Some safety tips from Boardman

arthur_scrimshaw

ugo.santalucia wrote:

You should look at Barcelona... been there recently and the cycling thing is booming, nobody wears a helmet, I mean nobody! One should look at their statistics and see if they are significantly different from London, where virtually everybody does wear a helmet... I suspect not so different

Agree, I was there last week. Didn't see any cyclists with helmets and there are loads of cyclists with bike hire stations all over the place. There's also thousands of motor bikes, well scooters, most park on the pavements so it's not unusual to be walking along and see a scooter mount the pavement and ride towards you looking to park. That said it's done without any speed or agression, it seems much more relaxed there. The other side of this is because of the quantity bikes/motor bikes, car drivers actually seem to look were they're going and check their mirrors before changing lanes etc.

tangled_metal

PS personal choice is the freedom of a civilized country.

PPS I wonder how many kids these days actually know who Boardman is? Other than one of the people on TV as the TdF presenter of course. He could just have easily been some cycling instructor from Salford or just a club rider from Manchester. With that in mind why would they take any notice of him not wearing a helmet?

PPPS Do kids listen to anyone these days? Will some scrote on an undersized bmx bike start wearing a helmet when he is carrying some weed for a dealer just because he saw a retired cycle racer wearing one or not? Sorry for the exaggerated scenario but who listens to tv presenters these days?

arthur_scrimshaw

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Debeli wrote:

I thought it was a good, clear, helpful video.

I was pleased and slightly amused that he went for dark clothes and no helmet. I think the pro-helmet faction can be as emptily noisy as the hardline anti-helmeteers, but to see a known and respected figure swing a leg over a bike helmetless and give a good demonstration of safe riding is refreshing.

I am on the fence regarding helmets. I go without most of the time, although I wear one for rides involving fast descents and when competing. All my children (21, 18 and 15) are keen cyclists. The middle one wears a helmet, the others usually not.

I do generally wear bright colours, but I note also that in good light a rider in black is pretty hard not to notice.

I am of the generation (born in the early early 60s) for whom helmets are often somewhere between an oddity and an affectation. Many ardently pro-helmet folk are new to cycling (last decade or so) and have been swept up in the recent enthusiasms for safety gear and ''looking the part'.

But back to the issue. A good video, refreshing, direct and from the thoughts of one who knows bicycles. Top marks!

That is one good post!

From a mods perspective maybe!

Bozman

Arthur Scrimshaw wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Debeli wrote:

I thought it was a good, clear, helpful video.

I was pleased and slightly amused that he went for dark clothes and no helmet. I think the pro-helmet faction can be as emptily noisy as the hardline anti-helmeteers, but to see a known and respected figure swing a leg over a bike helmetless and give a good demonstration of safe riding is refreshing.

I am on the fence regarding helmets. I go without most of the time, although I wear one for rides involving fast descents and when competing. All my children (21, 18 and 15) are keen cyclists. The middle one wears a helmet, the others usually not.

I do generally wear bright colours, but I note also that in good light a rider in black is pretty hard not to notice.

I am of the generation (born in the early early 60s) for whom helmets are often somewhere between an oddity and an affectation. Many ardently pro-helmet folk are new to cycling (last decade or so) and have been swept up in the recent enthusiasms for safety gear and ''looking the part'.

But back to the issue. A good video, refreshing, direct and from the thoughts of one who knows bicycles. Top marks!

That is one good post!

From a mods perspective maybe!

I'd say that it's spot on.

Buckie2k5

Boardman: My helmet saved me; Tour crash ace 'very lucky'.

A nice article from 1998

http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Boardman%3A+My+helmet+saved+me%3B+Tour+crash+ace+%27very+lucky%27.-a060668837

veronese68

Bozman wrote:

Arthur Scrimshaw wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Debeli wrote:

I thought it was a good, clear, helpful video.

I was pleased and slightly amused that he went for dark clothes and no helmet. I think the pro-helmet faction can be as emptily noisy as the hardline anti-helmeteers, but to see a known and respected figure swing a leg over a bike helmetless and give a good demonstration of safe riding is refreshing.

I am on the fence regarding helmets. I go without most of the time, although I wear one for rides involving fast descents and when competing. All my children (21, 18 and 15) are keen cyclists. The middle one wears a helmet, the others usually not.

I do generally wear bright colours, but I note also that in good light a rider in black is pretty hard not to notice.

I am of the generation (born in the early early 60s) for whom helmets are often somewhere between an oddity and an affectation. Many ardently pro-helmet folk are new to cycling (last decade or so) and have been swept up in the recent enthusiasms for safety gear and ''looking the part'.

But back to the issue. A good video, refreshing, direct and from the thoughts of one who knows bicycles. Top marks!

That is one good post!

From a mods perspective maybe!

I'd say that it's spot on.

As would I.

imposter2.0

Buckie2k5 wrote:

Boardman: My helmet saved me; Tour crash ace 'very lucky'.

A nice article from 1998

http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Boardman%3A+My+helmet+saved+me%3B+Tour+crash+ace+%27very+lucky%27.-a060668837

Which kind of underlines the point that he is exercising a free, fully-informed choice in not wearing one - no?

veronese68

Buckie2k5 wrote:

Boardman: My helmet saved me; Tour crash ace 'very lucky'.

A nice article from 1998

http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Boardman%3A+My+helmet+saved+me%3B+Tour+crash+ace+%27very+lucky%27.-a060668837

Much like riding a bike casually is not like jumping out of a perfectly good plane that is going to land anyway, riding a bike casually is not the same as racing in the Tour de France. If you read the article he even says that whilst they are not compulsory he chose to wear one.
Choice is the relevant bit here. When racing in a tight group at high speed the chances of coming off are high, if you do come off in that situation a lorry is not likely to drive over your head so a helmet is a sensible choice. If popping out to pick up a pint of milk on a shopping bike a crash helmet is not as likely to be necessary. If a lorry does drive over you it won't help, but you are unlikely to fall off anyway so it is his choice not to wear one in those circumstances.
You will probably refuse to see the difference here but I'm sure most people will understand the difference.

arthur_scrimshaw

Veronese68 wrote:

Bozman wrote:

Arthur Scrimshaw wrote:

ugo.santalucia wrote:

Debeli wrote:

I thought it was a good, clear, helpful video.

I was pleased and slightly amused that he went for dark clothes and no helmet. I think the pro-helmet faction can be as emptily noisy as the hardline anti-helmeteers, but to see a known and respected figure swing a leg over a bike helmetless and give a good demonstration of safe riding is refreshing.

I am on the fence regarding helmets. I go without most of the time, although I wear one for rides involving fast descents and when competing. All my children (21, 18 and 15) are keen cyclists. The middle one wears a helmet, the others usually not.

I do generally wear bright colours, but I note also that in good light a rider in black is pretty hard not to notice.

I am of the generation (born in the early early 60s) for whom helmets are often somewhere between an oddity and an affectation. Many ardently pro-helmet folk are new to cycling (last decade or so) and have been swept up in the recent enthusiasms for safety gear and ''looking the part'.

But back to the issue. A good video, refreshing, direct and from the thoughts of one who knows bicycles. Top marks!

That is one good post!

From a mods perspective maybe!

I'd say that it's spot on.

As would I.

Maybe I should have put a smilie on the end of my comment, I can see that my humour was not conveyed.

CiB

Glad you agree with what I said earlier there Buckie, that riding in a bunch sprint jostling for position requires a helmet, whereas a trundle around on a bike doesn't really.

Anonymous

The one and only time helmet wearing is required is when you fall off your bike and hit your head forcefully against something hard.
It has bugger all to do with what you were doing in the preceeding seconds.

Found it funny that Boardman did not wear a helmet to do something he said he does not normally do and would not let his kids do.
People who do regularly ride around in cities should just make up their own mind rather than be led by his fake example lol.

imposter2.0

Carbonator wrote:

People who do regularly ride around in cities should just make up their own mind rather than be led by his fake example lol.

I'm struggling to see how someone exercising free choice is somehow 'fake'....

Anyway, back to reality:

http://www.britishcycling.org.uk/campai ... reakfast-0

de_sisti

The first post on our cycle forum in work today was about Boardman not wearing a helmet. (As one of the moderators of the forum) I made a comment about Bill Turnbull stating the Boardman decided not to wear one. I also reminded all contributors that helmets were not compulsory and that they would serve little purpose if one's head was squished by a car travelling at 30 mph. I then locked the thread after stating that I didn't want it to end up with continual rants.

A couple of hours later a received an email from the IT administrators thanking me for the calm way I defused a potential helmet thread from erupting and galvanising the pro/anti brigade.

Anonymous

Imposter wrote:

Carbonator wrote:

People who do regularly ride around in cities should just make up their own mind rather than be led by his fake example lol.

I'm struggling to see how someone exercising free choice is somehow 'fake'....

Anyway, back to reality:

http://www.britishcycling.org.uk/campai ... reakfast-0

Because (as I said) he said he does not cycle around in cities, it was just for a program. So if anyone was led by that as an example, it was a fake one.

I am all for free choice. I also said that in my post didn't I? :roll:

Why Mr B wants you to use Utrecht as an example of what you should wear whilst cycling in London is beyond me.
Great idea to want London to be like Utrecht, but until it is dress accordingly (your free choice as to what that is of course ;-) ).

EDIT: Which reality are you getting back to by the way? London or Utrecht?

Anonymous

De Sisti wrote:

The first post on our cycle forum in work today was about Boardman not wearing a helmet. (As one of the moderators of the forum) I made a comment about Bill Turnbull stating the Boardman decided not to wear one. I also reminded all contributors that helmets were not compulsory and that they would serve little purpose if one's head was squished by a car travelling at 30 mph. I then locked the thread after stating that I didn't want it to end up with continual rants.

A couple of hours later a received an email from the IT administrators thanking me for the calm way I defused a potential helmet thread from erupting and galvanising the pro/anti brigade.

Does anyone actually think a helmet would help if your head was squished by a car?

I thought people wore them in case they were, say, cut up by a car (or even another cyclist/pedestrian) and just fell off and head butted the granite kerb stone.

If its so dangerous you are going to die doing it, protecting your most vulnerable body part against a lesser injury seems sensible to me.

dinyull

Why do helmets and hi-viz make some on here froth at the mouth?

I wear a helmet and a bit of high viz but personally couldn't give a toss if anyone else does.

de_sisti

Carbonator wrote:

Does anyone actually think a helmet would help if your head was squished by a car?

Yes. Not me, but many people do.

mpatts

Bozman wrote:

Some folk being a little pedantic here.

You can't be a little pedantic.

jscl

De Sisti wrote:

Carbonator wrote:

Does anyone actually think a helmet would help if your head was squished by a car?

Yes.

EU Safety laws mean cycling helmets only need testing up to an impact of 12mph. Imagine being knocked off your bike at 30+mph and run over at that speed too. The truth is, the outcome would not depend on just wearing a helmet, but the actual helmet you chose to wear.

bendertherobot

Just take one comment. "Even if a helmet would help 1%.............."

In a car.......

As a pedestrian......

Getting out of the shower........

Buckie2k5

CiB wrote:

Glad you agree with what I said earlier there Buckie, that riding in a bunch sprint jostling for position requires a helmet, whereas a trundle around on a bike doesn't really.

Well if you consider that riding on the roads having a wee trundle is more dangerous than the tour de france maybe it is really needed.

VmanF3

Not really sure why so many people are so concerned about what other people do.

In my experience of life in general, most people don't seem to give a crap about anything anyone else does. Not sure why cycle helmets raises so much debate. It's not even your head it affects.

Bozman

Someone hit on this earlier, but is there a direct correlation between the helmet Gestapo and the number of years folk have been cycling?
People that have been cycling for 20, 30 or 40 years would have cycled for years without wearing a helmet(god knows how they survived), are these cyclists nonchalant about the helmet issue.

ballspondroad

My helmet did once save me from a falling conker and the foam insets absorb some sweat. It's also quite handy as an impromptu fruit basket if you come across something worth foraging.

veronese68

De Sisti wrote:

Carbonator wrote:

Does anyone actually think a helmet would help if your head was squished by a car?

Yes. Not me, but many people do.

I think most of the 'popular press' seem to believe this.

Anonymous

Bozman wrote:

People that have been cycling for 20, 30 or 40 years would have cycled for years without wearing a helmet(god knows how they survived)

Guessing the same way they would have survived if they had not worn a seat belt in a car for the same period of time (not that I am in favour of compulsory helmet wear by the way).

Anonymous

ballspondroad wrote:

My helmet did once save me from a falling conker and the foam insets absorb some sweat. It's also quite handy as an impromptu fruit basket if you come across something worth foraging.

Thats exactly what you want the actual usefulness of a helmet to be isn't it?

How would you prefer it to be?
Do you actually want to have an accident where you hit your head hard just to justify having a helmet?

If you think they are so pointless then sell it/bin it/give it away..
If you had actually ever needed it then I assume your post would be praising it instead of taking the pi55 out of it wouldn't it? If so then what exactly is the point of your post?

Oh, you forgot a couple of plus points.
It makes you look pro, and is a handy place to store your glasses

Roberto di Velo

I actually saw the Boardman piece when I was in the gym this morning, and had wondered what reaction his normal attire of black jacket, brogues and no helmet, would get. Now I know...

I rarely ever cycle without a helmet, but I 100% agree with Boardman's outlook that cycling should not be viewed as an inherently risky activity. I've actually been working off and on in Holland this year and can confirm that I never see Dutch people wearing a bike helmet.

Anonymous

I think you should view the risk of cycling as realistically as possible based on type of cycling and where you are doing it.
Its difficult to get it spot on though, so erring on the side of caution seems sensible.

Is black ever a good idea?
He is making a stupid point against HiViz by wearing black IMO.
There are lots of options in between. You want to be vaguely visible don't you?

The Dutch are a very different society to ours. Even if we copy all their roads (which will never happen) it will still be Brits (see BBC3/itv Be.) driving on them.

ugo.santalucia

Carbonator wrote:

The Dutch are a very different society to ours. Even if we copy all their roads (which will never happen) it will still be Brits (see BBC3/itv be) driving on them.

Cycling in Amsterdam (or any other Dutch town) is pretty scary, if you are not used to... there are bikes going all over the place and cycle lanes are often hard to understand when you get to a junction