Crashes, what can be done?

[AmRacer]

just ban all cobbled classics and go to dubai instead

omloop with 50 riders at the start would still be far more dangerous than riding on highways in the desert

🙄

 

[Eagle_Alps]

If you read the injury shopping list.... riders with broken teeth, collarbones, pelvis, Kung injury described so far as a fracture to thigh area?

Airbags seem to be a good idea, but which one of these injuries would have been prevented if the riders had worn them?

And which crashes were caused by reckless riding? The only "dumb/avoidable" crashes I saw were caused by riders trying to put on or remove their raincoats. And the consequences seemed relatively minor.

So, what can be done, really?

 

[ashhutch1997]

I've been saying this for a while, the biggest problem is this obsession from DS's to be at the front. I turn on KBK and the riders are fighting tooth and nail to get to some random right hand bend with over 100k to go.

However, I don't think there's much more crashes than before, I remember the opening stages of the 2010 Giro in Holland being a crash fest, 2004/11/15/21 TDF first weeks had loads of big crashes, and the 2007 GW was the worst day of crashes I have ever seen.

 

[CyclistAbi]

Training crashes have nothing to do with the solutions to pro racing crashes. Open roads alone or in small groups has a totally different risk profile to a full péloton at race speeds on closed roads. Oftentimes the very same things that can make a road entirely unsuitable for race conditions are essential safety features of that same road when open to traffic.

Conflating the two just detracts from your point.

I don't know to whom you replied with this as at least last couple of posts didn't involve training crashes. As for possible introduction of more safety apparel in pro road peloton, that IMHO will affect training sessions too. Luckily.

As for the sport getting banned due to danger levels, the Isle of Man TT still takes place every single year.

Is Isle of Man TT a mainstream sport and/or where there ever calls involved to ban it altogether? Do you reckon does pro road peloton want to be associated with it in terms of athlete safety?

Airbags seem to be a good idea, but which one of these injuries would have been prevented if the riders had worn them?

Likely most.

And which crashes were caused by reckless riding? The only "dumb/avoidable" crashes I saw were caused by riders trying to put on or remove their raincoats. And the consequences seemed relatively minor.

Even if it would be true, that still doesn't mean it can continue go on.

So, what can be done, really?

A lot of things but currently not much is being done about it. Some jerking around with a tape measure and similar and that is it.

 

[Pozzovivo]

I've been saying this for a while, the biggest problem is this obsession from DS's to be at the front. I turn on KBK and the riders are fighting tooth and nail to get to some random right hand bend with over 100k to go.

However, I don't think there's much more crashes than before, I remember the opening stages of the 2010 Giro in Holland being a crash fest, 2004/11/15/21 TDF first weeks had loads of big crashes, and the 2007 GW was the worst day of crashes I have ever seen.

There are more crashes than before. Probably the strongest correlate is increased speed but it all hangs together with evrything else. The race is "on" for much longer than before now. Which increases speed in turn. DS are rightly panicking about being at the front because the cost of being at the back is very high with the large peloton (also due to the risk of crashes).

 

[CyclistAbi]

Does it even matter if there is more or less crashes and injuries then before?

It's too much.

 

[Eagle_Alps]

Likely most.

broken teeth? collarbones? pelvis? thigh? The only workable prototype of a cycling airbag we have seen would have done nothing to help.
But anyway, it would at least be a step in the right direction. Better than nothing.
But not enough.

 

[CyclistAbi]

broken teeth? collarbones? pelvis? thigh? The only workable prototype of a cycling airbag we have seen would have done nothing to help.
But anyway, it would at least be a step in the right direction. Better than nothing.
But not enough.

Hard to tell as the head bumped into the ground on where the teeth gave up. With activated airbaig the space in between the chest and the ground would be bigger so there is a chance for the teeth to be saved as a result. Colarbone and pelvis/hip yes, no brainer, thigh will likely be covered with an airbag too, current models that focus on pelvis/hip area could again help in some occasions with the thigh, mostly due to thigh being further away from the ground on impact, due to pelvis area being inflated. Obviously dedicated air sleeve for the tight to further reduce the possibility of injury.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

I don't know to whom you replied with this as at least last couple of posts didn't involve training crashes. As for possible introduction of more safety apparel in pro road peloton, that IMHO will affect training sessions too. Luckily.

Did you even read the articles you were citing? The Zoe Backstedt one was about a training crash.

Is Isle of Man TT a mainstream sport and/or where there ever calls involved to ban it altogether? Do you reckon does pro road peloton want to be associated with it in terms of athlete safety?

Motor racing is pretty mainstream, although the TT is pretty niche within it. And of course the pro road péloton doesn't want to be associated with it in terms of athlete safety. And, you know what, it isn't. Because it's a lot safer - even in its current state - than the TT is. And yet the TT runs every year and it is not under threat of being banned altogether.

And nor is professional road cycling, except in your most hare-brained hyperbole.

 

[jmdirt]

I've been saying this for a while, the biggest problem is this obsession from DS's to be at the front. I turn on KBK and the riders are fighting tooth and nail to get to some random right hand bend with over 100k to go.

However, I don't think there's much more crashes than before, I remember the opening stages of the 2010 Giro in Holland being a crash fest, 2004/11/15/21 TDF first weeks had loads of big crashes, and the 2007 GW was the worst day of crashes I have ever seen.

I disagree. There have always been crashes, but there are considerably more now.

 

[Oldman]

broken teeth? collarbones? pelvis? thigh? The only workable prototype of a cycling airbag we have seen would have done nothing to help.
But anyway, it would at least be a step in the right direction. Better than nothing.
But not enough.

Maybe help for a collarbone; the easiest injury to heal. They can help shield the vital organs from the one organ that makes the mistakes. The helmet is supposed to protect that.

 

[CyclistAbi]

Did you even read the articles you were citing? The Zoe Backstedt one was about a training crash.

That explains it as the reaction was implying you were triggered by something but i didn't know what caused it. Well, the truth is it doesn't make much difference, does it?

Motor racing is pretty mainstream, although the TT is pretty niche within it. And of course the pro road péloton doesn't want to be associated with it in terms of athlete safety. And, you know what, it isn't. Because it's a lot safer - even in its current state - than the TT is. And yet the TT runs every year and it is not under threat of being banned altogether.

I mean you brought this race up, not me, likely mentioning cricket of curling wouldn't do. I assume. Anyway, i agree that pro road peloton should never be associated with it, as that would be very damaging to the reputation. As for if the event you mentioned is under threat of getting banned. It is/was, basically every year that deaths surged the calls to ban it altogether emerged. Is organiser concerned by it? IMHO they are rather concerned by that. For example in 2025 it was only second time in history on where nobody died and starting with 2026 season airbag systems will become mandatory. IMHO it could happen, if at some season going forward death toll to surge, for organisers to get raided and jailed and for event to get banned.

And nor is professional road cycling, except in your most hare-brained hyperbole.

I don't know about that, the era of naivety is IMHO over, more in depth coverage, pressure and sensitivity on the raise:

Over 40 riders on the sidelines after spate of early-season crashes – Pro cycling injury list 2026

WorldTour, Women's WorldTour and ProTeam riders sidelined from racing while recovering from injuries

www.cyclingnews.com

On top of that i guess that is only the tip of the iceberg:

'I felt an obligation to be truthful and speak out' – Why Demi Vollering wants to keep periods and women's health in the spotlight in cycling

Former Tour de France Femmes champion has habitually spoken about periods, nutrition and health, saying 'it's very important to keep speaking up'

www.cyclingnews.com

It's a well known fact that if a woman keeps body fat percentage too low for prolonged time certain biological processes simply stop and illness such as osteoporosis surges. In modern sport such things are becoming a part of the sport, on where in the past the sport wanted to keep it out. Cycling here i guess again not on the frontiers but again likely one of the last sport to acknowledge it. For example even Isle of Man TT has beaten pro road peloton to it, on when it comes to introduction of safety apparel, such as airbag systems. This is just beyond.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

That explains it as the reaction was implying you were triggered by something but i didn't know what caused it. Well, the truth is it doesn't make much difference, does it?

Yes it does, because, as I mentioned, training is entirely different from racing, and road furniture that is a danger for road racing is an essential safety feature the rest of the year. When you're debating the dangers of road racing, crashes outside of race conditions are entirely irrelevant.

I don't know about that, the era of naivety is IMHO over, more in depth coverage, pressure and sensitivity on the raise:

Over 40 riders on the sidelines after spate of early-season crashes – Pro cycling injury list 2026

WorldTour, Women's WorldTour and ProTeam riders sidelined from racing while recovering from injuries

www.cyclingnews.com

There is a huge, huge, insane logical leap of interpretation from "more riders have got injured early season than usual" to "people are legitimately calling for this sport to be banned".

On top of that i guess that is only the tip of the iceberg:

'I felt an obligation to be truthful and speak out' – Why Demi Vollering wants to keep periods and women's health in the spotlight in cycling

Former Tour de France Femmes champion has habitually spoken about periods, nutrition and health, saying 'it's very important to keep speaking up'

www.cyclingnews.com

It's a well known fact that if a woman keeps body fat percentage too low for prolonged time certain biological processes simply stop and illness such as osteoporosis surges. In modern sport such things are becoming a part of the sport, on where in the past the sport wanted to keep it out. Cycling here i guess again not on the frontiers but again likely one of the last sport to acknowledge it.

That has absolutely nothing to do with crashes in road racing or implementing of airbags. It's literally nothing to do with the point at hand. It is a perfectly reasonable discussion point, but it's completely unrelated to your prior argument or in fact this thread as a whole.

You detract from any good points you have to make when your argument is presented in ludicrously bad faith.

You supported the point of there being too much danger in racing by including an article about someone who crashed in training. Then you claimed you didn't post an article about a crash in training. When then confronted with the evidence that, in fact, you did, you claim it still supports your point.

You claimed that cycling is on its way to being banned, a completely and utterly baseless statement, which you attempt to support by posting a link to an article that claims nothing more than "more riders than usual have got hurt so far this season", and then for some reason throw in a completely unrelated article about women's health that has absolutely nothing to do with the outcomes of crashes. Literally nothing is said in that article about rider safety in the context of crashes and injuries.

So, again, I ask you, do you actually read the articles you post in favour of your argument? Or do you just make your argument and throw hyperlinks in there in the blind hope that it supports your point?

 

[CyclistAbi]

Yes it does, because, as I mentioned, training is entirely different from racing, and road furniture that is a danger for road racing is an essential safety feature the rest of the year. When you're debating the dangers of road racing, crashes outside of race conditions are entirely irrelevant.

Of course that is not a valid claim at all and athlete safety is important on training sessions too. It even goes beyond that all the way down to amateur level and casual cyclists. Why was super tuck banned? It wasn't due to professional cyclists, it was due to not representing a bad example to copy for amateur cyclists. Testimonials of some prominent cycling personas or even regular amateurs are hence perfectly valid here.

Bicycle helmets are a utter engineering joke as I have repeated dozens of different ways. Your head doesn't know if you are falling on pavement at 50mph from a motorcycle or bicycle but bicycle industry insists that somewhere forces nobody can see or describe determine a different outcome in injury and protection.
Many water ski helmets have better engineering and protective properties.
Polo, skateboards, snow skiing, rock climbing, many are generally better than bike helmet design which have only grown more to look like ridiculous polystyrene toupees with some protection on top, none on rear held or by a strap resembling a healthy shoelace.

And as I have repeated, there is no data, none.

"Maybe I wouldn't be here today if I hadn't had a helmet on": Zoe Bäckstedt on her scary crash, quick recovery, and Olympic goals

A severe training crash just two weeks before the start of the cyclocross season could have derailed Zoe Bäckstedt's entire winter. Instead, the 21-year-old Welsh cycling star made a remarkable recove...

cyclinguptodate.com

"Maybe I wouldn't be here today if I hadn't had a helmet on"

As for:

There is a huge, huge, insane logical leap of interpretation from "more riders have got injured early season than usual" to "people are legitimately calling for this sport to be banned".

It used to be rather hard to get stats of injuries but lately even popular cycling orientated news sites report them. Kudos to that. So you feel it's sustainable to have 40 riders out in early March due to the injuries with gazillion more lucky enough to only crash? This is something that won't start to represent a real issue to pro road peloton, maybe even existential one? At least in terms of positioning it as a mainstream sport.

Why wouldn't it?

That has absolutely nothing to do with crashes in road racing or implementing of airbags. It's literally nothing to do with the point at hand. It is a perfectly reasonable discussion point, but it's completely unrelated to your prior argument or in fact this thread as a whole.

You detract from any good points you have to make when your argument is presented in ludicrously bad faith.

You supported the point of there being too much danger in racing by including an article about someone who crashed in training. Then you claimed you didn't post an article about a crash in training. When then confronted with the evidence that, in fact, you did, you claim it still supports your point.

You claimed that cycling is on its way to being banned, a completely and utterly baseless statement, which you attempt to support by posting a link to an article that claims nothing more than "more riders than usual have got hurt so far this season", and then for some reason throw in a completely unrelated article about women's health that has absolutely nothing to do with the outcomes of crashes. Literally nothing is said in that article about rider safety in the context of crashes and injuries.

So, again, I ask you, do you actually read the articles you post in favour of your argument? Or do you just make your argument and throw hyperlinks in there in the blind hope that it supports your point?

I expected some backlash on this one and some of your concerns are valid but you have to understand that so far i haven't seen any discussion about it and one could i guess need some guidance on where to put a discussion on women periods.

The decision, on why i posted it here is:

• It has to be discussed somewhere.
• It shouldn't be discussed in some obscure topic.
• We somehow determined that at least in near future nobody will do anything to prevent actual crashes.
• Ultimately mid term strategy will be to mitigate, that is to reduce injuries.
• Health is hence what we can do, the thing we can do about crashes.
• Health is what we can furthermore substantially improve, at least on the woman side, by settings such rules and conditions, for biological processes to be ongoing as normal.

So in short, by athletes getting better apparel and by that reducing the number of injuries and by setting some thresholds, as for example minimal percentage of body fat still allowed to enter a GT, by doing that we can substantially improve athlete health.

As for somebody doing anything to actually reduce number of crashes. Who? It's riders fault anyway, isn't it? So all in all health it is then, beyond that forget it, to much reluctance involved for now.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Of course that is not a valid claim at all and athlete safety is important on training sessions too. It even goes beyond that all the way down to amateur level and casual cyclists. Why was super tuck banned? It wasn't due to professional cyclists, it was due to not representing a bad example to copy for amateur cyclists. Testimonials of some prominent cycling personas or even regular amateurs are hence perfectly valid here.

"Maybe I wouldn't be here today if I hadn't had a helmet on": Zoe Bäckstedt on her scary crash, quick recovery, and Olympic goals

A severe training crash just two weeks before the start of the cyclocross season could have derailed Zoe Bäckstedt's entire winter. Instead, the 21-year-old Welsh cycling star made a remarkable recove...

cyclinguptodate.com

You posted it in response to an article about the number of race crashes on opening weekend. I'm sorry, but an article about a training crash is not relevant to in-race crashes on opening weekend. Arguing that the importance of the helmet makes it relevant is completely disingenuous, when helmets have been compulsory at all times in pro cycling for 20 years, so every single rider involved in a crash during a race should be wearing a helmet.

It used to be rather hard to get stats of injuries but lately even popular cycling orientated news sites report them. Kudos to that. So you feel it's sustainable to have 40 riders out in early March due to the injuries with gazillion more lucky enough to only crash?

You do realise this is actually a weakness in your argument, right? That the number of injuries might not be going up as much, it's just that reporting of those injuries is better now?

I largely feel that we have a similar number of accidents, but the problem is that the péloton is much faster nowadays (meaning the impacts of crashes are more severe) and the focusing of the elite péloton into a smaller number of teams, increasing the depth of the pro péloton, means that the bunch stays together longer so when there is an incident, more riders are dragged into it. This is why I actually think longer and more difficult races might actually be a good thing, because while it introduces fatigue, it also requires more effort management, and the riders can't just go full send at 100% at all times, so the consequences of an error will be lower on average.

This is something that won't start to represent a real issue to pro road peloton, maybe even existential one? At least in terms of positioning it as a mainstream sport.

Why wouldn't it?

You're tilting at windmills, Abi. You're inventing a situation in your head, imagining the worst possible outcome to it, and screaming that everybody needs to believe in your invented apocalyptic scenario. There have been a high number of injuries in the early season this year that mean that the people in charge of the sport need to consider whether any action can or should be taken. Nothing more, nothing less. It doesn't present a danger to the existence of professional cycling any more than a few high-profile players getting their legs broken presents a danger to the existence of professional soccer.

I expected some backlash on this one and some of your concerns are valid but you have to understand that so far i haven't seen any discussion about it and one could i guess need some guidance on where to put a discussion on women periods.

The decision, on why i posted is here is:

• It has to be discussed somewhere.
• It shouldn't be discussed in some obscure topic.
• We somehow determined that at least in near future nobody will do anything to prevent actual crashes.
• Ultimately mid term strategy will be to mitigate, that is to reduce injuries.
• Health is hence what we can do, the thing we can do about crashes.
• Health is what we can furthermore substantially improve, at least on the woman side, by settings such rules and conditions, for biological processes to be ongoing as normal.

So in short, by athletes getting better apparel and by that reducing the number of injuries and by setting some thresholds, as for example minimal percentage of body fat still allowed to enter a GT, by doing that we can substantially improve athlete health.

As for somebody doing anything to actually reduce number of crashes. Who? It's riders fault anyway, isn't it? So all in all health it is then, beyond that forget it, to much reluctance involved for now.

But the article has nothing to do with crashes, and has absolutely nothing to do with apparel. It's completely off-topic for this thread. You could put it in the general women's cycling thread, you could put it in the Demi Vollering thread, you could make a new thread to discuss it.

What's more, you didn't add the article to say "and here's a completely different issue that I think we need to discuss", you added it pretending it was somehow a related issue to the number of crashes in the early season in 2026 and backed up your point.

And then turning around and summarising by throwing your crusade about protective apparel in at the end as though what Vollering was talking about had anything whatsoever to do with your obsession with airbags is exactly what I mean by how your disingenuous arguments detract from the actual good points you have.

And I still remember how when you first came into this thread, you didn't actually care about rider safety in the slightest, since you spent the whole time arguing about ways to stop GC riders losing time when accidents happened, because you were upset that Primož Roglič falls over a lot.

 

[Eagle_Alps]

Interesting take from French Eurosport commentators :
Crashes happen more frequently nowadays (compared to 20 years ago) because of a more aero position on the bike. Tucked lower and more forward, meaning more weight on the front wheel, leading to a more difficult to handle bike. And narrower handlebars won't help to regain control in a critical situation.
As opposed to MTB where handlebars got wider for better control.
Any thoughts ?

 

[HashRouge]

broken teeth? collarbones? pelvis? thigh? The only workable prototype of a cycling airbag we have seen would have done nothing to help.
But anyway, it would at least be a step in the right direction. Better than nothing.
But not enough.

I think it would help with collarbone injuries. Airbags would have been a game changer in that awful Itzulia crash in 2024 - those rib/ chest injuries Jonas suffered, and the spinal ones suffered by Vine and Steff Cras are exactly the sort of thing airbags are great for. My background is equestrianism and we've had airbags for years, so I'm hugely in favour of them. They won't do everything, but they really do help.

 

[Eagle_Alps]

I think it would help with collarbone injuries. Airbags would have been a game changer in that awful Itzulia crash in 2024 - those rib/ chest injuries Jonas suffered, and the spinal ones suffered by Vine and Steff Cras are exactly the sort of thing airbags are great for. My background is equestrianism and we've had airbags for years, so I'm hugely in favour of them. They won't do everything, but they really do help.

Yes exactly. The 2024 season would have been very different with airbags. Wout's Dwars injuries would have been also be less severe I guess.

 

[RedheadDane]

Yes exactly. The 2024 season would have been very different with airbags. Wout's Dwars injuries would have been also be less severe I guess.

Not to mention Lambrecht's fatal Pologne injuries...

But the issue is still how to prevent it from getting too hot during well, hot races?
Unless, of course, someone could come up with a way to include a cooling technique in the device...

 

[Eagle_Alps]

Not to mention Lambrecht's fatal Pologne injuries...

But the issue is still how to prevent it from getting too hot during well, hot races?
Unless, of course, someone could come up with a way to include a cooling technique in the device...

Would airbags have helped to save Gino Mäder’s and Muriel Furrer's lives? Sadly we will never know.

But the "too hot" argument reminds me of the exact same debate for helmets. Remember when riders were allowed to remove their helmets on MTF's?
Totally ridiculous and unthinkable today.
If it's hot, deal with it. It's an outdoor sport!
Why is there no ice bag sleeve in the neck area of modern jerseys ?

And if climate change means >40°C in July, the TDF will have to change dates anyway

 

[RedheadDane]

But the "too hot" argument reminds me of the exact same debate for helmets. Remember when riders were allowed to remove their helmets on MTF's?

Helmets come with air-vents.

 

[CyclistAbi]

The discussion continued when Jan Bakelants took aim at measures previously introduced by the UCI. "Fifteen years ago, tramadol was considered the cause," the former Belgian rider recalled. "Now tramadol has disappeared from the peloton and they are still crashing even more."

Bakelants continued his reasoning by stressing that crashes are part of the sport but insisted that their consequences could be reduced. "Crashes are part of racing. We need to make sure crashes do not have consequences", he said.

Are airbags a solution?
One idea that has been raised involves introducing airbags integrated into riders’ clothing, something that could potentially be developed in partnership with cycling apparel manufacturers. "In horse riding and skiing this has existed for a long time. Why couldn’t it exist in cycling?", Bakelants asked.

Tom Boonen went even further and suggested the introduction of mandatory safety standards for cycling equipment. "Perhaps there should be a quality label that manufacturers must meet, with things like an abrasion index and an airbag. If the UCI made that mandatory, nobody could say: ‘We’re not going to use it.’"

"Tramadol has disappeared from the peloton and they are still crashing even more" - Analysts seek answers for so many crashes, while proposing solutions

We have not yet reached the end of the first quarter of the 2026 season, yet the list of riders who have already crashed continues to grow at an alarming rate. In almost every race there are incidents...

cyclinguptodate.com

 

[CyclistAbi]

You posted it in response to an article about the number of race crashes on opening weekend. I'm sorry, but an article about a training crash is not relevant to in-race crashes on opening weekend. Arguing that the importance of the helmet makes it relevant is completely disingenuous, when helmets have been compulsory at all times in pro cycling for 20 years, so every single rider involved in a crash during a race should be wearing a helmet.

In the post that triggered you a quote from Zoe, on how a helmet likely saved her life, followed after i posted an article on how Vannieuwkerke suggests airbags. The point was safety apparel does work and nothing more.

You do realise this is actually a weakness in your argument, right? That the number of injuries might not be going up as much, it's just that reporting of those injuries is better now?

I mean can't you just take that at face value, stating that it is a good thing nowadays we have easy access to such stats, on where in the past that was harder. This isn't an argument and hence can't be strong or weak. It's just an observation of current state of affairs.

I largely feel that we have a similar number of accidents, but the problem is that the péloton is much faster nowadays (meaning the impacts of crashes are more severe) and the focusing of the elite péloton into a smaller number of teams, increasing the depth of the pro péloton, means that the bunch stays together longer so when there is an incident, more riders are dragged into it. This is why I actually think longer and more difficult races might actually be a good thing, because while it introduces fatigue, it also requires more effort management, and the riders can't just go full send at 100% at all times, so the consequences of an error will be lower on average.

You're tilting at windmills, Abi. You're inventing a situation in your head, imagining the worst possible outcome to it, and screaming that everybody needs to believe in your invented apocalyptic scenario. There have been a high number of injuries in the early season this year that mean that the people in charge of the sport need to consider whether any action can or should be taken. Nothing more, nothing less. It doesn't present a danger to the existence of professional cycling any more than a few high-profile players getting their legs broken presents a danger to the existence of professional soccer.

So there has been a high number of injuries in the early season this year and you expect for the people in charge of this sport to look into it. Saying it like that indeed sounds less dramatic.

What do you reckon will they do and what will the stats say in early 2027 season? If situation won't improve should they be raided, jailed and banned from the sport, or what should be the appropriate outcome? In your own opinion.

But the article has nothing to do with crashes, and has absolutely nothing to do with apparel. It's completely off-topic for this thread. You could put it in the general women's cycling thread, you could put it in the Demi Vollering thread, you could make a new thread to discuss it.

What's more, you didn't add the article to say "and here's a completely different issue that I think we need to discuss", you added it pretending it was somehow a related issue to the number of crashes in the early season in 2026 and backed up your point.

It's health related and it seems that the consensus started to form, that is we can't do much about crashes, at least not mid term, lets then at least take care of health. I could have indeed posted it in some other thread but i stated my reasons on why i posted it here. On top of that i said what i support in this regard and that is in GT racing an athlete must provide evidence their body fat percentage is above some set minimal threshold, before entering the event. If anybody wants to add anything more to that, or not, here in this thread or somewhere else, fine.

And then turning around and summarising by throwing your crusade about protective apparel in at the end as though what Vollering was talking about had anything whatsoever to do with your obsession with airbags is exactly what I mean by how your disingenuous arguments detract from the actual good points you have.

And I still remember how when you first came into this thread, you didn't actually care about rider safety in the slightest, since you spent the whole time arguing about ways to stop GC riders losing time when accidents happened, because you were upset that Primož Roglič falls over a lot.

Ideally Primož Roglič will wear an airbag in a race before retirement. As for that other part, we'll see.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

In the post that triggered you a quote from Zoe, on how a helmet likely saved her life, followed after i posted an article on how Vannieuwkerke suggests airbags. The point was safety apparel does work and nothing more.

If you'd argued that to begin with, you might have a point.

But you contested that you hadn't posted anything about training crashes, when you had.

I mean can't you just take that at face value, stating that it is a good thing nowadays we have easy access to such stats, on where in the past that was harder. This isn't an argument and hence can't be strong or weak. It's just an observation of current state of affairs.

Again, you weren't arguing "it is better because we have access to these stats". You were arguing "it is worse because the numbers are big".

So there has been a high number of injuries in the early season this year and you expect for the people in charge of this sport to look into it. Saying it like that indeed sounds less dramatic.

What do you reckon will they do and what will the stats say in early 2027 season? If situation won't improve should they be raided, jailed and banned from the sport, or what should be the appropriate outcome? In your own opinion.

You were arguing that the fact there had been more crashes than usual this season was going to mean road cycling could get banned from taking place. This is a ludicrous step to take without there being actual evidence of possible steps in between, such as withdrawals of sponsorship money, TV channels refusing to broadcast, inability of races to secure emergency service resources, and none of which we have seen.

When we start to see things like that, you can discuss it. But now you've changed your tune, and now it's about what the appropriate action by the UCI should be.

For that, we need better regulation of appropriate finish locations especially on stages expected to end in a bunch sprint; we need longer and harder races that mean the groups are smaller and not going as fast, but most of all we need riders and DSes to actually acknowledge that this isn't PCM and actually respect one another and the road. Maybe the UCI not placing heavy value on anonymous placements meaning everybody has something to protect and everybody has an interest in taking stages to sprints would be beneficial too.

But largely, just enforcing the rules we already have now properly would be better. Things like drafting motorbikes and cars increasing pace, cutting people up, changing lines in sprints and reckless moves in the péloton. Too often the commissaires police the outcome, not the offence, so riders get away with it unless they cause a huge accident, and so they keep pushing it until there is a huge accident. I know that the problem is you had that one time, I think it was the 2020 Tour de France, where they policed the offence and not the outcome, relegating Peter Sagan for irregular sprinting when Wout van Aert stayed upright, and although he had been sprinting on the crab, the penalty ruined what had been an exciting maillot vert battle, and people got angry about it, and they went back to policing the outcome only.

It's health related and it seems that the consensus started to form, that is we can't do much about crashes, at least not mid term, lets then at least take care of health. I could have indeed posted it in some other thread but i stated my reasons on why i posted it here. On top of that i said what i support in this regard and that is in GT racing an athlete must provide evidence their body fat percentage is above some set minimal threshold, before entering the event. If anybody wants to add anything more to that, or not, here in this thread or somewhere else, fine.

You added it as a supporting point to an argument about crashes and then tried to use it to shoehorn your crusade about apparel in. It has nothing to do with crashes. Now when challenged about it, you're inventing an entirely new reason to have posted it. You're posting disingenuously and moving the goalposts, like you always do.

Like I say, you could actually have a perfectly civil and reasonable discourse on this if you stuck to actually posting about developments on the subject, rather than posting in incessant bad faith and crusading by spamming links to anything even tangentially related to the subject at hand and insisting that it backs your point up. Which is why I asked you if you even read the articles, because half the time they don't say what you claim they say, or they only mention what you're talking about in passing. You get exasperated at people not taking your arguments seriously enough, but you don't make them in a credible enough manner to be taken seriously.