Cycling UK Forum

squeaker wrote:Looking at the bunch sprint pile-ups in both pro-races, maybe a good job they were wearing plastic hats?

I was talking about the mass participation ride, not the races.

100%JR wrote:Why do this minority feel the need to ram home their(often misguided) opinions on others.
Look we get it you choose not to wear one,many choose to wear one.
Leave it at that

Last Tuesday I unexpectedly met a colleague when we changed trains (onto a main line so we had a rare chance to have a good natter). I put my bike in the bike space and we sat down. After a few work related comments and mutual explanations as to where we were heading, she asked if I wore a helmet. I hadn't even mentioned the bike. There were no further questions, no interest in the bike (it's a folder and usually gets some comments from passers-by), no questions about how I found travelling or working with one. Nothing.

Can you see why I'm sympathetic to the OP's point?

squeaker wrote:Looking at the bunch sprint pile-ups in both pro-races, maybe a good job they were wearing plastic hats?

Or maybe they would make less hot-headed decisions and take more care if they only had the old-style cotton caps or leather sausage hairnets? All we know is that top-level UCI races have not become less injurious since they exploited some rider deaths to force through a long-resisted helmet rule.

Helmet threads always seem to be started by the HUGE minority that don't wear them
Why do this minority feel the need to ram home their(often misguided) opinions on others.

Why do the helmet-(ab)using minority (and it has been a minority every time it has been measured in almost any country without compulsion) feel the need to deny that riders with plastic-free heads are the majority?

bovlomov wrote:It would be surprising if Boardman agreed to ride in an event where helmets were compulsory, especially as his decision not to wear one would be so obvious.

Why? He owned a plastic headgear maker and agreed to be an ambassador for the organisation which has done most to force plastic onto more heads (British Cycling, with their multitude of helmet-forcing rides), so I would not be at all surprised.

mjr wrote:

bovlomov wrote:It would be surprising if Boardman agreed to ride in an event where helmets were compulsory, especially as his decision not to wear one would be so obvious.

Why? He owned a plastic headgear maker and agreed to be an ambassador for the organisation which has done most to force plastic onto more heads (British Cycling, with their multitude of helmet-forcing rides), so I would not be at all surprised.

Then not wearing a helmet seems to be an odd choice.

horizon wrote:

100%JR wrote:Why do this minority feel the need to ram home their(often misguided) opinions on others.
Look we get it you choose not to wear one,many choose to wear one.
Leave it at that

Last Tuesday I unexpectedly met a colleague when we changed trains (onto a main line so we had a rare chance to have a good natter). I put my bike in the bike space and we sat down. After a few work related comments and mutual explanations as to where we were heading, she asked if I wore a helmet. I hadn't even mentioned the bike. There were no further questions, no interest in the bike (it's a folder and usually gets some comments from passers-by), no questions about how I found travelling or working with one. Nothing.

Can you see why I'm sympathetic to the OP's point?

Not really.

softlips wrote:

Last Tuesday I unexpectedly met a colleague when we changed trains (onto a main line so we had a rare chance to have a good natter). I put my bike in the bike space and we sat down. After a few work related comments and mutual explanations as to where we were heading, she asked if I wore a helmet. I hadn't even mentioned the bike. There were no further questions, no interest in the bike (it's a folder and usually gets some comments from passers-by), no questions about how I found travelling or working with one. Nothing.

Can you see why I'm sympathetic to the OP's point?

Not really.

It's because people's interest in the wearing of helmets is out of context. For the colleague I spoke to, her reference point wasn't her bicycle or cycling but something that came from somewhere else, presumably the non-cycling media. The OP felt that the number of helmets didn't reflect reality or normality: it's a social fetish. Helmets might be useful, they might not; but when they become the only focus, then something is askew. If a work colleague of yours comes back from holiday, you don't ask, "Did you check the safety card on the flight?" and mention nothing else. It's all very, very odd, almost weird in fact.

squeaker wrote:Looking at the bunch sprint pile-ups in both pro-races, maybe a good job they were wearing plastic hats?

I watched the ladies crash in slow motion, I didn't see any heads being struck except one rider would have not banged their heads if they'd have not worn a helmet, she got a minor knock to the helmet because of the increased circumference and likely the extra kinetic energy strapped to her head due to her being launched toward the ground. This is even more noticeable in children.

Maybe, just maybe Kirsten Wild wouldn't have ridden so recklessly if she hadn't been wearing a magic hat, maybe that's why we see so many crashes and indeed deaths/serious injuries post mandatory wearing in competition riding than before despite better brakes, grippier tyres, on course safety protocols and disc brakes
Helmets have made matters worse in competition cycling, it's patently obvious to see to the naked eye when comparing how ridiculously often they crash due to plastic hat wearing. The one study that interviewed pro racers showed a huge jump in traumatic injuries (of all body parts) from non wearing era to post helmet rule era, as I said, that's despite the increased safety protocols and increased braking/tyre traction efficiencies.

horizon wrote:It's because people's interest in the wearing of helmets is out of context. For the colleague I spoke to, her reference point wasn't her bicycle or cycling but something that came from somewhere else, presumably the non-cycling media. The OP felt that the number of helmets didn't reflect reality or normality: it's a social fetish. Helmets might be useful, they might not; but when they become the only focus, then something is askew. If a work colleague of yours comes back from holiday, you don't ask, "Did you check the safety card on the flight?" and mention nothing else. It's all very, very odd, almost weird in fact.

We should set-up a "National PPE Day", where every responsible citizen should check that their neighbour/colleague/sister has worn adequeate PPE for every task and/or journey.

- Did you wear gloves to washup?
- How was your holiday? Did Easyjet supply a decent helmet?