Very Steep and Fast Descent, gravel on road, tight bends: Extreme Caution Required!!!
I think there were about four of these on the route of the White Rose, but not many riders seemed to take a blind bit of notice, seizing the chance to go super-sonic, sometimes with dire results. This is borne out from comments I got from ambulance people, and also various accounts of hairy moments in White Rose experiences on these pages.
Apart from obvious issues of self interest the safety records on cyclo-sportives is obviously of public interest, and of relevance to the organisers of these events. I don't think sportives should be ridden as long-distance hilly time-trials, as many participants seem to.
EXTREME CAUTION REQUIRED
Moderator: Moderators
Exactly - in fact to use your own words Willy, ' long-distance hilly time-trials' is exactly what they are!Tullio wrote:Willy,
They are timed, competitive events and most riders approach them as such. What are you suggesting? Tootle around smelling the flowers and taking pictures of the Churches like an Audax?
Sorry to disagree with some of you, but time trials are individual efforts against the clock where every second counts.
These sportifs should be about achieving personal targets but not at all costs. What we end up with are uncontrolled road races if we are not careful, ie people riding in groups for times, making attacks and generally looking for extra seconds, but on routes where you would never get a road race past H&S.
If you want to compete then find a race, where these risks are managed for everyone's benefit. And racing or not, be careful - it just isn't worth it.
Nick
These sportifs should be about achieving personal targets but not at all costs. What we end up with are uncontrolled road races if we are not careful, ie people riding in groups for times, making attacks and generally looking for extra seconds, but on routes where you would never get a road race past H&S.
If you want to compete then find a race, where these risks are managed for everyone's benefit. And racing or not, be careful - it just isn't worth it.
Nick
I disagree about the comparison with time-trials. From the SPOCO notes:
"4. Please be aware that this event takes place mainly on unclassified country roads – there may be potholes, poor surface conditions, mud and other debris. Be vigilant at all times and always ride within your ability." [bold added]
Sounds like the sportives are *more* dangerous than a TT should be, even when every second counts. Catapulting yourself into a hedge isn't really a good way to get fast time in either kind of event.
"4. Please be aware that this event takes place mainly on unclassified country roads – there may be potholes, poor surface conditions, mud and other debris. Be vigilant at all times and always ride within your ability." [bold added]
Sounds like the sportives are *more* dangerous than a TT should be, even when every second counts. Catapulting yourself into a hedge isn't really a good way to get fast time in either kind of event.
Here we go. What started out as a debate about how fast you can safely descend has turned into a (misinformed) debate knocking Sportives. Can those who are knocking them now put your hand up if you've actually ridden one? Thought so!
1. I agree that on any ride and in any event cyclists should ride safely on public roads. However, the people I saw bumping into walls and the road at the weekend were doing so because they were inexperienced at descending fast not because they were going too fast. The signs should read simply 'Ride within your ability'. The faster riders were usually the safer ones.
2. The reason road races et al have rigorous Risk Assessments is because they are immensely more dangerous. A Sportive is little more than a fast Club Run over a long distance. Average speeds are no quicker than the 'H Ride'. Riders are challenging themselves against the clock and not racing eachother (as there's no mass start). Most of the time riders are joining up and helping eachother.
3. Let's not whip up a frenzy about this and suggest even more regulation for cycling events. You'll be suggesting we have risk assessments for Club Runs, MTB rides etc next just because there's an element of risk.
1. I agree that on any ride and in any event cyclists should ride safely on public roads. However, the people I saw bumping into walls and the road at the weekend were doing so because they were inexperienced at descending fast not because they were going too fast. The signs should read simply 'Ride within your ability'. The faster riders were usually the safer ones.
2. The reason road races et al have rigorous Risk Assessments is because they are immensely more dangerous. A Sportive is little more than a fast Club Run over a long distance. Average speeds are no quicker than the 'H Ride'. Riders are challenging themselves against the clock and not racing eachother (as there's no mass start). Most of the time riders are joining up and helping eachother.
3. Let's not whip up a frenzy about this and suggest even more regulation for cycling events. You'll be suggesting we have risk assessments for Club Runs, MTB rides etc next just because there's an element of risk.
Here we go. What started out as a debate about safety on sportives has turned into a (misinformed) debate knocking time-trials. Can those who are knocking them now put your hand up if you've actually ridden one? Err... actually I think just about everyone has.
1. I agree that on any ride and in any event cyclists should ride safely on public roads. However, I've never seen anyone bumping into walls or the road in a time-trial. The notes say: 'Ride within your ability'. The faster riders are often the safer ones.
2. The reason road races et al have rigorous Risk Assessments is because they are immensely more dangerous. A time-trial is little more than a fast Training Run over a short distance. Riders are challenging themselves against the clock and not racing each other (as there's no mass start). In fact they are forbidden from joining up and helping each other, and that prevents fast-moving groups, which may contain quite inexperienced riders, from forming.
3. Let's not whip up a frenzy about this and suggest even more regulation for cycling events. Eh?? Who mentioned regulation?
It's ten years and more since I rode what might now be called 'sportives' and I certainly do not claim to be an expert in the field. What I object to is the implication, right from the beginning of this thread, that somehow TTing either does or should involve people taking crazy risks in the pursuit of a few seconds' benefit. In practice I don't think TTs are like that; but if people are riding like idiots, the fact they're after a fast time certainly doesn't justify it.
Trollio
1. I agree that on any ride and in any event cyclists should ride safely on public roads. However, I've never seen anyone bumping into walls or the road in a time-trial. The notes say: 'Ride within your ability'. The faster riders are often the safer ones.
2. The reason road races et al have rigorous Risk Assessments is because they are immensely more dangerous. A time-trial is little more than a fast Training Run over a short distance. Riders are challenging themselves against the clock and not racing each other (as there's no mass start). In fact they are forbidden from joining up and helping each other, and that prevents fast-moving groups, which may contain quite inexperienced riders, from forming.
3. Let's not whip up a frenzy about this and suggest even more regulation for cycling events. Eh?? Who mentioned regulation?
It's ten years and more since I rode what might now be called 'sportives' and I certainly do not claim to be an expert in the field. What I object to is the implication, right from the beginning of this thread, that somehow TTing either does or should involve people taking crazy risks in the pursuit of a few seconds' benefit. In practice I don't think TTs are like that; but if people are riding like idiots, the fact they're after a fast time certainly doesn't justify it.
Trollio
This debate shouldn't be about the merits of Sportives but about riders and their behaviour. In most instances (I accept not all), the only victim of 'overfast descending' is the individual concerned. Generally experience gained in this way is likely to be beneficial to the rider's long-term cycling education (if not to his short-term health!).
Cricket Bats are lethal weapons if used carelessly/inappropriately. Should we then debate the future role of bats in cricket?
Cricket Bats are lethal weapons if used carelessly/inappropriately. Should we then debate the future role of bats in cricket?
"The reason road races et al have rigorous Risk Assessments is because they are immensely more dangerous"
I disagree with this. The safety or otherwise of pretty much any cycling event is down to the behaviour of the riders. Road races are - in my experience - pretty safe because the riders keep within their abilities and look out for each other. Last night's TLI was on roads which were submerged in places and strewn with rain-washed gravel in others, but the riders slowed for corners and shouted out the hazards, and everyone got round safely despite a wide range of abilities and experience.
On this basis I'm certainly not suggesting "more regulation", nor, I think, has anyone else. Then again I'm not wholly convinced that headbutting a dry stone wall teaches you that much about how to descend safely, and ambulances loaded with injured cyclists do little for the image of the sport. Nor does finishing the event in a ditch get you a good finishing time - to finish first, first you've got to finish***. If Willy's original post was - and I think it was - critical of the behaviour of some individuals, then I think he's got a point.
***copyright Dave Cook
I disagree with this. The safety or otherwise of pretty much any cycling event is down to the behaviour of the riders. Road races are - in my experience - pretty safe because the riders keep within their abilities and look out for each other. Last night's TLI was on roads which were submerged in places and strewn with rain-washed gravel in others, but the riders slowed for corners and shouted out the hazards, and everyone got round safely despite a wide range of abilities and experience.
On this basis I'm certainly not suggesting "more regulation", nor, I think, has anyone else. Then again I'm not wholly convinced that headbutting a dry stone wall teaches you that much about how to descend safely, and ambulances loaded with injured cyclists do little for the image of the sport. Nor does finishing the event in a ditch get you a good finishing time - to finish first, first you've got to finish***. If Willy's original post was - and I think it was - critical of the behaviour of some individuals, then I think he's got a point.
***copyright Dave Cook
Just to put some context around this there were nearly 900 riders on this event over the 3 distances and only about 30 DNFs. That's <4%.
The vast majority of the DNFs were doing the short route and, I guess, a mixture of exhaustion, mechanicals and accidents.
So of the 74,000 miles ridden a small handful hit the deck and couldn't continue for whatever reason. Does that statistic make it an extreme blood sport or are those figures about average for cycling?
The comment "making attacks and generally looking for extra seconds" simply doesn't reflect the nature of the rides - at all. The events are all about just trying to do the best you can, keeping your ave speed as high as possible and a lot of hard work. The downhills are just light relief and a chance to put a smile on your face.
I think people are misinterpreting what I'm getting at. I think all aspects of the sport are great and have their place for people who want different things from their riding. Road racing is safe but the increased regulation is necessary because they are a mass start and finish event and, generally, at higher speeds. Who's knocking Time Trials?? I think the heat is getting to some.
The vast majority of the DNFs were doing the short route and, I guess, a mixture of exhaustion, mechanicals and accidents.
So of the 74,000 miles ridden a small handful hit the deck and couldn't continue for whatever reason. Does that statistic make it an extreme blood sport or are those figures about average for cycling?
The comment "making attacks and generally looking for extra seconds" simply doesn't reflect the nature of the rides - at all. The events are all about just trying to do the best you can, keeping your ave speed as high as possible and a lot of hard work. The downhills are just light relief and a chance to put a smile on your face.
I think people are misinterpreting what I'm getting at. I think all aspects of the sport are great and have their place for people who want different things from their riding. Road racing is safe but the increased regulation is necessary because they are a mass start and finish event and, generally, at higher speeds. Who's knocking Time Trials?? I think the heat is getting to some.
Think you'll find (British Cycling) Sportives are just as regulated as time trials and road races....which you might remember is the reason we didn't run our annual Reliability Ride in Feb as the BC guidelines seemed to indicate we had to start running it like a Sportive with all the attendant risk assessments, event officials, signs etc.
You can't legislate for people who are too inexperienced, riding like an idiot - or just plain unlucky on the day - but if an event has several 'notifiable' accidents on one day (and I'm not saying that this one did - I don't know) then it won't just affect the image of the sport, it might also affect the event itself in the future given that the organisers have to prove their course is safe and get permission from BC and the police.
Everyone has a responsibility to ride repsonsibly - which I think is Willy's point?
You can't legislate for people who are too inexperienced, riding like an idiot - or just plain unlucky on the day - but if an event has several 'notifiable' accidents on one day (and I'm not saying that this one did - I don't know) then it won't just affect the image of the sport, it might also affect the event itself in the future given that the organisers have to prove their course is safe and get permission from BC and the police.
Everyone has a responsibility to ride repsonsibly - which I think is Willy's point?