Are you referring to the IRONMAN "clean-up crew" that killed the athlete at Mont Tremblant? Do you have any "facts" about whether the driver of the car was an employee or volunteer? Or this is just your general opinion?

I posted a video here to show the pure lack of training that IRONMAN Volunteers (who drive on the bike course) were given at IM Arizona: https://www.youtube.com/...amp;feature=youtu.be

Facts are facts.

Not about assigning fault, this is a discussion about what IM can do minimize risk (improve safety). When people are getting killed left and right during the race, in at least one instance by a vehicle driven by IRONMAN itself, it's important to have this discussion.

Also, you are mistaken regarding "it's Ironman." The word appears in all caps "IRONMAN" throughout IRONMAN's website. Here is just one example: https://www.ironman.com/...e.aspx#axzz62lweycHN

Finally, if you don't feel that a discussion about improving safety is for you, I suggest you just not open the thread.

Have everyone just bring their smart trainer and ride on Zwift in the climate controlled hotel ballroom?

---

Anne Barnes
ABBikefit, Ltd
FIST/SICI/FIST DOWN DEEP
X/Y Coordinator
abbikefit@gmail.com

You’re talking about two different classes of vehicle.

Bike SAG, which is usually in charge of patrolling the course and picking up DNFs and assisting with bike mechanics, are often volunteers. That’s the video you link to above.

Bike course clean-up for WTC owned and operated events (and to be honest, most RDs who know what they are doing), which is dealing with clearing the course to re-open to traffic, is driven by a W2 for insurance purposes. Those actually picking items up are a W2 or 1099, as you don’t want volunteer labor performing an essential function of the organization alongside paid labor in order to avoid any claims of wage and hour violations.

---

----------------------------------
Editor-in-Chief, Slowtwitch.com | Twitter

When people are getting killed left and right during the race, in at least one instance by a vehicle driven by IRONMAN itself, it's important to have this discussion.

——

Stick to the facts #1 rule when wanting to have a valid conversation! Exaggerating only makes you look foolish.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

Stupid? That is a simple descent. If that causes a triathlete problems, then they should really find another sport.

---

---

"Only those who risk going too far can possibly find out how far one can go." T.S. Elliot | Cycle2Tri.com
Sponsors: SciCon | | Every Man Jack

You do seem to go big with your claims (killed left and right)... For 99.999% of riders in races, there is nothing that comes close to a really threatening situation. Having raced Boulder twice, there was nothing on that course that was dangerous. Riding along the road where the rider was killed was a short section and there was plenty of space to ride and pass. What happened was a terrible accident, but one that was more case of being in the perfect place at the perfect time, rather than a systemic breakdown of safety.

---

---

"Only those who risk going too far can possibly find out how far one can go." T.S. Elliot | Cycle2Tri.com
Sponsors: SciCon | | Every Man Jack

I want to make sure we are talking about the same portion- usually done in reverse even by the locals- the one mile 12-14 grade ascent/ decent between the town of Gunlock and Veyo up and around the backside of Snow Canyon? Most of the time you'd climb the wall. Not come cruising down the straight away from Veyo, making a 90 degree turn when the road turns and if you went straight there is a drop off of approximately 500 feet, then a narrow one mile steep decent, then an immediate 180 degree turn at the bottom. That decent with 1800 competitors, with no guard rails, is potentially dangerous- especially if there will be allowable passing.

I lived in Ivins, I've ridden that loop many, many times, and I know that area well, and even I think that it poses a potential risk that is unecessary. The safe route would have the riders climb the wall twice like the old course did. And heaven forbid you find yourself racing that portion like they plan it and another competitor makes a dumb move that forces you to make an unecessary safety choice with potentially terrible consequences.

I have no opinion on the OP, whether he has a bone to pick with IM, whether he's racist, etc. I responded purely to the original post and read it like I've explained- how could risks be reduced- that Veyo wall example is low hanging fruit in my opinion.

Edit: I have some possible understanding as to why they have decided to have the course set up this way - but it's purely conjecture and I have not had conversations with anyone to confirm it- participants enjoy climbing Snow Canyon, and this time around they figured out how to allow them to do so and have the required overall bike distance. I believe that they could have them do so, go back down the canyon , then complete the loop up the wall instead of down it- same distance- is it harder? Yes. Is it safer, yes.

---

"There are two ways to slide easily through life- to believe everything and to doubt everything- both ways save us from thinking "- Korzbyski

How ironic that you post the bit I’ve quoted which contradicts your thread title. As you well know it is a fact that unfortunately the cyclist mentioned died in a accident when they left the bike course. But hey ho let’s just ignore that whole previous thread that you were involved in.

On a side note they have barriers at the start of the bike course at Ironman Wales and a guy did himself some damage crashing into those a few years ago. I don’t think you can cover all eventualities.

Video added for more context...

As an aside, those cheese-grater barriers with the angled metal feet are the subject of some recent controversy in the roadie world. The little feet are great for catching your shoe and taking you down. Granted, that roadie use is way different...in barrier sections they tend to be going 30+ MPH 5-6 wide.

A couple of things I want to point out here.
1. I'm pretty sure the experiences of various racers can be different depending on when they pass through a portion of the course. e.g. Fast swimmers get a cleaner course, slower swimmers do not, real back of the packers may again get a course empty of other riders, but littered with things that fell off the bikes ahead of them (e.g. bottles, etc.).

2. Sometimes cones get knocked over, and sometimes those cones end up in a position that actually does lead to significant width reduction for the allowed lane of travel. If this is what a rider finds when they are the only cyclist present, this is no different than any other road debris spotted with enough time to react safely. But if it's spotted at the last minute b/c the cyclist is passing a stream of slower cyclists, it really is a different situation with possibly little time and little real estate to react safely.

I'm not too happy to contribute to the OP's clear agenda-driven ax swinging at all things Mdot, however I take the topic of bike course safety seriously. I don't think some of these fatality locations are inherently unsafe beyond that encountered in general by riding one's bike outside. However, bike course density (in some events I've done) is too high, period. Or so is my perspective as a meh swimmer but stronger cyclist who spends the entire ride passing many people. Either a different means of traffic partitioning needs to occur in place of cones, or course density needs to come down.

I'd be a fan of lowering the time limit for some of the courses. I think that would cut down on the enrollment as well as perhaps get people into the mindset that this serious athletic endeavor that starts in the water deserves some care and attention to swim training. Keep some courses at 17 h but reduce allowed registration numbers. It's bizarre how cookie cutter the IM experience is in the US. It doesn't have to be.

---

To breathe, to feel, to know I'm alive.

Stick to the facts #1 rule when wanting to have a valid conversation! Exaggerating only makes you look foolish. //

Man, that shipped sailed a long, long, time ago. I know you like to argue(we have had some good ones!) but really, can't you tell when someone is being thoughtful or trolling? Save your ammo for when Wurf bridges up to the lead group, and then goes off the front for a podium!!

wrap every participant before the start in 3 layers of bubble wrap (the big stuff, not the wimpy stuff). Head to toe, with holes cut for eyes and mouth. And, mandate training wheels on all bikes. Bubble wrap would help both the swim and if someone crashes on the bike, well... - no problem there.

Overheating? Who cares?

#completewussificatinonoftriathlon&completeabrigationofpersonalresponsibility

---

I saw this on a white board in a window box at my daughters middle school...
List of what life owes you:
1. __________
2. __________
3. __________

this guy has gone off the rails in the last couple of days, is now squarely into troll territory, and as of this moment you'll find him over at reddit.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

I agree with most of what you said, especially cutting the cutoff time to reduce the field size. As a former DH MTB racer, I don't find the crowds to bad, but with my last two races (Nice and Galveston, where I was in the last wave), it was pretty hectic at times (although fun as I love crazy - chaotic riding - hence my user).

---

---

"Only those who risk going too far can possibly find out how far one can go." T.S. Elliot | Cycle2Tri.com
Sponsors: SciCon | | Every Man Jack

Yes, I know that climb (raced StG in 2010 and 2012) and trained there going up and down it. I found a super easy descent with no more than the usual switchback riding one finds in the Alps or Pyrenees, etc. As the next StG has that descent in the last 25% of the bike course (roughly), I don't expect the crowds to be much on it. If so, a bit more caution is all that is needed for the few moments where it could get chaotic.

---

---

"Only those who risk going too far can possibly find out how far one can go." T.S. Elliot | Cycle2Tri.com
Sponsors: SciCon | | Every Man Jack

Since you have experience with it (btw 2012 was crazy, huh? That day was actually my first IM), wouldn't you think that just keeping the old course would work just fine? That course was/is safe(r), and unfortunately, it is impossible to make people be careful ( especially if they are tired). I see no reason to increase risk.

---

"There are two ways to slide easily through life- to believe everything and to doubt everything- both ways save us from thinking "- Korzbyski

Thank you, and once that happens I hope they feel the same way you do.

---

Too old to go pro but doing it anyway
http://instagram.com/tgarvey4