Euro-pro helmet useage

[Boyd Speerschne]

While the new guidelines laid down by the UCI concerning helmet useage in the European peleton have
the best intentions, I'm concerned that the implementation of these intentions is kind of dubious.
To be specific, I think its kind of odd that they will allow the riders to take their helmets off on
uphill finishes.

How will they do this?

Its one thing to have one or two guys at a time take their helmets off, and take them back to the
team car. Its quite another to have the whole peleton (or what remains of it) take their helmets off
and try to hand them off. The logistics seem pretty complex. Will they just throw them to the
crowds? Will the domestiques earn their salary big time? What's the scoop?

- Boyd S.

 

[Alex Rodriguez]

In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
>While the new guidelines laid down by the UCI concerning helmet useage in the European peleton have
>the best intentions, I'm concerned that the implementation of these intentions is kind of dubious.
>To be specific, I think its kind of odd that they will allow the riders to take their helmets off
>on uphill finishes. How will they do this? Its one thing to have one or two guys at a time take
>their helmets off, and take them back to the team car. Its quite another to have the whole peleton
>(or what remains of it) take their helmets off and try to hand them off. The logistics seem pretty
>complex. Will they just throw them to the crowds? Will the domestiques earn their salary big time?
>What's the scoop?

Give em to your buddy or drape the helmet over your stem. Helmets don't weigh that much.
-----------------
Alex __O _-\<,_ (_)/ (_)

 

[Mike S.]

"Alex Rodriguez" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
> >While the new guidelines laid down by the UCI concerning helmet useage in the European peleton
> >have the best intentions, I'm concerned that the implementation of these intentions is kind of
> >dubious. To be specific, I think its kind of odd that they will allow the riders to take their
helmets
> >off on uphill finishes. How will they do this? Its one thing to have one or two guys at a time
> >take their helmets off,
and
> >take them back to the team car. Its quite another to have the whole peleton (or what remains of
> >it) take their helmets off and try to hand
them
> >off. The logistics seem pretty complex. Will they just throw them to
the
> >crowds? Will the domestiques earn their salary big time? What's the scoop?
>
> Give em to your buddy or drape the helmet over your stem. Helmets don't weigh that much.

So then wear the (expletive deleted) things!

Mike

 

[Kurgan Gringion]

"Mike S." <mikeshaw2@coxDOTnet> wrote in message news:wHXua.26495$eJ2.2580@fed1read07...
>
> "Alex Rodriguez" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
> > >While the new guidelines laid down by the UCI concerning helmet useage
in
> > >the European peleton have the best intentions, I'm concerned that the implementation of these
> > >intentions is kind of dubious. To be specific,
I
> > >think its kind of odd that they will allow the riders to take their
> helmets
> > >off on uphill finishes. How will they do this? Its one thing to have one or two guys at a time
> > >take their helmets off,
> and
> > >take them back to the team car. Its quite another to have the whole peleton (or what remains of
> > >it) take their helmets off and try to hand
> them
> > >off. The logistics seem pretty complex. Will they just throw them to
> the
> > >crowds? Will the domestiques earn their salary big time? What's the scoop?
> >
> > Give em to your buddy or drape the helmet over your stem. Helmets don't weigh that much.
>
> So then wear the (expletive deleted) things!

On a long, windless climb, the helmet impedes ventilation, hence the rule allowing them to be
ditched when the finish is at the top.

It's a reasonable rule and the riders at the front have good cause to ditch their helmets on the
final climb.

I'll guess that only riders in the front group will be throwing their helmets aside (like
waterbottles). The time of the rest of the riders isn't important and teams aren't going to want to
be carrying arounds stacks of replacement helmets.

 

[Callistus Valer]

> In the history of the previously helmetless TdF or Giro or Vuelta, can you think of any rider
> getting a head injury (that a helmet would have prevented) while going uphill on the final climb?
>

When I was in high school, a friend of mine, as he was walking to his car, slipped on some ice,
landed on his head and was killed instantly. All this, no air, it's too hot, is all bogus, and
you know it. Have everyone wear their helmets all of the time.

 

[Kurgan Gringion]

"Callistus Valerius" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> > In the history of the previously helmetless TdF or Giro or Vuelta, can
you
> > think of any rider getting a head injury (that a helmet would have prevented) while going uphill
> > on the final climb?
> >
>
> When I was in high school, a friend of mine, as he was walking to his car, slipped on some
> ice, landed on his head and was killed instantly. All this, no air, it's too hot, is all
> bogus, and you know it. Have everyone wear their helmets all of the time.

In the history of the previously helmetless TdF or Giro or Vuelta, can you think of any rider
getting a head injury (that a helmet would have prevented) while going uphill on the final climb?

 

[Bob McBreen]

Why would you call someone a dumbass?

"Kurgan Gringioni" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Qui si parla Campagnolo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > Kurgan-<< On a long, windless climb, the helmet impedes ventilation,
hence
> the
> > rule allowing them to be ditched when the finish is at the top.
> >
> > It's a reasonable rule and the riders at the front have good cause to
> ditch
> > their helmets on the final climb.
> >
> > Typical UCI non-speak...how fast was Kivilev going when he hit the
> pavement?
> > I guess the UCI needs another death before they grow a spine about
this...
>
>
>
>
> Hey dumbass -
>
> The climb has to be at least 5k in length, the finish has to be at the top of the climb, and the
> riders cannot ditch their helmets until there is a sign telling them it is OK to do so.
>
> In the history of the previously helmetless TdF or Giro or Vuelta, can you think of any rider
> getting a head injury (that a helmet would have prevented) while going uphill on the final climb?

 

[Dave]

"Bob McBreen" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:55bd4129c76c1e809356de58c12885a0@TeraNews...
> Why would you call someone a dumbass?

ummm cuz he can?

Dave

 

[John Forrest To]

"Callistus Valerius" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> When I was in high school, a friend of mine, as he was walking to his car, slipped on some ice,
> landed on his head and was killed instantly.

So have you pushing for helmet use when walking on ice?

JT

--
*******************************************
NB: reply-to address is munged

Visit http://www.jt10000.com
*******************************************

 

[Kurgan Gringion]

"Bob McBreen" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:55bd4129c76c1e809356de58c12885a0@TeraNews...
> Why would you call someone a dumbass?

Hey dumbass -

because it's rbr

 

[Dave]

"Kurgan Gringioni" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Bob McBreen" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:55bd4129c76c1e809356de58c12885a0@TeraNews...
> > Why would you call someone a dumbass?
>
>
>
> Hey dumbass -
>
> because it's rbr

Heh... Dave

 

[Kyle Legate]

Boyd Speerschneider wrote:
>
> Its one thing to have one or two guys at a time take their helmets off, and take them back to the
> team car. Its quite another to have the whole peleton (or what remains of it) take their helmets
> off and try to hand them off. The logistics seem pretty complex. Will they just throw them to the
> crowds? Will the domestiques earn their salary big time? What's the scoop?
>
Have you ever hung your helmet off your bars?

 

[Kyle Legate]

Kurgan Gringioni wrote:
>
> On a long, windless climb, the helmet impedes ventilation, hence the rule allowing them to be
> ditched when the finish is at the top.
>
> It's a reasonable rule and the riders at the front have good cause to ditch their helmets on the
> final climb.
>
The second last climb is just as hot as the last climb. Why have the UCI made such a silly arbitrary
distinction?

 

[Kyle Legate]

Kurgan Gringioni wrote:
>
> In the history of the previously helmetless TdF or Giro or Vuelta, can you think of any rider
> getting a head injury (that a helmet would have prevented) while going uphill on the final climb?
>
Can you think of a scenario where this has happened on the second last climb? Yet the riders are not
allowed to sling their helmets off their bars until the last climb. It simply does not make sense.

 

[Kurgan Gringion]

"Kyle Legate" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Kurgan Gringioni wrote:
> >
> > On a long, windless climb, the helmet impedes ventilation, hence the rule allowing them to be
> > ditched when the finish is at the top.
> >
> > It's a reasonable rule and the riders at the front have good cause to ditch their helmets on the
> > final climb.
> >
> The second last climb is just as hot as the last climb. Why have the UCI made such a silly
> arbitrary distinction?

1) They have to descent after the 2nd to last climb. Need a helmet for the descent.

2) the last climb is where they will go the hardest.

 

[Kyle Legate]

Kurgan Gringioni wrote:
> "Kyle Legate" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> Kurgan Gringioni wrote:
>>>
>>> On a long, windless climb, the helmet impedes ventilation, hence the rule allowing them to be
>>> ditched when the finish is at the top.
>>>
>>> It's a reasonable rule and the riders at the front have good cause to ditch their helmets on the
>>> final climb.
>>>
>> The second last climb is just as hot as the last climb. Why have the UCI made such a silly
>> arbitrary distinction?
>
>
> 1) They have to descent after the 2nd to last climb. Need a helmet for the descent.
>
> 2) the last climb is where they will go the hardest.
>
1. So they sling it off their stem and put it on at the top of the climb. If the rule allowing them
to take it off on the final climb is for heat considerations, it makes no sense to differentiate
where the climb appears in the race.

2. So? They go plenty hard up the other climbs as well. Do you think they don't get hot?

 

[Kurgan Gringion]

"Kyle Legate" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Kurgan Gringioni wrote:
> > "Kyle Legate" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> >> Kurgan Gringioni wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On a long, windless climb, the helmet impedes ventilation, hence the rule allowing them to be
> >>> ditched when the finish is at the top.
> >>>
> >>> It's a reasonable rule and the riders at the front have good cause to ditch their helmets on
> >>> the final climb.
> >>>
> >> The second last climb is just as hot as the last climb. Why have the UCI made such a silly
> >> arbitrary distinction?
> >
> >
> > 1) They have to descent after the 2nd to last climb. Need a helmet for the descent.
> >
> > 2) the last climb is where they will go the hardest.
> >
> 1. So they sling it off their stem and put it on at the top of the climb.
If
> the rule allowing them to take it off on the final climb is for heat considerations, it makes no
> sense to differentiate where the climb appears in the race.
>
> 2. So? They go plenty hard up the other climbs as well. Do you think they don't get hot?

Not as hot as the last climb.

They are trying to compromise with certain riders who otherwise may boycott the rule.

I think it makes sense. Wearing a helmet on the final climb isn't going to save anyone's life.

 

[Kyle Legate]

Kurgan Gringioni wrote:
>
> They are trying to compromise with certain riders who otherwise may boycott the rule.
>
If they boycott it they should be fined. Maybe the UCI could earmark some of the revenue for a 'help
save COAST' fund.

 

[Tom Kunich]

"Kurgan Gringioni" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Kyle Legate" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > Kurgan Gringioni wrote:
> > >
> > > On a long, windless climb, the helmet impedes ventilation, hence
the
> > > rule allowing them to be ditched when the finish is at the top.
> > >
> > > It's a reasonable rule and the riders at the front have good
cause to
> > > ditch their helmets on the final climb.
> > >
> > The second last climb is just as hot as the last climb. Why have
the UCI
> > made such a silly arbitrary distinction?
>
>
> 1) They have to descent after the 2nd to last climb. Need a helmet
for the
> descent.

After reading something like that perhaps I ought to also cover your bet.

> 2) the last climb is where they will go the hardest.

Yup, how about a box of Hammer Gel?