i'm only interested in our cohort

Dan,


Selfishly, yes, that's what most likely concerns us - what are the risks to cyclists on the road training for triathlons and cycling events?

The issue I see with this approach is that, while I ride to the rules of the road, and do everything in my power to not be an irritant to drivers, I know that, say down-town bike couriers, regularly flagrantly abuse and break the rules /laws of the road, and may also go out of their way to be belligerent with drivers! The issue here is that the driver only sees a CYCLIST - someone on two wheels. They don't break that down into the commutor, the bike courier, the triathlete, the roadie etc . . .

I am guessing that's why, while I am riding along safely and fully to the right, minding my own business, a motorist will pass me with the horn blaring, with window rolled down yelling at me to, "Get that F-ing bike off the road"! He (the motorist) may have been cut off by another cyclist, 5 minutes previously, and for good measure the cyclist gave him the finger and spat on his window as he rolled past!

I'm not justifying the actions of the motorist to me in anyway, just stating the reality of the situation. Based on experience, that motorist now thinks ALL people on two wheels are asses! He's wrong, but again, that is the real situation on the road!

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

Sorry Dan I applaud your effort but IMO this is one colossal waste of time. Too many variables and not enough reliable data. Each location a person rides has a different inherent risk level. How do you factor in location, time of day, riding ability, one's awareness, rider experience, and safety equipment used? It's your "Spock-like" brain trying to wrap around the nebulous dangers of riding one's bike on public roads.

You will find that most bike/car crashes basically come down to some version of "bad luck." Actually all accidents do. That is why they are semi random events. But, having data where you can differentiate among a number of factors will allow some categorization of variance in risk. Right now, many people posting here see it as binary - ride on the road = very risky - ride the trainer in the basement = safe. We all know intuitively that it is much more nuanced than that. But there is very little hard data on the range of risk out on the road.

For example, based on the generally personal experience hearing stories and paying attention to the news, In the past 2 years or so, have about a dozen sport rider type people that have been killed riding on fairly busy roads with high speed limits. On the other hand, in that same time period, I can not recall hearing about any sport rider type person being killed riding on low traffic roads with low speed limits (although I do know of several incidents where people have been hit and injured, some severely, on that type of road). Both have risks, but I'd be shocked if the data did not show that one had a higher risk of both accident and death than the other. It would be interesting, and valuable, to get that from "I heard some stories" to "these are the facts."

The one thing people are going to have to accept though is that whatever the stats show, all riding is not going to be equally safe and, it is unlikely that anything can be done to change that. Drivers will hit cyclists until the end of time. What we can change though is how WE as cyclists manage those risks, or, in some cases with good knowledge, make sound decisions to avoid some risks. Data will also help the process of educating drivers and maybe even designing safer roads. Data is never going to mean that no more cyclists will die but that does not make gathering it pointless.

Slowman wrote:

i'm only interested in our cohort, and i think we might be able to get a little closer to the goal because our cohort is much more tightly circumscribed than yours; and we have much better data on our folks because we aren't considering everyone aboard 2 wheels.

While you are correct that just looking at triathletes it is a much smaller cohort, I don't think you will be able to quantify it. How many people annually race in tris nationwide? What about people who might not race this year, but are still out training? Someone training for a road race, but has occasionally done tris in the past? A racer who is killed while commuting one day? Who do you count, and when do they count? There are too many variables to nail down.


Don't get me wrong, I think there could be value in this, but it would be a monumental undertaking - the type of thing that universities get grants worth hundreds of thousands of dollars to do and take years to perform.


In my mind what it really comes down to is that bicycling (whether training for a tri, out riding with your kids, going to the store, or riding to work) is actually quite safe. However, looking at our fatalities compared to some European countries, it could be much safer. What it will take to achieve rates similar to say the Netherlands is a substantial change in how we build roadway infrastructure, a change in US liability laws, and a change in our driving culture. Bicyclists should take prudent steps to ride safely and defensively (choose less busy roads when feasible, avoid routes going directly into the sun near sunrise and sunset, use lights...), but the fear of a serious crash should not keep people from riding.


Kevin

---

~Kevin

"How many people annually race in tris nationwide? What about people who might not race this year, but are still out training?"

this is our wheelhouse. this is what we calculate well.

"A racer who is killed while commuting one day? Who do you count, and when do they count? There are too many variables to nail down."

they count when they are killed while riding during a race or during a training ride, or a pleasure ride, or commuting though i think that's rare among our cohort.

we'll see. do you think you'd know it if one of those in your social circle died while riding a bike? i'm wagering that we have enough social reach to nail down every cycling death among those in the broader triathlon community over the past 3 years.

"What it will take to achieve rates similar to say the Netherlands is a substantial change in how we build roadway infrastructure, a change in US liability laws, and a change in our driving culture."

i agree.

"the fear of a serious crash should not keep people from riding."

also agree. but like shark attacks we won't have a strong narrative demonstrating this until we show the actual probability. if we can show the probability (in our cohort) and drive that probability down through our own behavior, then we won't have people fearing a serious crash enough to keep people from riding. right now, 10 percent of our readers have that irrational fear that keeps them from riding. how high does that number need to get before you think it's time to try to properly gauge the risk?

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

All good points Dan. My biggest concern is that training miles may end up undercounted (perhaps significantly), which will over state the (extremely minimal) risk. I don't mean to dissuade you from doing the work, just trying to make it clear that it may be more challenging than anticipated!


Kevin

---

~Kevin

Hello Andrewmc and All,

Good points you have mentioned ....

Also worth noting the most motorist/cyclist fatalities are the cyclist being struck from the rear (Cross/Fisher data) and:

.... there are probably more triathletes riding where there are few intersections (for training) ...... so for us our chances of being nailed fatally from behind are actually greater than the 40% share ....... since that number is for all classes of cyclists.

http://bikeleague.org/...EBC_report_final.pdf

Approximately 40% of fatalities in our data
with reported collision types were rear end collisions.


How to reduce these crashes?

Use the old fighter pilot adage ...... Check your 6 .... maintain situational awareness.


Considering that the DOT reports over 5000 police reported motorist rear end crashes each DAY and surmise from insurance data there are many more rear end crashes ..... (this is the largest class of motorist crashes)


'Streetcar Named Desire' .... You are not Blanche DuBois: "Whoever you are, I have always depended on the kindness of strangers."

you cannot depend on the motorist for your safety.


The new high intensity bicycle red tail lights and more sophisticated devices like the Garmin Varia combo taillight and rear facing radar will help .... and what is also needed is a cyclist rear view mirror (perhaps incorporated into the helmet like motorcycle helmets ) that does not have the 'Fred' look.

http://www.reevu.com/

"Reevu Helmets was established in 1999 after nearly a decade of research and development. Their Mission: “Improve the safety of sports and recreational enthusiasts around the world by applying rear vision technology to help prevent accidents.”"

http://www.dcrainmaker.com/...ia-radar-review.html

[on a side note .......... the Garmin Varia is a great way to see your Power, Cadence, HR, Speed, and other data without any devices cluttering up your bike cockpit ..... keep a Garmin 520 or other in your pocket and the info is relayed and displayed by your face .... I have been using it for awhile now and it works great!]

The basic problem .... just as with aircraft, boats, and even spacecraft .... is maintaining separation .... in our case separation from motorists.

Look for ways to maintain your separation .... support physically separated bike lanes, motor vehicles with auto braking (that senses cyclists and pedestrians), riding where motorists are not ........ or where motorists are at slower speeds ...... locate and be aware of motorists that can breach your separation ... and be prepared to take evasive action.

---

Cheers, Neal

+1 mph Faster