I agree it is BS. Regardless of my opinions or beleifs,what is done outside the race is none of my business and is enforcable by local laws. What is done between the start and end of the race is another matter.

Whether ridiculous or not to "dictate" helmet wearing at all times on the bike at races, it is NOT as ridiculous as NOT wearing a helmet. That short 30 second jaunt across the parking lot, across the curb to T1 may be the most dangerous time for most riders. You don't expect anything to go wrong. That's generally when it does. And a 5mph wreck falling against a curb can accelerate your melon quite fast enough to cause death. Imagine that happening. Now imagine the scenario that would certainly follow, at least in this country. The victim's surviving family is likely to hire the nearest ambulance chaser and come after the race director for not "protecting the competitors." Think it won't happen? Then you also think someone wouldn't sue the lawnmower company for not warning users to refrain from picking it up by the deck with their hands to trim the hedges after they did so and double amputated their hands. And you'd be wrong. In the end, two reasons it isn't ridiculous:

1. Death.

2. Lawyers.

To reply to :

The victim's surviving family is likely to hire the nearest ambulance chaser and come after the race director for not "protecting the competitors." Think it won't happen

Yeah, you are right...............And that is the problem. However,where does it stop? Even if someone asks a question on an opinion on the internet, a forum,and an answer cannot be given without someone explaining the legal reasons(though you are right). OK, the rule was in the race, now intro to the race,saddly it will now have to be in writing that you must train with a helmet or else they "may" be promoting unsafe conditions. (I ain't flaming you)It is just getting so F*#@$$ ridiculous.I deal with this shit at work............NO ONE is RESPONSIBLE for THEIR actions anymore........Its always someone else's fault.

Also to:

Then you also think someone wouldn't sue the lawnmower company for not warning users to refrain from picking it up by the deck with their hands to trim the hedges after they did so and double amputated their hands. And you'd be wrong. In the end, two reasons it isn't ridiculous:


Yeah dude, again you are right, a lawsuit would be lost, but it IS ridiculous. Someone who picks up a lawn mower like that may win,however the courts agree with them.................They are still a fool. THATS the problem.

NO ONE is RESPONSIBLE for THEIR actions anymore........Its always someone else's fault.


Including Management.

---

==================================
but I can deal with the angels, cause it ain’t me they’re here to claim. it’s a good night for blowing ‘em off til some other day

"The victim's surviving family is likely to hire the nearest ambulance chaser and come after the race director"

Two words: Tort Reform

What do you call a mass grave filled with 20,000 lawyers?
- - A good start.

---

Cousin Elwood - Team Over-the-hill Racing
Brought to you by the good folks at Metamucil and Geritol...

Tort reform...fat chance of getting that through any congress when most members ARE lawyers!

The rule doesn't bother me as I wouldn't dream of putting my foot to pedal without my helmet buckled.

---

Jim

**Note above poster works for a retailer selling bikes and related gear*

Tort reform: Corporate irresponsibility.

---

==================================
but I can deal with the angels, cause it ain’t me they’re here to claim. it’s a good night for blowing ‘em off til some other day

"Two words: Tort Reform "


Exatly. Empower Government! Where do I sign up?

---

==================================
but I can deal with the angels, cause it ain’t me they’re here to claim. it’s a good night for blowing ‘em off til some other day

I posted: "Two words: Tort Reform "

You're reply: "Exatly. Empower Government! Where do I sign up?"

How exactly does limiting the lunacy of our court system empower government?

---

Cousin Elwood - Team Over-the-hill Racing
Brought to you by the good folks at Metamucil and Geritol...

>>What is done between the start and end of the race is another matter.<<

Actually I think you are incorrect. The entire VENUE is part of the insurance and I'm guessing that that is why the rule was invoked. Me--I'm with whomever said below that the rule doesn't bother me, my helmet is always on.

clm

---

clm
Nashville, TN
https://twitter.com/ironclm | http://ironclm.typepad.com

Speak English? Why, yes, I do. Thanks for asking.

The Constitution provides individuals the Right to seek redress in a court of law. I consider tort reform a) an encroachment on separation of powers, b) the governments unconstitutional legistlation limiting my Constitutional rights, and c) if we are talking Federal tort reform, then an unlawful encroachment of the Federal government upon a state's rights.

I see no lunacy. So I guess we'll just have to disagree.

---

==================================
but I can deal with the angels, cause it ain’t me they’re here to claim. it’s a good night for blowing ‘em off til some other day

Ironclm has it right insurance issue. The rule doesn't bother me either as I usually walk my bike to transition. As for tort reform if juries weren't so stupid and reward these crazy settlements there would be much less problems. Juries need to listen to facts use common sense and stop listening to lawyers.

Yeah, like this will ever happen with a Kerry/Edwards ticket. I am not really impressed with Bush, but the idea of an ambulance chaser a heartbeat away from the presidency... Ugh.

"The Constitution provides individuals the Right to seek redress in a court of law."

And tort reform would not hamper that, but might bring some sanity to the process. You can't think $3 mil for being stupid enough to pour coffee on yourself makes any sense, can you?

The problem is that the courts are making decisions that can't be supported by law. The courts are legislating from the bench, so the the legislature needs to reclaim it's turf.

And on a parallel plane, someone needs to make the courts responsible to act with some slight hint of rationality. That's tort reform. Saying, e.g., that you can't assess damages without finding adequate blame, and insisting that damages be commensurate with the injury and in some way demonstrably connected to malice, malfeasance or egregious error for which the assessed party is responsible.

---

Cousin Elwood - Team Over-the-hill Racing
Brought to you by the good folks at Metamucil and Geritol...

Are you posting from SF? I thought we were paying you big bucks to report live from le Tour...

---

Cousin Elwood - Team Over-the-hill Racing
Brought to you by the good folks at Metamucil and Geritol...

Actually, in that coffee spill case there were many cases files collected by the company where people burned themselves with coffee. The company chose to ignore those cases over years and they just piled up. It would have been very easy for the company to add a temperature check to the operation manual but they didn't.

I'm not sure if I agreed with the verdict, but it was pretty clear that the company did a poor job of following up on injuries. I don't think it's right that a person should hit the jackpot from a court verdict, but mismanagement will catch up with a company one way or another.

"Actually, in that coffee spill case there were many cases files collected by the company where people burned themselves with coffee. The company chose to ignore those cases over years and they just piled up. It would have been very easy for the company to add a temperature check to the operation manual but they didn't."
- - Sure, but there's not much of a market for cold coffee. And anyone who expects coffee to be cold shouldn't be allowed out in the world without a guardian. Now people who like hot coffee get screwed because the courts are overruling the free market. If you're concerned about rights, how about that one?

"I'm not sure if I agreed with the verdict, but it was pretty clear that the company did a poor job of following up on injuries. I don't think it's right that a person should hit the jackpot from a court verdict, but mismanagement will catch up with a company one way or another."
- - Coffee = HOT, hot coffee in lap = burn. Stella (can't remember her last name) should not only have had her case dismissed, she should have been ordered to pay court costs and do community service for tying up the courts over her own stupidity.

---

Cousin Elwood - Team Over-the-hill Racing
Brought to you by the good folks at Metamucil and Geritol...

Actually there's a lot of reasearch regarding coffee and the ideal temperature it should be served at. This information was readily available. It's not a matter of serving cold coffee, it's a matter of setting the termperature correctly.

For example dishwashers must heat the water to 160 degree so that all bacteria on the dishes are killed. This is regulated to make sure people don't get sick from contaminated dishes. In the same vain, it could be argued that coffee temperature should be set as to not harm the customer due to accidents. What would happen if coffee was placed on a counter and accidently spilled on a baby. This could very easily happen in a place like mcdonalds. If the coffee temperature was regulated, the customer would receive a product that was hot but not dangerous.

Another reason for the strict rules is that it's makes life easier for the officials. They don't have to argue or prove that you were only going to the head or where you are riding. Very simply, wear the helmet while on a bike. Easy rule to enforce, no way to argue.

 Not sure if triathlon had the same problem but the USCF used to have a rule that if you were on your bike you had to have your helmet on. Even warming up on the turbo trainer. They have relaxed that on the trainer part, but the reason was that the race insurance was nullified for not 100%compliance of the helmet rule was maintained. The officials had no choice in the matter but DQ.
Guess what? no insurance no race. I don't like it but if that is the lame rule , we live by it. G

Insurance and risk management is precisely the issue. In fact when this rule was conceived, to the best of my knowledge, it was based on the USCF's helmet rule. After a conversation with Charlie Crawford, it was very clear for the need and application of the rule. As ironclm pointed out, it's about liability and exposure to the event as well as to USAT's policy.

Others in this thread have pointed out that it's not difficult to imagine an instance where someone falls sans helmet and presto: lawsuit. It sucks, but that's how the system works.

With respect to the original post, it's unfortunate that participants, especially "newbies", weren't informed better about the rule rather than blanket DQs being issued. I'm not an official, however, so I won't venture to guess on the protocol they follow for issuing penalties in that scenario. It sounds very similar to the bar end plug rule. That sneaks up on a lot of people, but there is a very easy way around it. Education.

Education is the first step and from your description the race, USAT and the officiating crew at the event fell a little short in that department.

If I remember correctly Muncie has a prerace meeting the day prior to the event which would provide the perfect opportunity to mention things like the helmet rule. I think anything that can cause an immediate DQ deserves mentioning if there is a forum for it, especially if it will be monitored closely by the officials on race day.

Muncie has a history of being a very well run event. I raced there in '95 when it also happened to be be set up as a point to point race. Point to point is not my favorite format either, but it was the only real option to the race organizers under the circumstances.

Lesson: wear your helmet. :o)

---

Jeff Larson

"You must be the change you wish to see in the world."
-Ghandi

Learn the facts:

http://www.atlanet.org/...naldsCoffeecase.aspx

The system worked quite well, if you bother to actually find out what really happened in this case.

---

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"