When does a race become too extreme?

[veji11]

Re:

Risk of severe injuries in descents will always be present. The fact remains this is a sport whereby the athletes are taking risks at high speeds with their only protection being a styrofoam helmet.

Responsibility of the organisers should be to attempt to mitigate the inherent risks. Especially in a one day event where the stakes are extremely high like here i think more could have been done here to mitigate the risks. In terms of Signage etc. Look at Utah, every marginally dangerous turn had a sign posted before it to warn riders. None of this was present in Rio.

Some netting was put up but the kerbs were left exposed. Had van Vleuten landed differently she could have been paralyzed or dead smashing her back into the kerb like that.

I agree that the fault wasn't with the course but with a lack of proper protections and indications put in place in the 4/5 really dangerous parts of the descent. This should have been done indeed.

 

[veji11]

Re:

Fwiw, Van Vleuten's crash really wasn't the organisers' fault. Yes, the gutter was dangerous, which smashed into her back when she fell, but ultimately she took a terrible line into that turn, and unfortunately just got it wrong, and paid the price by losing the race. Hopefully she'll be fine soon, placing her in ICU seems more precautionary than anything else

Had she taken such a horrible line in an alpine road she could have ended up "Rivière style" (look it up youngsters) in a ditch 15 or 20 meters below... Honestly the problem is also that the athletes are going to go to their absolute limit on such an important race, they will play the route as much as they can. Does that mean we should go with only flat safe routes ???

We all agree better indications and more protection put in place in the 4 or 5 really dangerous spots of the descent should have taken place. The UCI/organisers messed up in that regard. §But the route itself was great and the very technical descent was a big part of it. Let's not blame the descent itself in those incidents, it's all too easy.

 

[Ryongsyong]

Re: Re:

I think Boardman summed it up pretty well last night in his little update on Vleuten. The descent had a combination of poor visibility due to light/dark contrast from canopy, gutters over 0.5m deep in places, negative camber, unmovable concrete walls, drainage edges made of right-angle paving slabs rising up from road, large trees just a few cm off the racing line very densely packed together, sheer drops and a fast technically difficult descent at the most critical point of the race making it obvious there would be a risk to life when the only safety precaution was some plastic pipe and garden netting around the corners. It wasn't enough. You see far more protection given to the riders in Grand Tours and Classics, Far more.

There was risk to life in far apparently safer places where guys like Kyvilev or Weylandt or others have died...

Let's not be too revisionist. I remember just five minutes before Weylandt died David Harmon said "Someone is going to have a massive accident here." It was not considered a safe descent.

 

[veji11]

Re: Re:

I think Boardman summed it up pretty well last night in his little update on Vleuten. The descent had a combination of poor visibility due to light/dark contrast from canopy, gutters over 0.5m deep in places, negative camber, unmovable concrete walls, drainage edges made of right-angle paving slabs rising up from road, large trees just a few cm off the racing line very densely packed together, sheer drops and a fast technically difficult descent at the most critical point of the race making it obvious there would be a risk to life when the only safety precaution was some plastic pipe and garden netting around the corners. It wasn't enough. You see far more protection given to the riders in Grand Tours and Classics, Far more.

There was risk to life in far apparently safer places where guys like Kyvilev or Weylandt or others have died...

Let's not be too revisionist. I remember just five minutes before Weylandt died David Harmon said "Someone is going to have a massive accident here." It was not considered a safe descent.

Nor was the Portet d'Aspet descent where Casartelli died for example yet those routes are taken very very often.

 

[jmdirt]

There are certainly safety concerns with every route, and the final descent of the ORR had several. As someone posted above, the racers who decided the medals descended at a speed that got them to the bottom still on their bikes.

 

[carton]

Massively overblown issue, given the medal-almost-in-the bag crashes. No other women's crashes. Maybe two more in the men's race outside the final lap.

Yep, the gutters were unfamiliar to some of the Europeans, but most everyone handled them well. Had Nibali trained a little more near his hometown and not his current home, and Annemiek realized she had enough daylight to take less risks, no one would be talking about this. In fact I've actually seen no current pro riders bring it up so far, even the Cancellaras of the world, so that should tell you something.

Those were two of the best hilly one-day races I've seen in a long time.

 

[Arnout]

I think it's fair to say that the Vista Chinesa descent was, as far as descents in cycling go, relatively dangerous - steep (c.10% gradient), fast & twisty with lots of blind corners.
That doesn't in itself make the descent dangerous. But whereas, say, the Col de Manse* generally has nice grass fields for riders to bail onto if they overshoot a corner, the Vista Chinesa descent has deep gutters, high pavements & lot of trees. That's what makes it relatively dangerous.

Added to that is the context in which it was raced - 15km from the end of arguably the biggest one-day race of the year, and in a race where the parcours and dynamics meant that any climbers who wanted to win (i.e Nibali, Henao, Majka) would need to get a gap on the climb and maintain/extend that gap on the descent. It was always going to be raced hard, and on the limit.

As for whether it was TOO dangerous...I don't know...
Arguably, the riders determine how dangerous a descent is. They could easily have taken it cautiously and stayed upright with no problems (see Mara Abbott). But at the same time, the parcours invited, or perhaps forced, some riders to ride it dangerously, and I think that could be predicted. Indeed, it was predicted by some, and certainly bore out to be true, given the extensive list of injuries.

So, in summary, I'm not sure what the answer is...!


* Perhaps not the best example given Beloki, G Thomas etc, but hopefully demonstrates the point!

Thing with the Beloki crash is that locally poor asphalt made the descending unpredictable. The Rio descent was very predictable - even if it was poorly lit the yellow road markings are visible in near dark and were of good quality and the asphalt was very consistent as well. Circumstances were predictable, that't quite an important facet when looking at safety.

 

[Monstre du Cyclisme]

I do not think the course was too dangerous. The riders just took to much risk. The ORR is the most imporant 1 day race and the riders tried everything to win it and some of them just overdid because they were fanatical about a possible win. It was not the descent itself which created those crashes, it was the irrationality of the riders. Look at various sprints and how crazy some of the riders act. I am not sure how we can deal with this issue. If the downhill would have been a bit easier the riders would perhaps haven taken even more risks. It's the mind of the riders which is the problem. But of course, we can only hope that Van Vleuten get healthy quickly. In her case I am not even sure, if she was too risky or if she was only one moment too unconcentrated. At least that would fit to her terrible line into the bend. Nobody would ride in this way into a bend just because he or she is willing to take a lot of risk. Unfortunately, this can happen when you are at the limit. As a person who rides only for leisure I can regularly stop at the summits and have a short break in order to get clearness back. However, a professional rider cannot.

 

[hfer07]

The only way I can see a race becoming too extreme is when the weather makes it a hazard for the riders- other than that, the "extreme element" is always present by how aggressive the riders are approaching the parcours.

BTW I noticed there are lots of mixed sentiments due to the Olympics, but the accidents occurred not because of the parcours itself, but by the aggressiveness of the riders risking everything for glory- that's part of the sport.

 

[RedheadDane]

When it becomes a 'race' for the various race organisers in 'one-upping' each other, to the point that it becomes gimicky and things are implemented in a race simply from a perspective of "We can! And nobody has done it before!" rather than "We think this might create some interesting racing."

 

[veji11]

The thing is riders will always be willing to take massive risks when the prize is really worth it (olympic medal, etc). If you want to maintain safety in a contest where the participants are willing to take all possible risks, than you are stuck with borefest super safe routes. Is that what we want ? At some point once all riders and coaches have seen the course, recon'd it, done the trial event, etc... Well it's up to them to say there might be a problem and the need for more protections here and there. Not saying so and then barking about safety after the event (when you lost) is a bit too easy.

 

[samhocking]

The point is the lack of safety put in place given how technical the descent was for the point in the race it was ridden, not the actual descent itself. Roads don't kill riders, just like roads don't kill drivers. I think that's all Boardman was really saying, was did the organisers do absolutely everything they could to minimise the damage riders would do to themselves on that descent if they got out of control and lost it and clearly they didn't. No crashes in a test event, is not an argument to say the road is fine for the real thing.

 

[veji11]

Re:

The point is the lack of safety put in place given how technical the descent was for the point in the race it was ridden, not the actual descent itself. Roads don't kill riders, just like roads don't kill drivers. I think that's all Boardman was really saying, was did the organisers do absolutely everything they could to minimise the damage riders would do to themselves on that descent if they got out of control and lost it and clearly they didn't. No crashes in a test event, is not an argument to say the road is fine for the real thing.

True but the way Boardman said it was "the route is unsafe". The truth is the route was known long ago, there were reccies and a test event and at no time did the stakeholders (teams, riders, etc) really raise the issue with the organisers. If failing there is, it is collective and the riders and their managers are as responsible as the organiser. It's a bit easy to criticize the organiser afterwards and say "the course was not safe", that's all I am saying.

 

[Alexandre B.]

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/haas-we-shouldnt-have-raced-tour-down-under-in-those-conditions/

"I don't want to sound like a sore loser but we shouldn't be racing in conditions like that - in my opinion. It's just upsetting."

"The guys who won, they handled the heat and people can say 'Nathan you're exaggerating here' but it's not safe to do this. You can shorten stages or start them earlier but if you're out there in temperatures that are six to ten degrees more than your body temperature is supposed to be in… it's just not a good thing for your body."

"Hats off to the guys who can suffer more than me but I didn't actually know I was in a bike race in the end. I just had my director yelling at me to stay in the cars. I didn't know where I was."

"At the bottom of the Norton Summit, I dropped myself on purpose and used a teammate to come back, just to avoid the first acceleration. That was planned and when we got back in we felt okay. Then we started the next part of the climb and I genuinely didn't know where I was. It's just insane."

"It's all over. I lost a minute and it's such a shame because I put in so much work. Actually all my numbers and physiology this year have been better than any year and I was most looking forward to this stage. It is what it is, that's bike racing but today I was a big victim of the heat. My team was actually awesome and I can't thank them enough but from the early kilometres of the race I felt like it was a chaotic situation."

 

[Robert5091]

Haas, you're just a product to be sold to, in this case, the Australian population. The UCI et al are happy that you'd risk your own health for their financial gain - "we love you, Nathan!" :sad:

 

[Alex Simmons/RST]

Luxury. When I were lad....

 

[Breh]

This is beyond ridiculous. Riders should really not be competing in temperatures over 40°.

I'm glad they're atleast shortening the stages.

 

[RedheadDane]

Is this about the height of the Australian summer?
Surely there must be a better time on the calendar, one that still doesn't clash with the big bulk of races in Europe. Late November/early December? Though... that would make it a late-season, rather than an early-season race, but having it earlier in January wouldn't make much of a difference, would it?

 

[barmaher]

If you want to avoid hot weather in Australia at this time of year, well any time from mid-December to end of February, you need to have the race in Tasmania or South Victoria.

 

[Brullnux]

The EWP is more important in these conditions than when it's too windy/too cold (unless if it's below freezing for an extended period). You can at least dress for the cold, but when it's 40 degrees in the shade, nobody benefits from it, and it puts riders in serious danger. Yet it is rarely used for heat.

 

[Max Rockatansky]

Come to Portugal, Nathan. Torre is waiting. :twisted:

 

[Jspear]

“There were a lot of guys complaining, but there were also a lot of guys not complaining. Just to name some teams, Movistar, UniSA, BMC, even the Mitchelton guys were all saying they didn’t want to cancel the stage. I’m not saying the whole team, but some of the riders I spoke with said ‘no, it’s ok. Sure, it is hard, but it’s ok’,” Hansen told Cyclingnews.

“Sprinters will complain it’s too hilly, climbers will complain a sprint finale is too technical. Guys were complaining today because of the heat and I admit it was super hot and it’s not nice to do. I don’t think anyone enjoyed it, it’s still a bike race and we’re all human, we all have our own rights and we can always just stop. At the end of the day, every rider can make their own choice to stop. There’s that on one side and I don’t agree with that, ‘you shouldn’t push people over their limits’. Well, how do you stay in this sport? You’re always over your limit.”

It's great that we are thinking of the riders safety, but...too much regulation and it takes away from the sport. Hansen brings up a good point. You can just bow out of the race. You don't have to continue - That way those who can handle the heat can still race. That's fair for a sport that's all about endurance and conditioning.

 

[Jagartrott]

It's great that we are thinking of the riders safety, but...too much regulation and it takes away from the sport. Hansen brings up a good point. You can just bow out of the race. You don't have to continue - That way those who can handle the heat can still race. That's fair for a sport that's all about endurance and conditioning.

Yeah, if you think your workplace is unsafe, you can also just quit your job...
The main thing here is that doing physical excertions in 45°C is unhealthy and risky. Heat shock may appear quite suddenly. I remember a QS rider going unconcious a few years ago in California. That's more than a farce, that's unethical. Don't organise races in 45°C conditions. Full stop.

 

[Ferminal]

Generally agree, that heat is more of a danger than the cold. They really should have started at 8am which would have meant the racing was done before it hit 40. That probably wasn't logistically possible, they could have easily cut out 25km of the stage though. Not really sure that makes sense either, you make all these concessions for the weather, at what point is the better option just cancellation?

 

[gregrowlerson]

When you make the riders climb Olympus Mons, I would have thought.