NO HELMET = NO RIDE

[whoof]

The event I posted to and others like it have no difficulty filling their spaces either.
So that is 200 catered for out of a population of 180,000.
I am not saying that any* or all of those 180,000 would have been tempted to give it a go without the £40 or helmet. That would be as much jumping to conclusions as assuming that 200 turning up and possibly another 100 being rejected shows that there were no barriers in the eyes of the other 180,000.
As self-selected sample of roughly .1% of the population.

*With the obvious exception of one individual.

This event like many others include a fee. Part of which is for insurance to ride a bike. In an Audax your can either be insured as a member of AUK, CUK or pay an additional fee to ride. NO PAY INSURANCE = NO RIDE. There is no option to take out this insurance if you wish or just ride if you don't want it.

Why is paying this insurance not a barrier?

If cycling is to be an inclusive and a 'normal' activity why pay for insurance? I went for a walk on Sunday I didn't take out insurance.

There are some who would like to impose the wearing of helmets for all cycling. As there are those who would like all cyclist to be insured and carry number plates. In addition to the insurance imposed on other events the one you linked to would also expect you to ride around displaying a number. Do you not feel that this is a form of 'creep' to impose insurance and registration on all cyclist?

The only reason someone would accept one and rail against the other is the 'H' word.

[meic]

The only reason someone would accept one and rail against the other is the 'H' word.

That is wrong for a whole host of reasons, the only one of which that matters here, is that Audaxes were not being offered as a Healthy Activity on the Council's healthy lifestyle site.

Others are that I do object in principle to the AUK £2 insurance fee but in reality it is more of a member's discount on an already very cheap entry fee. The other activities will just have it buried in the £40 or £5 licence with no option to avoid it.
I have known one person who I had almost talked into an Audax have the additional £2 as the straw that broke the camel's back. Though most of the expense was about the logistics of getting to the Audax.
I dont have to pay the £2 myself, so it isnt a problem for me personally.
It is only a problem for new entrants and AUK has to balance attracting newcomers against not making members disadvantaged, which is their decision to make.

[gaz]

Carmarthenshire Council do seem to promote triathlon equivalents of a permanent audax http://www.discovercarmarthenshire.com/ ... thlon.html

Despite stating

... how you do them is entirely up to you!

there's an explicit request for helmet wearing.

Once you’ve dried off, don your helmet ...

No marshalls to provide enforcement so the first statement is over-riding .

[gaz]

Remember I said it was being pushed under a "healthy living campaign".

The website linked in the OP: http://www.healthylifeactivities.co.uk/ ... -questions has an "About Us" page which makes it clear the event is run by a private enterprise.

As Chairman of Clwb Triathlon Llanelli I organised races between 2001 – 2010. In 2011 I decided to establish a Non profit organisation called Healthy Life Activities / Gweithgareddau Bywyd Iach to ensure that the events continued to be organised in Carmarthenshire.

It would be interesting to see how Carmarthenshire CC are placing the event and promoting it to the public, do you have a link?

[Graham]

Ghetto material methinks ?

[mjr]

Why is paying this insurance not a barrier?

I think it is and it shouldn't be charged if the event is part of a public-funded project.

But then, I take part in group rides that don't require registration and are free at the point of pedalling (we do ask for donations occasionally), so my actions agree with my words. I think all local public-funded rides here are also free, such as the rides in Norfolk Trails's Walking and Cycling Festival. Norfolk is actually getting this aspect right IMO. Carmarthen isn't.

Do you not feel that this is a form of 'creep' to impose insurance and registration on all cyclist?

The only reason someone would accept one and rail against the other is the 'H' word.

I don't think it's an attempt to get cyclists used to registration as much as it's a way to track who has arrived back at the finish.

I also think it's fair to rail against these activities because of any clothing or cycle type restrictions, quite aside from any other fees. Don't you?

[mjr]

Ghetto material methinks ?

Please don't give into a minority who wants to make this all about one aspect of the exclusivity. There are other threads in the ghetto already discussing that aspect.

The thread title was a poor choice, but the general problems of sportification and unnecessary exclusions are a barrier to improving public health with cycling more widely which I'd like to discuss anyway.

[mjr]

It would be interesting to see how Carmarthenshire CC are placing the event and promoting it to the public, do you have a link?

http://visit.carmarthenshire.gov.uk/lat ... r-fun.html was the 2015 edition. I'm not sure the county council is sponsoring the 2016 one ("Discover Carmarthenshire" is shown under "Links", not "Sponsor Links"), or if it's only sponsored by Carmarthen town council.

[gaz]

Thanks, that looks very much like a "What's on" page rather than "Council led/promoted Public Health Activities". I'll wait to see what meic comes up with.

[mjr]

Thanks, that looks very much like a "What's on" page rather than "Council led/promoted Public Health Activities". I'll wait to see what meic comes up with.

Personally, I don't much mind whether it's coming from public health funding or other council funding. I'd much rather they promoted more open events.

[wahoofish]

and I never rode an event where a helmet wasn't compulsory or at a bike park where it wasn't compulsory. Thus I would not agree that the requirement prevents people taking up cycling, putting aside the effectiveness argument.

Shouldn't you try an event unhelmeted before dismissing it and drawing bogus conclusions? You might even like the greater diversity typical of such non-sports events!

That wasn't the point of my post. I was just arguing the point that insisting on helmets will prevent the growth of cycling. I don't personally give a [inappropriate word removed] if you choose to wear a helmet or not.

[mjr]

and I never rode an event where a helmet wasn't compulsory or at a bike park where it wasn't compulsory. Thus I would not agree that the requirement prevents people taking up cycling, putting aside the effectiveness argument.

Shouldn't you try an event unhelmeted before dismissing it and drawing bogus conclusions? You might even like the greater diversity typical of such non-sports events!

That wasn't the point of my post. I was just arguing the point that insisting on helmets will prevent the growth of cycling.

And the point I'm making is that "I never rode an event where a helmet wasn't compulsory or at a bike park where it wasn't compulsory" does not support your point in any way.

Also, I think we're arguing that insisting on helmets or other unnecessary sports frippery will hinder the growth of cycling. It may not be sufficient to prevent growth, as we're starting from a very low level... but it still could. For example, helmet promotion is widespread along Lincolnshire local government and that's an area with some of the largest decreases in cycling, despite already below-average levels, as described by Bez under the heading "Not just danger" on http://beyondthekerb.org.uk/2016/09/23/the-lions-share/

Is it really not obvious that each extra cost put in the way of people cycling reduces the probability of them doing so?

[meic]

Remember I said it was being pushed under a "healthy living campaign".

The website linked in the OP: http://www.healthylifeactivities.co.uk/ ... -questions has an "About Us" page which makes it clear the event is run by a private enterprise.

As Chairman of Clwb Triathlon Llanelli I organised races between 2001 – 2010. In 2011 I decided to establish a Non profit organisation called Healthy Life Activities / Gweithgareddau Bywyd Iach to ensure that the events continued to be organised in Carmarthenshire.

It would be interesting to see how Carmarthenshire CC are placing the event and promoting it to the public, do you have a link?

No, I was mistaken about that. They have a logo close enough to the Council one, are running an event (The Mayor's race) which I thought was a Council run event and call themselves "HealthyLife Activities", so I jumped to a wrong conclusion about who they were and what they are for.
As it is a charity based around Triathlon but just branching out a bit, they have no more responsibility for the County's Health than I do, they can insist on people wearing Red Noses if they want.
I have an issue with the exclusive Sportification of healthy living but that doesnt extend to interfering with any sporty minded people arranging events in their own particular way and reaching out to attract to others even with restrictions.
I can quite relate to what the man said in his introduction and admire his efforts, just a pity he is a helmet zealot (to return the word in a more suitable place), that is par for the course.

Thanks Gaz for the link to the "Permanents" the first is on my doorstep, I would be more likely to do a DIY version of it which would utilise Llandysul swimming baths instead of the canoeists' lake.
It would also involve getting properly changed in the changing rooms, I certainly am not proper Triathlon material.

[100%JR]

I used to have a "No helmet-no ride" Policy when I was leading Forum MTB rides(not this Forum but a few MTB Specific Forums I was/am a member of).These were all informal meets,no money/fees/insurance etc it was just our rule.We did have riders turn up a few times but they never left the car park(with us at least).
Wearing a helmet is personal preference,I always do Road,CX or MTB but if you're out MTBing with us you wear one or you don't join us.Simple.
I don't want or need the responsibility and certainly don't want to have to explain to Mountain Rescue/Emergency Services why someones head is broken halfway down Snowden/Helvellyn/Ben Lomond etc

[mjr]

Wearing a helmet is personal preference,I always do Road,CX or MTB but if you're out MTBing with us you wear one or you don't join us.

If you're imposing it on others, how is that personal preference?

Simple.
I don't want or need the responsibility and certainly don't want to have to explain to Mountain Rescue/Emergency Services why someones head is broken halfway down Snowden/Helvellyn/Ben Lomond etc

Unless you were insisting on Snell B95 or similar high spec helmets, in date and correctly fitted, then you were probably about as likely to be doing that as if no one was using helmets. Typical road helmets aren't tested for MTB situations.