Helmets in the TDF

2»

Comments

  • seanoconn
    seanoconn Posts: 11,671
    GeorgeShaw wrote:
    disgruntledgoat wrote:
    I havent seen a rider fall and injure themselves going uphill in 20 years.
    Menchov?
    I've fallen and injured myself going uphill :D
    Pinno, מלך אידיוט וחרא מכונאי
  • cougie
    cougie Posts: 22,512
    Very interesting how much use was made of the aero road helmets this year.
    Is aero the way forward rather than adding extra vents each update.
  • pat1cp
    pat1cp Posts: 766
    ThomThom wrote:
    disgruntledgoat wrote:
    The rule at the time was that you were allowed to remove them on the last climb of a mountain top finish stage... nowadays you can't. Not sure why.

    A bit obvious, isn't it?

    You can still fall and rip your head off even though you are only going 20 km/h up a mountain. How many crashes with severe damages have we heard of in the neutral zone with same speed? Quite a few, eh..?

    Besides, it was a complete mess when the riders had to hand their helmets back to the team cars.

    There's absolutely no reason to let the riders ride without one.

    I seem to recall it being something about helmets getting lobbed everywhere at the bottom of the final climb too.
    http://tinyurl.com/332edp
    http://tinyurl.com/2nu7r3
  • thomthom
    thomthom Posts: 3,574
    cougie wrote:
    Very interesting how much use was made of the aero road helmets this year.
    Is aero the way forward rather than adding extra vents each update.

    It's the 'marginal gains' that counts... :D;)
  • mike6
    mike6 Posts: 1,199
    I can see the theory why they now insist on helmets, but the reality is very different.
    If anyone thinks a polystyrene lid is going to give you any protection if you crash at 80 kph on a descent they are sadly deluded.
    And yes.....I do wear a helmet, always have. It makes me feel more secure. No idea why.
  • thomthom
    thomthom Posts: 3,574
    mike6 wrote:
    I can see the theory why they now insist on helmets, but the reality is very different.
    If anyone thinks a polystyrene lid is going to give you any protection if you crash at 80 kph on a descent they are sadly deluded.
    And yes.....I do wear a helmet, always have. It makes me feel more secure. No idea why.

    Way to argue against yourself in 4 lines...
  • slowsider
    slowsider Posts: 197
    mike6 wrote:
    And yes.....I do wear a helmet, always have. It makes me feel more secure. No idea why.

    It's called risk compensation. :)
  • Tom Butcher
    Tom Butcher Posts: 3,830
    Giro air attack - that's the aero road helmet I was thinking of - who's getting one ?
    it's a hard life if you don't weaken.
  • cougie
    cougie Posts: 22,512
    I'm toying with the idea. Might use it for my ironman race. I had the original version way back so that kind of appeals too.
  • greasedscotsman
    greasedscotsman Posts: 6,962
    I quite like the idea of getting one to use in the winter. Shame they aren't avaliable until the spring! :shock:
  • mike6
    mike6 Posts: 1,199
    ThomThom wrote:
    mike6 wrote:
    I can see the theory why they now insist on helmets, but the reality is very different.
    If anyone thinks a polystyrene lid is going to give you any protection if you crash at 80 kph on a descent they are sadly deluded.
    And yes.....I do wear a helmet, always have. It makes me feel more secure. No idea why.

    Way to argue against yourself in 4 lines...

    Not at all. I am not a pro racer, I do not do 80k plus on descents. The UCI make helmet use mandatory for "safety" reasons. Do you think a piece of polystyrene would save you at those speeds?
  • k-dog
    k-dog Posts: 1,652
    mike6 wrote:
    I can see the theory why they now insist on helmets, but the reality is very different.
    If anyone thinks a polystyrene lid is going to give you any protection if you crash at 80 kph on a descent they are sadly deluded.
    And yes.....I do wear a helmet, always have. It makes me feel more secure. No idea why.

    That's always a stupid argument - the speed you're going doesn't dictate the speed you hit your head at. Even if you come off at 80kph you'll likely slide into something (thus slowing down) before hitting your head. Sure you might break your arm/leg/collarbone in the impact but the part of that is entirely essential is held out of the way until you hit something else.

    If you're unfortunate enough to come straight off and hit a kerb/lamppost/bus with your head then short of a full face motorbike helmet then you're right that it won't give you protection. But that's not the majority of bike accidents.
    I'm left handed, if that matters.
  • mike6
    mike6 Posts: 1,199
    k-dog wrote:
    mike6 wrote:
    I can see the theory why they now insist on helmets, but the reality is very different.
    If anyone thinks a polystyrene lid is going to give you any protection if you crash at 80 kph on a descent they are sadly deluded.
    And yes.....I do wear a helmet, always have. It makes me feel more secure. No idea why.

    That's always a stupid argument - the speed you're going doesn't dictate the speed you hit your head at. Even if you come off at 80kph you'll likely slide into something (thus slowing down) before hitting your head. Sure you might break your arm/leg/collarbone in the impact but the part of that is entirely essential is held out of the way until you hit something else.

    If you're unfortunate enough to come straight off and hit a kerb/lamppost/bus with your head then short of a full face motorbike helmet then you're right that it won't give you protection. But that's not the majority of bike accidents.

    Stupid eh? Nothing like a bit of personal abuse to define a difference of opinion.

    So everyone who crashes on a descent always slides eh? You answered your argument in your second paragraph.
    Motorcycle helmets rarely prevent head injuries on motorbikes, unless it is in a low speed gimp fall.

    If you look at the history of pro cycling the amount of deaths and injuries resulting from head trauma are very very small. This when mandatory helmet wear is a very recent thing.

    I worked in the Polystyrene industry for 12 years and the injury prevention afforded by a thin shell of said material is minimal.
  • slowsider
    slowsider Posts: 197
    Don't undermine your argument, by claiming that motorcycle helmets are only good for gimp falls. The hard outer provides abrasion resistance and the liner provides impact absorption. I've slid on tarmac far enough to wear away an old-style visor press-stud fastener on one. The impact wasn't massive, but the sliding would have worn a hole in my head.

    However, the idea that kdog has that a fallen rider will be able to hold his head off the ground whilst sliding is laughable.
  • greasedscotsman
    greasedscotsman Posts: 6,962
    Tom Butcher wrote:
    Giro air attack - that's the aero road helmet I was thinking of - who's getting one ?

    Or you could get one of these for about £40!

    MATBK.jpg
  • No_Ta_Doctor
    No_Ta_Doctor Posts: 14,651
    This is a very disappointing thread.

    Three pages of "Helmets at the TdF" and not a single mention of either of the Schlecks yet.
    Warning No formatter is installed for the format
  • neilo23
    neilo23 Posts: 783
    I definitely agree with Rick's comment about helmets not being good for spectators. I have some lovely prints of old TdF stages on my walls where you can really see the riders' agony but wouldn't dream of having similar photos of my favourite modern-era riders with their heads and eyes covered, indistinguishable from their team mates. With helmet and shades on I could never work out whether I was watching Armstrong or Leipheimer (apart from the fact that one of them usually had a "1" on his back).
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,661
    neilo23 wrote:
    With helmet and shades on I could never work out whether I was watching Armstrong or Leipheimer (apart from the fact that one of them usually had a "1" on his back).

    That's pretty harsh on Armstrong.
    _

Categories