Road Bike Racing - Helmet use in pro peloton

Given the tragedy with A. Kivilev
will UCI mandate the use of helmets during
sanctioned rides?
I'd be very interested to hear what Xavier has
to say about this as he is an ex pro rider.

Thanks,
Marty

There is a breed of European racer that just isn't going to strap on a lid regardless of regulations. Too much bravado! :)

They should then implement the system like the NHL did when they mandated helmet use. Only "new" players were obligated. Existing players were allowed the option of going "topless".
By now, all of the old helmetless crowd are retired and all players are now protected.
Funny, the NHL players made the exact same kind of arguments the anti-bike helmet crowd makes.

I think the UCI will take action soon. Sure, there are going to be some people, at first, who are going to take the punishments (fines, etc.), but I think everyone will realize the dangers of going top-less sooner or later.

I never knew that is how the NHL did it. I like that idea and that seem like that would go over better.

While, I'm a proponent of helmet use, I'd be surprised to see the UCI mandate helmets. But then again, more "radical" things have happened. Aren't some of these teams partly sponsored by helmet manufacturers? I wonder what kind of pressures the helmet industry will put on the teams they sponsor.

Besides the safety factor, a helmet provides more room for sponsor logos.

BTW, the UCI has tried in the past to mandate helmets:

http://www.velonews.com/news/fea/3586.0.html

although i'm sure this recent tragedy will have some affect on the UCI...i don't see them making any helmet rules anytime soon...

i'm sure a lot of riders would protest...all of them know the helmet is good for them...but come the summer time with the sun beating down and the heat rising from the tarmac...they would rather remain cool...

Although I don't see the UCI mandating helmets, it would be a good example for younger riders who look up to their heros. Luckily, helmet use for kids is becoming more accepted but there still is a long ways to go.

In light of the recent tragic death of Andrei Kivilev, mandatory helmet use among pros is being debated again. I say make those guys wear helmets, a warm head is better than a fractured head.

Please not ANOTHER foam and plastic post! Give me strength! YES helmets should be mandatory for sanctioned races. My personal choice is to wear one and I won't ride with anyone who doesn't. I've said my bit and I'm done

Personally many may not like what I am about to say and many know me, but I am very honest

I think they should not be mandatory.

Pro riders know the risks and I think they should have the freedom to choose what they want.

So any pro sport should'nt be mandatory to wear helments,right?They all know the risks.

They went through this in ice hockey years ago, and helmets are now universal. It certainly is a good example for young people coming up, too.

That is my opinion and some may not agree with it

Lance wants to create a good example then he should wear one. It is up to each individual to choose. If they want to be safe then use a helmet. If they want to set a good example to others then they should.

I like freedom. The freedom too choose. Slowly we are loosing this but I think we should fight for it.

Originally posted by Raiyn
Please not ANOTHER foam and plastic post! Give me strength! YES helmets should be mandatory for sanctioned races. My personal choice is to wear one and I won't ride with anyone who doesn't. I've said my bit and I'm done
Raiyn,

No not another foam and plastic post, I'm not asking about
our personal choices, but what we think the UCI will
do and how the peloton will respond. I think UCI will again
try to mandate but it won't pass.

Marty

When the cyclist's race in the Tour Down Under helmet use is mandatory due to our road laws. The first year there was a bit of a rebellion with riders not wearing them on training rides. The majority did wear them during the race though. The race director Mike Turtur said that the police should book any pro not wearing a helmet on training rides, so they did! Now in it's 5th year all the pro's seem to dealing with the law, and are reminded at the beginning of the week that these are our road rules and any rider not conforming can be kicked out.

The heat thing is a red herring, this year the temperature reached 44ºC/111F and the pro's still wore their helmets. When it is that hot, and your body is suffering a helmet less head isn't going to cool you down, it's like riding in an oven, the heat is everywhere.

CHEERS.

Mark

Hey, guys. Is it me or are some of the European helmets shaped different?

I'm kinda new to watching races but it appears some of the peloton wear lower-profile helmets with a brim in the back. Maybe it's just a regular helmet over a hat but it looks different from the street legal helmets we wear in the states.

Originally posted by Dutchy
The heat thing is a red herring, this year the temperature reached 44ºC/111F and the pro's still wore their helmets. When it is that hot, and your body is suffering a helmet less head isn't going to cool you down, it's like riding in an oven, the heat is everywhere.

Agreed. I've ridden in those temperatures (and hotter) on occasions. I've got by OK wearing a helmet, and I'm probably not as fit as any of the pro-riders are. It's not really an excuse when you consider all the ventilation available on helmets these days. Having said that, I really can't see it being passed. I think there will be too much opposition from the riders, and I also think the UCI are going to be more concerned with other issues such as the "D" word.

Originally posted by Chris L

Agreed. I've ridden in those temperatures (and hotter) on occasions. I've got by OK wearing a helmet, and I'm probably not as fit as any of the pro-riders are. It's not really an excuse when you consider all the ventilation available on helmets these days.

I never understood the heat issue either. Maybe it's just me but I feel that my head gets hotter without a helmet to shield the sun from beating down directly on my head.



Originally posted by Chris L

Having said that, I really can't see it being passed. I think there will be too much opposition from the riders, and I also think the UCI are going to be more concerned with other issues such as the "D" word.

Since they backed down before in the face of rider protest it's very likely they'll do so again. Perhaps I haven't been observant enough but I haven't heard of any more support for helmets from the pro peloton now than there was ten years ago.

I think pro riders on a closed course should be allowed to choose.

I suppose a team sponsor could make it's sponsorship contingent on helmet usage.

FWIW, helmet usage has increased significantly in the 10-15 years... just look at the pictures in Greg LeMond's book. And there were those brancale(?) things... the leather hairnet "helmets." Why bother?

Originally posted by roadbuzz
. . . And there were those brancale(?) things... the leather hairnet "helmets." Why bother?
well, the hairnets didn't offer crash protection, but they
did offer something to slide on the road other than your
scalp. Its an evolution thing, just look at an early Football
(U.S. type) helmet compared with todays helmets.

Marty

If I were a team owner or sponsor I would put it in every riders contract that he must wear a helmet or go somewhere else. if every team would do that the UCI would not have to make them mandatory and it comes down to a money thing. Wear a helmet or not get paid.

hrmm IMHO they should mandate them, but will they? who knows.... I sometimes think to myself, why would any pro cyclist not wear a helmet, with the history of no helmet crashes leading to some deaths?..

Bottom line is be safe or stupit.Sometimes you need others to choose for you.

Pro racing is a good example of the helmet debate. I think no one goes faster, takes more risks and crashes harder than the pros. Support cars and motorcycles are all over the road and pros train on open roads. Travelling in peletons, one wrong move 6 inches to the sides or moving up or back will take down large groups.

Sponsers invest millions of dollars in their athletes. So what's the deal with no helmets?

We can look to example. Racing has gone on for, what, just about 100 years? Kivelev's is one, so was Fabio Casartelli. Tommy Simpson died from amphetmines. What would be the other experiences from the pro's? Problems?

Maybe that's why the pros have staged sit downs when the UCI tried to impose mandatory helmet usage.

The heat argument is interesting. If everyone wore one, the handicap would be the same. What about mountain stages? They start out with them on but take them off for the climb (because they are too hot, so they say) and don't put them on for the decent (even though many pro's manage to put newspapers under their jerseys).

I would think that the intelligent, millionaire, businessmen sponsers would do their best to protect their investments and not take any unnessasary risks with millions of dollars. I think they've gone over the helmet question with a fine toothed comb and concluded there are better things to do to keep riders earning them money than impose mandatory helmet use.

(OBTW- since the NHL's helmet rule came into effect, head injuries have increased. They used to be almost unheard of - there are, of course exceptions, like when Wayne Maki and Teddy Green got into a stick swinging fight that put them both in the hospital - and now they're epidemic)

Here's a good example of ideal conditions to wear a helmet, yet no one is.

If the cyclists in this picture received head injuries maybe they would be wearing them.

I guess some people would'nt wear a cup until,well you know.Sometimes finding out the hard way just isnt worth it.

well then why would this guy (who is known for advocating the safety of helmets and has written in his book about crashing while training - admitting it was a mistake for not wearing the helmet - but surviving the crash anyhow) be racing up (and down at 70mph) mountains without the lid?

Pro racing is a huge test for everything about cycling and we can learn a lot from it.

I agree with Xavier actually. I wear a helmet, because I have decided that the benefits of not wearing a helmet are to minimal..But something about having a rule/law saying I HAVE to wear a helmet, gets under my skin and makes me not want to wear one.

"Rider dead in stage 2 of Tucson Bicycle Classic
Stage two of the Tucson Bicycle Classic was affected by tragedy yesterday
when Garret Lemire, a 22-year old rider with the Los Angeles-based KB Home
team was killed in a head-on collision with a motor vehicle.
The Toyota was estimated to be travelling at 25 mph."

Kivalev's death gets ink but what about this kid who was wearing a helmet and hit a car going 25 mph and ended up just as dead?

You know,you guys that don't want to wear one,don't and don't bother with seatbelts either because youguys want this,i'm not going to be told or this freedom crap,go ahead,dont.

it's been proven that seatbelts have saved lives. Death rates have dropped substantially when seatbelts are worn.

I wish they could make a helmet that would survive a collision with a car going 25 mph (a reasonable expectation when racing at that speed)

Choice is good here because the need and effectivness is in question.

Originally posted by closetbiker
"Rider dead in stage 2 of Tucson Bicycle Classic
Stage two of the Tucson Bicycle Classic was affected by tragedy yesterday
when Garret Lemire, a 22-year old rider with the Los Angeles-based KB Home
team was killed in a head-on collision with a motor vehicle.
The Toyota was estimated to be travelling at 25 mph."

Kivalev's death gets ink but what about this kid who was wearing a helmet and hit a car going 25 mph and ended up just as dead?

Because Kivalev's death could have been prevented simply by using a helmet. (I'm guessing)

I really had not position on helmets prior to this last Fall. I didn't always wear one, nor did I care if I saw someone without one. But on a group ride I had someone crash about 5 feet in front of me and land on his head. Without that helmet he surely would have had either brain damage or been killed. And it happened in an instant. One second he was up, the next on the ground and sliding across the pavement like a ragdoll. There's no way I'd ride without a helmet now, unless I was just rolling around the driveway or something.

I am all for the UCI instituting a mandatory helmet rule. I can't imagine that no helmet is that much cooler on those mountain stages....

PBW

Originally posted by brent_dube
Because Kivalev's death could have been prevented simply by using a helmet. (I'm guessing)

well anyone saying that would be guessing.

Casartelli was wearing one as well as Garret Lemire who crashed in the Tuscon Classic.

Sure the Pros know the risks. But how much longer are they going to behave in such an immature way! It is bike racing, I would think that doing something as simple as wearing a helmet to potentially save your life is a "no brainer". The arguement of helmets being too hot is BS- the new helmets actuall make yourhead cooler, due to the venturi effect of the vents- studies have shown this.
Most of all, these guys need to set an example for the kids coming up. Here in California evry kid under the age of 18 has to wear a helmet when riding a bike or skateboard. It is the LAW!
Then they see the pros on tv and the idiots who think they are too cool to wear a helmet, and it sends a mixed message. When riders needlessly die, it only hurts our sport.

Originally posted by Xavier
Personally many may not like what I am about to say and many know me, but I am very honest

I think they should not be mandatory.

Pro riders know the risks and I think they should have the freedom to choose what they want.

Xavier, I'm 100% with you on this one.
FREEDOM of CHOISE!!!!!

Just as a note on the side, and that's also the last thing I'm gonna say about it.
Just as there is a possibility that helmets may have saved lives,
there is also the possibility that helmets actually may have caused accidents and deaths.
They block out or dim noises of oncoming cars or other traffic. The heat they cause, especially on hot days during intense physical performances, doesn't add to the savety of athletes.
There is no improvement in headmovement when having a helmet on.
In general, helmets do decrease the level of comfort. All these things considered, helmets may just as well take away the added level of safety which they are supposed to provide.
The good thing about them is they are a fashion item, and their popularity does add to the economy in some way and provides a few jobs.

My helment does'nt cover my ears to dim noises.The good outweights the bad just like with airbags.They burn my face,it broke my nose.I'll take that over kissing the wheel or glass.Adds to the economy and a fashion statement,come on,please.You can say that about shoes,do you wear those?I guess it up to each of us how much safer we want to be.I did'nt want to wear gloves until my dad said,you'll wish you had them if you go down,never ride without them.It just seems that if you dont want to use a helment,seatbelts,airbags,a cup,ect.,you dumb.

I guess my main point I'll re-state and then I'll be done with this (unless someone comes up with some decent argument).

How many pro's are there? 1000? (I guess it depends how you consider at what level you're a pro) 2000?

How many miles a year does each one put in training (6 weeks) and racing (8 months)? 10,000?

And how many years have they all been racing? 100?

Is it fair to guess we're talking about 10,000,000 miles cycling (under the most extreme circumstances possible) each season? For 100 seasons?

Now how many deaths from head injury from falls off the bike? What would be the odds? 1 in a 1,000,000? At those odds, I think we would be safer if we all wore bullet proof vests when riding (odds the average American will be murdered - 1 in 11,000)

It would seem to me that if the UCI considers history, they may conclude that history suggests a lack of need to protect it's riders from something that has never been a real threat in the past and unless they change the rules to encourage more of a risk to hitting heads it's likely to stay staus quo.

well i am a helmet advocate and had one bike head-collision where my face got all mangled but i got no injuries from the initial impact b/c of my helmet (it shattered as it should)...

i usually wear a helmet for commuting and ALWAYS wear a helmet for racing and off-road riding EXCEPT... since i have been living near the Alps where there are LONG mountain climbs where you spend 30 to 120 minutes or more going slow (less than 15mph and usually 10mph or even less) i have gotten into the habit of taking my helmet off for the climb and then putting it back on for the descent... i can take off the helmet and attach it to the bars and then later put it back on without stopping which i assume pros could also do...

as far as the heat/helmet thing goes: my opinion is that if you are moving at a decent speed then a well-ventilated helmet is not much difference from helmetless, but at near-walking or running pace of hill-climbing where there is very little "road wind" a helmet reduces the evaporation and cooling as well as collects sweat which poors down into my face...

as to the mandatory helmet rule - i personally think a rule for HAVING mandatory helmets (but not necessarily on the head) at all times and then required to wear for all descents and high speed riding (say > 20 or 30mph)

so some kind of rule that provides a little bit more freedom than simply: helmet usage at all times...

As I understand it, the recent tragedy was actually a low speed accident, probably the type where a helmet will afford the most protection.

Originally posted by closetbiker

they may conclude that history suggests a lack of need to protect it's riders from something that has never been a real threat in the past and unless they change the rules to encourage more of a risk to hitting heads it's likely to stay staus quo.

Tell that to Kivalev's family.

Odd's don't mean a thing if you're the one that gets it.

Tell that to Casartelli's and Lemire's family.

At least Kivalev made a choice. NOTHING in life is risk free. Casartelli and Lemaire put their lives in the hands of propaganda from helmet companies that the helmet would save their lives. Fat lot of good it did.

Originally posted by green lion
They block out or dim noises of oncoming cars or other traffic. The heat they cause, especially on hot days during intense physical performances, doesn't add to the savety of athletes.
There is no improvement in headmovement when having a helmet on.
In general, helmets do decrease the level of comfort. All these things considered, helmets may just as well take away the added level of safety which they are supposed to provide.

I'm sorry, but most of that is just codswallop. I've ridden in temperatures significantly hotter than anything the European pros are ever likely to encounter, and wearing a helmet hasn't harmed my performance at all. The simple fact is, riding in temperatures exceeding 45 C is going to be uncomfortable, helmet or not. It's just the nature of the conditions.

As far as blocking out noises goes, again, this simply doesn't happen (or at least, not with my helmet, maybe a motorcycle helmet might, but we weren't debating those). I wear a helmet every time I ride and can hear what's going on around me perfectly well. I don't consider myself suddenly more crash-prone because I'm wearing one.

Green Lion - Don't know what type of helmet you are wearing/talking about, but I haven't seen a road bike helmet that interfers with anyone's ears so that it would reduce/dim road noise. We are not talking motorcycle helmets here.

Also, if the Peleton were told by their respective team managers/owners/sponsors to wear helmets or not ride/get paid, they would strap them on and wear them. Needs to be a mandate by not only the UCI, but by the team owners, etc.

Originally posted by Chris L
I'm sorry, but most of that is just codswallop.
As far as blocking out noises goes, again, this simply doesn't happen

Maybe if you would go a bit faster then 3 miles/hour, you would know what i'm talking about.

Originally posted by closetbiker
Casartelli and Lemaire put their lives in the hands of propaganda from helmet companies that the helmet would save their lives. Fat lot of good it did. (This probably belongs under the current "helmet" thread, but here goes)

Closetbiker,

I think you're taking this a bit too far. Can you show some evidence that helmet manufacturers guarantee that a helmet will save your life? I certainly haven't seen these claims being made. A helmet may save your life or it may not. Who knows?

I think, in order to make any meaningful statement regarding the efficacy of helmet use you'd have to compare cycling deaths per unit of distance ridden (or unit of time spent riding) due to head injury for helmeted vs. non-helmeting riders.

By the logic I think I'm hearing here, everyone should stop wearing their car seatbelt and deactivate the airbags in their car because someone died in a car accident while using one of these safety devices.