Crashes, what can be done?

[bNator]

You still have Dakar rally in which every year someone passes away, usually motocyclists. Motor sports are more dangerous than cycling in general.

There are certain things that can be done, sometimes race designs are a bit too risky, but honestly fatal accidents often happen on lower risk areas (Kivilev, Lambrecht). Gino Mäder accident happened on a descent that had been used for many years without any consequence.

I don't agree at all with the current trend of "everything is risky", "ban everything", "if a fatal crash takes place then it is the organization's fault". Cycling is a dangerous sport that entails risks. Accepting that fact is the first step to improve things. Then, let's concentrate on realistic measures that can really improve safety.

I agree with your assessment. We need realistic measurements to be implemented but we need to start moving. My question earlier in the thread was: what has been done to improve safety besides banning certain positions on the bike in the recent years? Maybe I can extend that and ask what has been done besides trying to change riders behaviour (a little bit)? I think not a single thing (but I might be wrong).

So we are not talking about knee-jerk reaction here, we are talking about any reaction whatsoever. But everyone just sort of seems to be cool with it - it’s an inherently dangerous sport and as long as it’s other people dying and not me, I really don’t care that much… As long as it’s other people dying, I accept it’s a part of our sport.

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

We don't know if it's true.
I love races without radios however when we see radios can probably save a rider's life, I'm all in for radios.
I think the only way to avoid death on the road is by making all stages/classics a TT (without dangerous descents). Of course this is not gonna happen.

I think the safety argument in terms of removing tactical radio support is a total red herring.

All radios on one channel: Race control can speak to all riders, and riders (and maybe some other parties) have access to speak up where necessary. Safety requirements met, remote control tactics removed.

Daft to have transponders attached to the bikes, which can be changed mid-race. These are, I think, tiny (transponders, not bikes), so have the riders carry them.

I do worry a bit about the radios: EF, I have particularly noticed, seem to have huge radios on their backs. Surely they could be a complicating factor in a fall, although not that would make for anything life-changing. Surely they could be smaller, but, in the current context, that is minor.

 

[Extinction]

Compulsory helmets were introduced in the 90s, which was a major advance in rider safety measures. Think about it, prior to that cyclists rode the same decents, the same corners, the same cobbles, with nothing protecting their heads. Beyond this there really isn't much else to do in terms of what a rider can wear to diminish the risk of serious or fatal injury after a fall. I'd have to look at old footage, but it seems to me that road furniture (which has increased over the years) is generally more padded than it was in the past. There was also less policing of sprint finishes to relogate riders for physical contact or moving from a line. Overall there is more awareness about having to take safety seriously in the peloton.

And yet the speeds have increased considerably, the riders seemingly compelled to take big risks to get results or be out of a contract. Sure it was like this in the past, but the sponsorship and management pressure today placed on the riders has probably increased, as larger investments and performance science to eke out every possible advantage have created an environment of hyper-expectations.

So, in short, I honestly don't know what can be done to make a sport safer that is inherently one of the most dangerous by its very nature: ride as fast as you can, shoulder to shoulder, elbow to elbow, on often narrow, twisty roads, under physical and mental duress, with little protective gear on your body.

 

[RedheadDane]

Compulsory helmets were introduced in the 90s, which was a major advance in rider safety measures.

Huh? Here I was, thinking they were introduced after the Kivilev crash, in 2003...

 

[Extinction]

Huh? Here I was, thinking they were introduced after the Kivilev crash, in 2003...

I just remember rider protests over being made to ride with a helment in like 1993. But you may be correct that compulsory helmets didn't actually take effect until 2003.

 

[Axel Hangleck]

I fear it's going to take a 'name' to have a horrific crash for any proper meaningful action to happen. Rather like Senna in 1994 in F1/ Motorsport.......

 

[RedheadDane]

I just remember rider protests over being made to ride with a helment in like 1993. But you may be correct that compulsory helmets didn't actually take effect until 2003.

There might have been country-based mandatory helmet use before then, but crazy that it took UCI a decade to realise that "Hmm... these people are on to something. Maybe we should make helmet use mandatory everywhere."

 

[awavey]

Oh yeah supertuck banned.

I've never seen anyone crash in supertuck in my 15 years of watching this sport

The logic for the ban was that it was us mere amateurs copying it and crashing.

 

[Ricco']

A lot of devices (helmets, bike computers, etc.) have now crash detectors that can send distress signals to emergency contacts in case of a fall. Don't think it will be hard, at least in major events like World Tour races and World Championships, to have this kind of devices that relay a warning sign to race control or team car in case of a fall.

Wasn't this how Steven de Jongh (I believe) was found and presumably saved when he fell out during a alone ride a few years ago?

 

[bNator]

Supertuck was all optics. It's very visual. It's actually a pretty stable position cause your center of gravity gets lower. Riders only using it on straight sections where cornering is very limited, and riders who weren't skilled or brave enough to use it simply didn't use it. The entire danger was self-limiting.

If anything, the supertuck ban just shows you the focus is all on PR, and not on things that are actually dangerous. Twisty technical descents have people shitting their pants when it rains when in reality you can just use your breaks and it also turns out that on narrow technical descents you don't hit 90 per hour and crashes tend to not kill you.

It is so obviously all for PR reasons that the Sormano descent, which everyone knows and has had numerous bad crashes over the years gets instantly banned the moment one of the golden boys decides to be stupid enough to chase Nibali and fall off mountain.

Meanwhile, causing crashes and taking out other riders with dangerous or stupid behavior is almost completely fair dinkum. It's completely ridiculous.

There is no way you can react to unpredictable situations on the road in supertuck position. Any animal or other obstacle comes on the road and you’re gone. What’s worse, those practices translated to lower categories. There were kids doing supertuck in U13 which now they don’t anymore.

You try to relieve UCI of any responsibility and focus 100% on the riders which is just as problematic as saying it’s all UCI

 

[Red Rick]

The logic for the ban was that it was us mere amateurs copying it and crashing.

"Logic" indeed.

 

[Ricco']

"Logic" indeed.

Same logic:
- Ban savage rock gardens in XCO because 13 y.o. can also try them;
- Limit motorcycle racing to 120 km/h maximum because amateurs may try go over those speeds (exception to Monaco GP, where speed limit would be 30km/h).

And honestly, if there were kids doing supertuck in racing, that was caused either by:
a) lack of judgement and oversight from their parents/tutors to warn them of the risks;
b) unethical cycling team staff that should be prevented from working with youngsters if they condone that behavior during practices/races

As it's fun to watch 10m platform divers doing triple backflips but knowing that I would end up in hospital or in the graveyard if I tried to do that, a sane person would have presence of mind to know that doing the supertuck going down a hill 80km/h in open traffic would be a negligent action.

 

[Red Rick]

Same logic:
- Ban savage rock gardens in XCO because 13 y.o. can also try them;
- Limit motorcycle racing to 120 km/h maximum because amateurs may try go over those speeds (exception to Monaco GP, where speed limit would be 30km/h).

And honestly, if there were kids doing supertuck in racing, that was caused either by:
a) lack of judgement and oversight from their parents/tutors to warn them of the risks;
b) unethical cycling team staff that should be prevented from working with youngsters if they condone that behavior during practices/races

As it's fun to watch 10m platform divers doing triple backflips but knowing that I would end up in hospital or in the graveyard if I tried to do that, a sane person would have presence of mind to know that doing the supertuck going down a hill 80km/h in open traffic would be a negligent action.

I mean I do a supertuck down every bridge out of spite at this point

 

[janraaskalt]

There might have been country-based mandatory helmet use before then, but crazy that it took UCI a decade to realise that "Hmm... these people are on to something. Maybe we should make helmet use mandatory everywhere."

Maybe it's about different helmets? The current ones after Kivilev and the old-fashioned ones earlier?

 

[Danskebjerge]

And not even knowing where everyone was the whole time, simply someone realising earlier that she hadn't finished.

I've never heard of a system that enables the organizers to keep track of each rider constantly during a race. It could be done, but the incident was to my knowledge the first ever in the history of cycling or at least extremely rare. Implementing a solution to a non-existing problem (which this was until this week) would be unusual.

A rider crashing without others seeing it - it happens.

A rider skidding off a road and disappearing into the woods - it happens.

A rider left unconscious after a crash - it happens.

But all these things happening at the same time - it's extremely unfortunate.

 

[Extinction]

Cycling began as a means to go faster over longer distances than otherwise possible (for example, the horse). In fact, the first bikes were refered to in an equine way. It's time for a new horse, it was said, when the bike was old. We've gone well beyond this.

Same logic:
- Ban savage rock gardens in XCO because 13 y.o. can also try them;
- Limit motorcycle racing to 120 km/h maximum because amateurs may try go over those speeds (exception to Monaco GP, where speed limit would be 30km/h).

And honestly, if there were kids doing supertuck in racing, that was caused either by:
a) lack of judgement and oversight from their parents/tutors to warn them of the risks;
b) unethical cycling team staff that should be prevented from working with youngsters if they condone that behavior during practices/races

As it's fun to watch 10m platform divers doing triple backflips but knowing that I would end up in hospital or in the graveyard if I tried to do that, a sane person would have presence of mind to know that doing the supertuck going down a hill 80km/h in open traffic would be a negligent action.

At 15 years-old you imitate the pros, because they are the role models. Now one should soon realize their limits and if you don't bad stuff can happen. Hopefully most come to terms with their limitations, either through fear or an accident without consequence. But you have to push yourself to find out and the cream keeps rising to the top. It's the nature of things. But for any aspiring cyclist, truly invested in the process, you have to go through the initiation. Otherwise it's better to just enjoy the scenery.

 

[Ricco']

At 15 years-old you imitate the pros, because they are the role models.

Of course, but at that age they should have guidance to tell them their limits, what they can imitate and what they can not. I'm not a father, but if I was, I can't imagine myself letting my kids of that age going alone in rides without my or other adult supervision, dealing with traffic.

And as a sports coach of 11-14 y.o. on another sport, they often want to do what they see on the television, but specially dealing with those ages, a responsible coach must have the authority to tell what's not allowed to do and exercise that authority.

For instance, in my sport, almost every kid sees an olympic bar and already asks when they are going to do that and start lifing weights. First thing a coach should do is tell them they are not allowed near those weights until they are 3 or 4 years older. Unfortunately, there are still many coaches who squeeze every ounce of those kids in this early ages, leaving them with all kinds of knee and back problems when they reach full maturity.

 

[RedheadDane]

I've never heard of a system that enables the organizers to keep track of each rider constantly during a race.

I'm not talking about during the race; I'm talking after.
They did an entire other race - and maybe started another - before she was found.

 

[Danskebjerge]

I'm not talking about during the race; I'm talking after.
They did an entire other race - and maybe started another - before she was found.

I haven't seen any official report saying that nobody searched for her after the race. Do we have any evidence about this?

 

[Extinction]

Of course, but at that age they should have guidance to tell them their limits, what they can imitate and what they can not. I'm not a father, but if I was, I can't imagine myself letting my kids of that age going alone in rides without my or other adult supervision, dealing with traffic.

And as a sports coach of 11-14 y.o. on another sport, they often want to do what they see on the television, but specially dealing with those ages, a responsible coach must have the authority to tell what's not allowed to do and exercise that authority.

For instance, in my sport, almost every kid sees an olympic bar and already asks when they are going to do that and start lifing weights. First thing a coach should do is tell them they are not allowed near those weights until they are 3 or 4 years older. Unfortunately, there are still many coaches who squeeze every ounce of those kids in this early ages, leaving them with all kinds of knee and back problems when they reach full maturity.

We had no guidance. Nobody told us how to descend a mountain. We just went down at the limit trying not to get dropped. Otherwise there was no point, but we were carefree.

 

[Mayomaniac]

Still, would we loose out on any good racing with a speed limit of 80 km/h on descents? You can still make the difference on technical ones, but the highspeed descents with too little reaction time (if you make a mistake) are no longer there.

Also, cyclists (mainly in the men's pro peloton) are the ones fighting for position and drilling descents at every turn with 90kms to go, with almost zero benefit. If they can't think for themselfs and have to do what a DS screams into their ear than we should just get rid of team radios and only have neutral race radios instead. You kinda have to force them to be more responsable, because they will be the ones taking stupid risks (and making mistakes) only to blame everyone else afterwards. They mostly act like children and shouldn't make their own rules/make the important decisions.

 

[ashhutch1997]

A lot of devices (helmets, bike computers, etc.) have now crash detectors that can send distress signals to emergency contacts in case of a fall. Don't think it will be hard, at least in major events like World Tour races and World Championships, to have this kind of devices that relay a warning sign to race control or team car in case of a fall.

Wasn't this how Steven de Jongh (I believe) as found and presumably saved when he fell out during a alone ride a few years ago?

The incident detector on my Garmin is useless. It goes off when I stop at a junction, but when I crash in a race it never goes off.

 

[Netserk]

Still, would we loose out on any good racing with a speed limit of 80 km/h on descents?

How do you enforce it (how much and for how long do you need to go above the limit to be DSQ'ed)? How practical is it for the rider to keep braking while closely monitoring his speed to ensure that he goes to the limit?

 

[Red Rick]

Still, would we loose out on any good racing with a speed limit of 80 km/h on descents?

Yes.

Also, how the hell do you wanna enforce it?

 

[Extinction]

Still, would we loose out on any good racing with a speed limit of 80 km/h on descents? You can still make the difference on technical ones, but the highspeed descents with too little reaction time (if you make a mistake) are no longer there.

Also, cyclists (mainly in the men's pro peloton) are the ones fighting for position and drilling descents at every turn with 90kms to go, with almost zero benefit. If they can't think for themselfs and have to do what a DS screams into their ear than we should just get rid of team radios and only have neutral race radios instead. You kinda have to force them to be more responsable, because they will be the ones taking stupid risks (and making mistakes) only to blame everyone else afterwards. They mostly act like children and shouldn't make their own rules/make the important decisions.

You could be on to something, get the ds/staff out of their ears during the race and perhaps the presure would ease and prevent then from taking eccessive risks.