Bike Snob NYC

[cycle tramp]

It wouldn’t have been the falling off a bike that might have made an ass of them, it would have been the doctrinaire preaching about not wearing a helmet, followed by falling off and banging their head that would have made an ass of them.

Are you suggesting that if a cyclist preaches about being pro-helmet, but dies in a collision that they too are an ass?

[Nearholmer]

No.

Neither am I suggesting any other thing I haven’t said, just to save you asking.

I’m not really sure why my synopsis is so controversial; it’s a synopsis of what the author took vast amounts of verbiage to say.

“…… you can be sure that one of the foremost things on my mind was, “Boy, if I bash my skull in, I’m gonna look like a real buttock-orifice.”…….” (Which the auto-prude has altered slightly).

“At the same time, I now realize that in being so doctrinaire about it I’m making exactly the same mistake as the helmet zealots……”

[Bmblbzzz]

I found the analysis of decisions that could have been taken (post facto...) to mitigate or eliminate the fall quite interesting. And the conclusion that in future he will (try to) wear a helmet when in lycra roadie mode and not when in casual mode seems reasonable (though leaves a lot unaddressed: what about touring? what about off-road, both in competitive and casual modes?)

[Bmblbzzz]

It wouldn’t have been the falling off a bike that might have made an ass of them, it would have been the doctrinaire preaching about not wearing a helmet, followed by falling off and banging their head that would have made an ass of them.

Up to a point, Lord Copper.
I would be very surprised if you found anyone who told you it's vital to wear a helmet for foot-based orienteering. I wouldn't be surprised if any suggestion one did would be widely countered that you absolutely don't need a helmet for foot based orienteering.
On one occasion I was running along, looking down at my map, and totally failed to notice a low tree bough that I then banged my head against at running speed. It really hurt. It would have hurt less had I been wearing a helmet. Right then and there, I wished I had been. Yet after the event I still say you absolutely don't need a helmet for foot based orienteering.

Pete.

I'm sure someone is recommending them. Probably not someone who does orienteering though. Although here's a helmet specifically described as for orienteering (looks kind of like a rock climbing helmet to me): https://shop.teamwendy.com/collections/orienteering

And here's a helmet for pedestrians against "struck by vehicle" incidents, albeit in very different circumstances:
https://www.respondersafety.com/news/ne ... published/

It has been 4 years since the City of Lubbock, TX lost two public safety personnel in a catastrophic struck-by-vehicle incident while emergency personnel were working at a previous crash scene. Lubbock Fire Rescue Lieutenant Eric Hill and Lubbock Police Department Officer Nicholas Renya were killed at the scene. Lubbock Fire rescue Firefighter Matt Dawson was also struck by the same vehicle and suffered a significant traumatic brain injury along with many other injuries but initially survived that crash on Jan. 11th, 2020. FF Dawson unfortunately passed away in November of 2023. His death was classified as line-of-duty death (LODD). Both Lt. Hill and FF Dawson were wearing their structural firefighting helmets at the time of the incident, but their helmets failed them. The force of the impact knocked their helmets off their heads, thereby providing zero protection.

It's also common to see (in the UK) adults with a high chance of falling, particularly those with eg learning disabilities thus deemed not able to make their own decisions, wearing helmets (and hi-viz jackets) when walking down the street with their carers. Given the clear direction of travel, I wouldn't rule out seeing helmets on foot orienteering participants some day. Hopefully they'll remain optional though...

[cycle tramp]

No.

Neither am I suggesting any other thing I haven’t said, just to save you asking.

I’m not really sure why my synopsis is so controversial; it’s a synopsis of what the author took vast amounts of verbiage to say.

“…… you can be sure that one of the foremost things on my mind was, “Boy, if I bash my skull in, I’m gonna look like a real buttock-orifice.”…….” (Which the auto-prude has altered slightly).

“At the same time, I now realize that in being so doctrinaire about it I’m making exactly the same mistake as the helmet zealots……”

I think that's a fair comment...
As someone who aspires to write better, I'm always interested in the situation that two people can read the same book and take two (slightly) different views of it (depending on how the content resonates with the views and experience of the readers).
The quotes above are part of BikeSnob NYC writings, and clearly its what has resonated with yourself, as previously evidenced by my irksome posts - for which I apologise. I suspect the reason why they may resonate with yourself, and I apologise I get the next bit wrong, is that you believe that cycling safety probably involves more helmet wearing.
However from the article, my own synopsis was a writer exploring why they came off, which covered things like road and riding conditions, the bike used and the route taken. The reason why I came away with this synopsis is that I come from the Ian Mutch school of road safety, in which helmets play a consideration, but aren't perhaps as imprtant as the bicycle itself or the route or even awareness of the conditions in which you happen to ride.

On an emotional level I have to admit that I remain slightly annoyed, that to me, the first few posts where dismissive of the article, rather than what I had hope would be a thread in which various factors of any bicycle spill could ve discussed further - but that has always been my annoyance with anyone who believes that safety can only be achieved by strapping a foam bowl to your head. If you like - safety that is purchased, either than safety that is achieved through clear and considered thinking.

[Nearholmer]

you believe that cycling safety probably involves more helmet wearing

More helmet wearing than what?

More people wearing them?

Each person wearing more than one?

Seriously though, cycling safely involves a host of things, many of which depend on the environment, and the type of cycling.

Personally, I nearly always wear a helmet, because in the event that I fall off it might offer some useful protection, it is very unlikely indeed that it increases the probability of me falling off, it is very hard to think of a credible scenario in which it would worsen the consequences of me falling off, and it’s good at soaking-up thwacks from low-hanging branches. Sometimes, if I’m only making a very short trip at very low speed, I don’t bother, and sometimes when it’s absolutely baking hot I wear a wide-brimmed hat instead, because the risk of heat exhaustion/stroke seems greater than that of falling off.

[pjclinch]

Personally, I nearly always wear a helmet, because in the event that I fall off it might offer some useful protection, it is very unlikely indeed that it increases the probability of me falling off, it is very hard to think of a credible scenario in which it would worsen the consequences of me falling off,

Actually it's quite easy. Because a helmet makes the head bigger it increases the chances of hitting your head at all, and it creates a bigger lever to twist the neck/spine. I'm not saying that's especially likely, and it doesn't stop me from wearing one, but it's certainly credible (there is work that suggests a tangible increase of neck injuries with wearing, but all the reasons that make proving them great hard also tend to make proving them bad is hard).

A helmet would credibly offer useful protection in a trip or fall, or a car crash. Yet the same reasoning doesn't apply for those, suggesting culture (i.e., what everyone around us is doing) is a very significant factor in our notional risk assessments and rationalisations.

Pete.

[853]

On an emotional level I have to admit that I remain slightly annoyed, that to me, the first few posts where dismissive of the article, rather than what I had hope would be a thread in which various factors of any bicycle spill could ve discussed further - but that has always been my annoyance with anyone who believes that safety can only be achieved by strapping a foam bowl to your head. If you like - safety that is purchased, either than safety that is achieved through clear and considered thinking.

What did you really expect? You started the thread with a title Bike Snob NYC, yet you hoped for a discussion on something different?

You also said that it was ".. probably one of the better pieces of writing about helmets and bike safety", when I would describe it as garbage (forum rules prevent me from using my word of choice for articles such as this) and a waste of my time reading it

..its interesting take on what goes through all our minds after a spill and probably one of the better pieces of writing about helmets and bike safety https://bikesnobnyc.com/2026/01/06/taki ... more-39827

[cycle tramp]

You also said that it was ".. probably one of the better pieces of writing about helmets and bike safety", when I would describe it as garbage (forum rules prevent me from using my word of choice for articles such as this) and a waste of my time reading it

Given your previous posts... I would be very surprised if you had found it insightful or useful especially as you've made your latest point through an emotive position (describing the post as 'garbage') rather than through an intellectual position ('i found the author's point to be weak because......')

However I still like it, there should be an encouragement to critique any fall, as to the events leading to it, rather than simply 'should have worn a helmet'. Especially in the weather conditions that early January brings..
Because riding a bike on a trainer, rather than outdoors is dull and boring

[853]

However I still like it, there should be an encouragement to critique any fall, as to the events leading to it, rather than simply 'should have worn a helmet'. Especially in the weather conditions that early January brings..
Because riding a bike on a trainer, rather than outdoors is dull and boring

You're perfectly entitled to like it, and you're perfectly entitled to pay the suggested $5 a month if you want. But let's not be under any illusion as to what it is you're reading; it's someone trying to make a living by producing a screen full of words, when they haven't got much to say, to try and convince some readers to pay $5 a month.

You can critique a fall as much as you like. If you've been reading the posts in this section carefully, however, you'll realise that every crash/incident is different and involves multiple factors in a permutation that you'll probably never experience again

[cycle tramp]

You can critique a fall as much as you like. If you've been reading the posts in this section carefully, however, you'll realise that every crash/incident is different and involves multiple factors in a permutation that you'll probably never experience again

Thank you, I intend to. But you can't really believe that each clash is entirely different that there are not similar underlying issues... ..?
..the last four falls i had where due to loss of contact either on the front or back wheel... so I look a bit harder at the road surface, think about the weather and in some circumstances use the pair of schwalbe 365 tyres.. and in doing so reduce those incidents...
Other reasons why a bike rider may fall (without collision with a vehicle) may involve component failure, inappropriate speed, or having impaired visibility....

Collisions with other vehicles may involve any of the above, with either party being at fault, but may also include failure to judge the others speed correctly, failure to communicate and failure to understand intentions.

The basis of understanding why a collision occured, is the first step to preventing it in the future.

[cycle tramp]

...the idea you walk away from any incident thinking 'nothing to learn from that'* makes it very possible that the same situation may repeat itself.

Your brain is the greatest safety device there is, it can forsee and predict hazardous issues, indeed it may be one of the reasons in evolution as to why a brain was evolved.
However if you're not going to use it, what's the point in protecting it?

(*which is different from the point of view of crash investigators, police and heath and safety operatives, to name but a few).

[Nearholmer]

There’s a great deal that experienced cyclists can teach novice cyclists about how to avoid sudden unplanned dismounts, and even experienced cyclists can learn from one another.

But, publishing vast quantities of pompous windbaggery is a very poor way to pass on insights of any kind. The useful points about avoiding falling off are right at the end of that article, beyond the point at which most readers will have lost patience with it, or slipped into a light coma.

[cycle tramp]

There’s a great deal that experienced cyclists can teach novice cyclists about how to avoid sudden unplanned dismounts, and even experienced cyclists can learn from one another.

But, publishing vast quantities of pompous windbaggery is a very poor way to pass on insights of any kind. The useful points about avoiding falling off are right at the end of that article, beyond the point at which most readers will have lost patience with it, or slipped into a light coma.

See..853, that is proper intelligent criticism. None of this "its a pile of pooh" stuff. And a nice reminder to anyone involved in writing that Brevity is King

[853]

There’s a great deal that experienced cyclists can teach novice cyclists about how to avoid sudden unplanned dismounts, and even experienced cyclists can learn from one another.

But, publishing vast quantities of pompous windbaggery is a very poor way to pass on insights of any kind. The useful points about avoiding falling off are right at the end of that article, beyond the point at which most readers will have lost patience with it, or slipped into a light coma.

See..853, that is proper intelligent criticism. None of this "its a pile of pooh" stuff. And a nice reminder to anyone involved in writing that Brevity is King

..its interesting take on what goes through all our minds after a spill and probably one of the better pieces of writing about helmets and bike safety https://bikesnobnyc.com/2026/01/06/taki ... more-39827

It's an awful lot of words for saying very little. Presumably they get paid by the word