where it’s harder to see the crash occur.
There are helmet mounted brake lights that work via accelerometer + gyrometer.

One example here (obviously needs to be re engineered for bike helmets):
 
  • Like
Reactions: SHAD0W93
Then the riders should have different colour lights depending on their skill level. If Nicole Frain brakes and you see a red light, for instance, you'd know it would already be way too late for you to brake, but if you see Pierre Latour's yellow light in a descent, you can probably wait a little longer before taking action, as long as you don't follow his line.

I thought the issue with Nicole Frain was that she didn't brake...
But maybe her seeing a bunch of lights would make her aware she should brake...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sandisfan