Safety and the rules/regulations/law of open road racing.

dermabrasion

How does it work in Northern Ireland? I've raced there a few times (which are very well organised IMHO), but where do the CC and the PSNI fit into the planning of a race?

Chips Lovell

It's not so much that additional manpower may be need to close roads but that the conditions attached meant the amount of traffic on the course wouldn't be reduced by much.

You have the situation where officially, there's a road closure order in place and participants believe it to be the case, but in actuality, there's still going to be vehicles on the circuit. I'd be very wary of that.

Cond0r

Jep Gambardella wrote: »

It's not so much that additional manpower may be need to close roads but that the conditions attached meant the amount of traffic on the course wouldn't be reduced by much.

You have the situation where officially, there's a road closure order in place and participants believe it to be the case, but in actuality, there's still going to be vehicles on the circuit. I'd be very wary of that.

If you have the temporary road closure order, you could implement a traffic management system whereby traffic on the circuit is only allowed to travel in the direction of the race. This still allows local access, albeit with a detour in some cases, but also makes it safe for riders.

Chips Lovell

My understanding of the situation was that they were asked to have a traffic management system that would allow the locals come and go as they pleased without restriction.

Now maybe the person who told me that had misunderstood it, but if that's the case, it's a second good reason for not going along with it.

Beasty

Jep Gambardella wrote: »

My understanding of the situation was that they were asked to have a traffic management system that would allow the locals come and go as they pleased without restriction.

Now maybe the person who told me that had misunderstood it, but if that's the case, it's a second good reason for not going along with it.

I suspect they had misunderstood. There was a road closure outside my own house last year to facilitate a Triathlon event, and traffic was only allowed to enter in the direction of the cyclists. I stood on one corner and was telling motorists the road was closed but they could travel that way if they avoided overtaking anyone (road was very narrow anyway). Having said that I was not a marshal, just offering "advice" (and giving "moral support" to the person who did end up trying to manage the traffic)!!

pprendeville

So is Stamullen going ahead for now?

Chips Lovell

I was in two minds about the Fingal County Council press release. I initially saw it as a mealy mouthed "not our fault gov" statement. But now I'm wondering if it may serve to put the spotlight on the people who're causing the problems. So far they've been operating in the background but they may find themselves now having to publicly defend their actions.

wav1

pprendeville wrote: »

So is Stamullen going ahead for now?

See post 200

Beasty

pprendeville wrote: »

So is Stamullen going ahead for now?

They are certainly not cancelled at this stage, and the suggestion is they are re-routing to avoid Fingal. I guess it would be very odd for the Gardai to permit racing on the roads of Fingal simply because the race is largely in Co Meath, unless the Co Meath Gardaí accept responsibility and actively "police" the races

pprendeville

wav1 wrote: »

See post 200

Thanks wav. I don't mean to come across as only caring about whether races go ahead or not. I just don't have the experience in dealing with the Gardai to offer any worthwhile comments on the subject matter but what I do feel is important is building relationships with the powers that be. One would imagine that someone within CI would be designated this responsibility. I guess this matter is one for the AGM this year. Also it looks like us riders need to be a lot more conscious of what we're doing out on the roads especially if there are people out with cameras with the sole intention of creating evidence against riders but that's besides the point. The rules of the road should be adhered to.

Beasty

pprendeville wrote: »

I guess this matter is one for the AGM this year.

This is were we really miss a Road Commission. The problem at the CI level is road racing is only one of its many responsibilities with limited resources to deal with everything everyone thinks they should be dealing with

wav1

Cond0r wrote: »

Except the ones that are on closed roads, eg. the elite and vets national championships last year.

Fair point but very much the exception.Dont think I ever seen a road closure for a normal one day race in Ireland.Exception to this was Stephen Roche GP last yr which was forced on them as a contagen of events elsewhere,The ras is not even on closed roads

CramCycle

MOD VOICE: I am shutting down discussion on the O'Laughlin crash in Carrick, presumably there is an investigation and until more details are released on official news sites, it will not be discussed here.

Posts will be deleted shortly.

Feel free to PM if you have any queries on this.

Cond0r

wav1 wrote: »

Fair point but very much the exception.Dont think I ever seen a road closure for a normal one day race in Ireland.Exception to this was Stephen Roche GP last yr which was forced on them as a contagen of events elsewhere,The ras is not even on closed roads

I think that to say that this was due to "contagion" suggests that you think the current way races are run is perfectly fine? I don't see how a crit could be run on anything other than closed roads. How could you have riders hammering around a small circuit like that with traffic on it? Clearly the road was being closed but it wasn't formalised via the Council in previous years, and last year the Gardaí finally insisted on it - probably due to lack of resources to facilitate the closure themselves.

The Rás is effectively run on closed roads, because it has a large Garda presence who close the road on a rolling basis, stopping traffic at junctions, etc.

While I think that the situation in Fingal is deplorable and that the Gardaí are being vindictive by withdrawing their support, I also think that things need to change with regard to safety at races. I think people have their heads in the sand if they think this isn't the case.

The bunch sizes in A3 and A4 this year are so huge that it seems to me that it's becoming less and less possible to run a race can safely on open roads, particularly when CI commisaires don't appear to take any action to sanction riders that ride dangerously.

As an example, this was very evident at the Boyne GP last weekend, the bunch coming down the main road at over 60km/h with riders across the road and traffic coming the opposite direction being forced to pull over. Same on the smaller roads as well, albeit at a slightly slower speed.

When that kind of stuff is going on unchecked, it becomes easier to see why the Gardaí and Councils take a view like Balbriggan and Fingal have (not that I agree with how they're going about it).

In my view, Cycling Ireland have failed miserably to act on this subject, and are maybe the most to blame considering they're supposed to be the governing body for the sport. The representative they sent to meetings with Fingal and the Gardaí didn't even have the first notion about road racing.

wav1

Cond0r wrote: »

I think that to say that this was due to "contagion" suggests that you think the current way races are run is perfectly fine? I don't see how a crit could be run on anything other than closed roads. How could you have riders hammering around a small circuit like that with traffic on it? Clearly the road was being closed but it wasn't formalised via the Council in previous years, and last year the Gardaí finally insisted on it - probably due to lack of resources to facilitate the closure themselves.

The Rás is effectively run on closed roads, because it has a large Garda presence who close the road on a rolling basis, stopping traffic at junctions, etc.

While I think that the situation in Fingal is deplorable and that the Gardaí are being vindictive by withdrawing their support, I also think that things need to change with regard to safety at races. I think people have their heads in the sand if they think this isn't the case.

The bunch sizes in A3 and A4 this year are so huge that it seems to me that it's becoming less and less possible to run a race can safely on open roads, particularly when CI commisaires don't appear to take any action to sanction riders that ride dangerously.

As an example, this was very evident at the Boyne GP last weekend, the bunch coming down the main road at over 60km/h with riders across the road and traffic coming the opposite direction being forced to pull over. Same on the smaller roads as well, albeit at a slightly slower speed.

When that kind of stuff is going on unchecked, it becomes easier to see why the Gardaí and Councils take a view like Balbriggan and Fingal have (not that I agree with how they're going about it).

In my view, Cycling Ireland have failed miserably to act on this subject, and are maybe the most to blame considering they're supposed to be the governing body for the sport. The representative they sent to meetings with Fingal and the Gardaí didn't even have the first notion about road racing.

You have several points all wrapped up together in there and I would agree with some of them in particular to Cycling Irelands input.
1 The ras IS on open roads and most of the marshalls doing the stopping at junctions and lights etc are just civilian marshalls the same as any weekend.I take your point about the garda presence but its the other guys who do the junctions and not the Garda.
2 TBH I do think that most road races are run very well now that you mention it.What you refer to happening on the roads is rider behaviour and is nothing to do with how a race is run/promoted.You are mixing up 2 x totally different issues.
3 There were 88A4 riders in Boyne GP and 136 A3 riders.Whilst large I don't consider that to be excessive for the roads that were being used.
4 I am in receipt of comms report for Boyne GP and had a talk with the Garda on duty and both were very pleased with the event.
Everybody can improve and that's a fact but at the same time I wouldn't be biting off the hand that feeds the riders needs as event promoters on the road will become a very rare breed indeed,if they continue to be slammed for doing what they di,in the best and safest way they can..EG Boyne Gp had 3 x lead cars with each event and a motomarshall with each event plus more than ample static marshalls..As I said rider behaviour can in no way be attributed to a race promoter.Riders last Sunday were spoken to at the start both by myself and the comms and posts on here on boards suggested that it helped in making the race a lot less dodgy than previous weeks.

Cond0r

wav1 wrote: »

You have several points all wrapped up together in there and I would agree with some of them in particular to Cycling Irelands input.
1 The ras IS on open roads and most of the marshalls doing the stopping at junctions and lights etc are just civilian marshalls the same as any weekend.I take your point about the garda presence but its the other guys who do the junctions and not the Garda.

If marshals are stopping people at junctions they're in breach of the law, and without a Garda being present the person in a car would be fully within their rights to drive on. I don't think that's a good situation to be in.

wav1 wrote: »

2 TBH I do think that most road races are run very well now that you mention it.What you refer to happening on the roads is rider behaviour and is nothing to do with how a race is run/promoted.You are mixing up 2 x totally different issues.
3 There were 88A4 riders in Boyne GP and 136 A3 riders.Whilst large I don't consider that to be excessive for the roads that were being used.
4 I am in receipt of comms report for Boyne GP and had a talk with the Garda on duty and both were very pleased with the event.
Everybody can improve and that's a fact but at the same time I wouldn't be biting off the hand that feeds the riders needs as event promoters on the road will become a very rare breed indeed,if they continue to be slammed for doing what they di,in the best and safest way they can..EG Boyne Gp had 3 x lead cars with each event and a motomarshall with each event plus more than ample static marshalls..As I said rider behaviour can in no way be attributed to a race promoter.Riders last Sunday were spoken to at the start both by myself and the comms and posts on here on boards suggested that it helped in making the race a lot less dodgy than previous weeks.

Please don't misunderstand, I'm not meaning to lay blame at the promoter's door. I'm also not suggesting that promoters don't have safety as their primary concern. You're also mixing two separate issues; I completely understand that it takes a huge (voluntary) effort to put on a race, and that people willing to take the lead on those things are far and few between. However, constructive criticism should to be taken on board without it being taken as 'biting off the hand that feeds it'.

With that said, I was in the A3 bunch last Sunday and I think you guys put on a great day's racing - there were certainly ample marshals and lead cars for sure.

However I have to disagree that all of the roads were suitable for a bunch of 133. On the road between the pub and the main road up the hill around the blind corner, the bunch was ditch to ditch on every lap. I can't see how that could be avoided even with riders being told not to do it. It's unrealistic to suggest that riders in a bunch of that size will ride 2 or 3 abreast while leaving space for cars to come the opposite direction, when there's not even a centre line. In a section of road like that there's a "concertina effect", and there's no way around that.

The situation on the main road in my view is different, and I completely agree is down to incredibly bad rider behaviour. Sanctions from CI commissaires should absolutely be handed out to riders riding on the wrong side of that road. However, I'm doubtful that even this will help. When the red mist of racing descends, people tend to do really stupid things and to suggest different is a little naive in my view.

I think if you polled any of the people driving cars or trucks that were forced to pull over due to the oncoming bunch they'd take a fairly dim view of bike racing.

I think given that the bunch sizes are unlikely to get smaller as popularity continues to increase, this is going to be an increasing problem.

As I see it, first and foremost CI/commisaires need to start handling the problem of dangerous riding in races, and I think promoters should consider restricting bunch sizes, or choosing roads that are larger to handle the volume -- however, I think this is not feasible in the long run and shouldn't be down to the promoters.

I think that the only solution here is that CI need to get their finger out and address this problem in a properly sustainable way by facilitating a process to organise closed roads more easily. Then promoters can manage traffic themselves (via the marshals), for example by implementing a one-way system on circuits. That way locals get their access, and racers don't have to worry about cars coming around corners.

Beasty

wav1 wrote: »

1 The ras IS on open roads and most of the marshalls doing the stopping at junctions and lights etc are just civilian marshalls the same as any weekend.I take your point about the garda presence but its the other guys who do the junctions and not the Garda.

I've only marshalled the final stage in Skerries which is a circuit they do 3 times, so this may not be indicative of what happens elsewhere in the race. However what I have always witnessed is the Gardai issuing instructions to close the roads. We then put in place barriers. I have always had a Guard on my corner who has dealt with drivers who kick up a fuss (which has happened quite regularly on the corners I have been on). Essentially what I have done has been under the direction of the Gardai.

It will be interesting to see if this approach is adopted at all junctions within Fingal - I suspect some of the earlier junctions are typically managed from a Gardai perspective by the guys ahead of the race on motorbikes

Cond0r

Beasty wrote: »

I've only marshalled the final stage in Skerries which is a circuit they do 3 times, so this may not be indicative of what happens elsewhere in the race. However what I have always witnessed is the Gardai issuing instructions to close the roads. We then put in place barriers. I have always had a Guard on my corner who has dealt with drivers who kick up a fuss (which has happened quite regularly on the corners I have been on). Essentially what I have done has been under the direction of the Gardai.

It will be interesting to see if this approach is adopted at all junctions within Fingal - I suspect some of the earlier junctions are typically managed from a Gardai perspective by the guys ahead of the race on motorbikes

Yes. I was late heading up to watch the finish last year, and arrived to a closed road well in advance of the race approaching, at the top of Shady Lane coming into Skerries. There was also a Garda present at that junction, who not so politely told me the road was closed.

bcmf

Beasty wrote: »

I've only marshalled the final stage in Skerries which is a circuit they do 3 times, so this may not be indicative of what happens elsewhere in the race. However what I have always witnessed is the Gardai issuing instructions to close the roads. We then put in place barriers. I have always had a Guard on my corner who has dealt with drivers who kick up a fuss (which has happened quite regularly on the corners I have been on). Essentially what I have done has been under the direction of the Gardai.

It will be interesting to see if this approach is adopted at all junctions within Fingal - I suspect some of the earlier junctions are typically managed from a Gardai perspective by the guys ahead of the race on motorbikes

I usually do Cross of the Cage. Even with a Garda presence people will do everything they can to get onto the circuit. Without a Garda presence EVEN WITH A CLOSURE ORDER it would be impossible and dangerous.

wav1

Beasty wrote: »

I've only marshalled the final stage in Skerries which is a circuit they do 3 times, so this may not be indicative of what happens elsewhere in the race. However what I have always witnessed is the Gardai issuing instructions to close the roads. We then put in place barriers. I have always had a Guard on my corner who has dealt with drivers who kick up a fuss (which has happened quite regularly on the corners I have been on). Essentially what I have done has been under the direction of the Gardai.

It will be interesting to see if this approach is adopted at all junctions within Fingal - I suspect some of the earlier junctions are typically managed from a Gardai perspective by the guys ahead of the race on motorbikes

Very much the exception because its on a circuit..Every other day whens its A to B its just a rolling marshall system similar to lots of other events.There is the GARDA presence of the moto cops but they drive at the front of the race.Normal type marshalling assignments are designated in the race officials manual to a particular marshall or marshalls,so its just the same as any weekend albeit on a bigger scale.Of course there would be a garda presence passing through the main towns and citys..This I suppose is because the race enjoys a healthy support from the Garda.At the end of the day though there is a fee payable to them for their services for the 8 days.

wav1

Cond0r wrote: »

If marshals are stopping people at junctions they're in breach of the law, and without a Garda being present the person in a car would be fully within their rights to drive on. I don't think that's a good situation to be in.



Please don't misunderstand, I'm not meaning to lay blame at the promoter's door. I'm also not suggesting that promoters don't have safety as their primary concern. You're also mixing two separate issues; I completely understand that it takes a huge (voluntary) effort to put on a race, and that people willing to take the lead on those things are far and few between. However, constructive criticism should to be taken on board without it being taken as 'biting off the hand that feeds it'.

With that said, I was in the A3 bunch last Sunday and I think you guys put on a great day's racing - there were certainly ample marshals and lead cars for sure.

However I have to disagree that all of the roads were suitable for a bunch of 133. On the road between the pub and the main road up the hill around the blind corner, the bunch was ditch to ditch on every lap. I can't see how that could be avoided even with riders being told not to do it. It's unrealistic to suggest that riders in a bunch of that size will ride 2 or 3 abreast while leaving space for cars to come the opposite direction, when there's not even a centre line. In a section of road like that there's a "concertina effect", and there's no way around that.

The situation on the main road in my view is different, and I completely agree is down to incredibly bad rider behaviour. Sanctions from CI commissaires should absolutely be handed out to riders riding on the wrong side of that road. However, I'm doubtful that even this will help. When the red mist of racing descends, people tend to do really stupid things and to suggest different is a little naive in my view.

I think if you polled any of the people driving cars or trucks that were forced to pull over due to the oncoming bunch they'd take a fairly dim view of bike racing.

I think given that the bunch sizes are unlikely to get smaller as popularity continues to increase, this is going to be an increasing problem.

As I see it, first and foremost CI/commisaires need to start handling the problem of dangerous riding in races, and I think promoters should consider restricting bunch sizes, or choosing roads that are larger to handle the volume -- however, I think this is not feasible in the long run and shouldn't be down to the promoters.

I think that the only solution here is that CI need to get their finger out and address this problem in a properly sustainable way by facilitating a process to organise closed roads more easily. Then promoters can manage traffic themselves (via the marshals), for example by implementing a one-way system on circuits. That way locals get their access, and racers don't have to worry about cars coming around corners.

Whats your alternative suggestion to having marshalls at junctions?[whether it be legal or not theres someone there.What would happen if the junctions were unmaned?]
I take your opinion on board re the field size of 136 riders but would ask this.
Gorey today listed 200 riders and Ras Mumhan has 210 riders.Both of these races take in sections of road that will be narrower and in worse condition than most weeks.What would you do there?Des Hanlon in Carlow on Sunday next is one of the monuments and will attract riders from everywhere.Some of the roads and surfaces are dodgy to say the least..Where should the call come from on the day

Cond0r

wav1 wrote: »

Whats your alternative suggestion to having marshalls at junctions?[whether it be legal or not theres someone there.What would happen if the junctions were unmaned?]
I take your opinion on board re the field size of 136 riders but would ask this.
Gorey today listed 200 riders and Ras Mumhan has 210 riders.Both of these races take in sections of road that will be narrower and in worse condition than most weeks.What would you do there?Des Hanlon in Carlow on Sunday next is one of the monuments and will attract riders from everywhere.Some of the roads and surfaces are dodgy to say the least..Where should the call come from on the day

I don't think I suggested not having marshals at junctions?

What would I do for those field sizes? Close the roads. Simple. If the road can't handle oncoming cars and riders together, that seems to me to be the only solution. How can you possibly suggest that sending 200 riders down a single lane boreen is safe if there's oncoming traffic to be expected?

I completely appreciate the difficulty in organising and expense in paying for road closure orders that exists at the moment, but CI need to push for a lightweight process to handle it. The current situation is not sustainable.

wav1

Cond0r wrote: »

I don't think I suggested not having marshals at junctions?

What would I do for those field sizes? Close the roads. Simple. If the road can't handle oncoming cars and riders together, that seems to me to be the only solution. How can you possibly suggest that sending 200 riders down a single lane boreen is safe if there's oncoming traffic to be expected?

I completely appreciate the difficulty in organising and expense in paying for road closure orders that exists at the moment, but CI need to push for a lightweight process to handle it. The current situation is not sustainable.

I never once suggested sending 200 riders down a single lane boreen is safe.I just asked you what would you do,and you answered me.'close the roads simple'' aBSOULOUTELY THE CORRECT ANSWER.
So whats the problem?The problem is that if the roads were expected to be fully closed for especially stage races that go from A to B it wouldn't happen.What I suggested several posts ago is to bulid a relationship with the garda in the area..Thats the only real workable solution[as indeed many have].You also have to bulid a relationship and rely on the goodwill of locals/residents in areas where circuits are being used year after year.Advance signage before events helps so that they know whats coming their way.I have been to races where locals didn't know what was happening.Its all about building relationships where you get to the situation where an event is welcomed or at the very least tolerated..Sometimes the road closures could create more problems than they solve.Yes the cyclists will feel a lot safer but you could get grief from motorists for a different reason[diversions etc]Bottom line is that its not an easy solution.

GMCI

Cond0r wrote: »

As an example, this was very evident at the Boyne GP last weekend, the bunch coming down the main road at over 60km/h with riders across the road and traffic coming the opposite direction being forced to pull over. Same on the smaller roads as well, albeit at a slightly slower speed.

If this is in relation to the A4 race at the Boyne GP, I find your views massively inaccurate. You see it from the peloton that cars were being forced over to the other side of the road. As the moto marshal for the A4 race, I can confirm to you that by way of warning traffic (within the boundaries of the law) of an approaching hazard (the peloton) 90% of the drivers took the action themselves to pull in and give as much room as possible in order to allow the race pass safely. They were never "forced in". So before naming events that are promoted for your leisure and pleasure, take view of the bigger picture that would have given reason to why actions took place in the way they did. There was no element of safety concern at the Boyne GP which was down to good cooperation with the Gardaí and the work of the moto and static marshals on the day

Lusk_Doyle

GMCI wrote: »

If this is in relation to the A4 race at the Boyne GP, I find your views massively inaccurate. You see it from the peloton that cars were being forced over to the other side of the road. As the moto marshal for the A4 race, I can confirm to you that by way of warning traffic (within the boundaries of the law) of an approaching hazard (the peloton) 90% of the drivers took the action themselves to pull in and give as much room as possible in order to allow the race pass safely. They were never "forced in". So before naming events that are promoted for your leisure and pleasure, take view of the bigger picture that would have given reason to why actions took place in the way they did. There was no element of safety concern at the Boyne GP which was down to good cooperation with the Gardaí and the work of the moto and static marshals on the day

When you say they were not forced to pull in, what other option is available to them with a mass of bodies approaching from the opposite direction on the wrong side of the road? Strikes me as being forced.

wav1

Lusk_Doyle wrote: »

When you say they were not forced to pull in, what other option is available to them with a mass of bodies approaching from the opposite direction on the wrong side of the road? Strikes me as being forced.

Huge difference between making a decision themselves to pull in and being forced in..They were motorists being courteous to the race..I don't know..Do you riders really want races promoted for YOU at all..If they do they should stop nit picking at every effort of promotions to be as well run as possible

Lusk_Doyle

wav1 wrote: »

Huge difference between making a decision themselves to pull in and being forced in..They were motorists being courteous to the race..I don't know..Do you riders really want races promoted for YOU at all..If they do they should stop nit picking at every effort of promotions to be as well run as possible

Have not raced an open race in over a year and a half. I'm simply responding to what I read. If I was a driver approaching a race coming the other way I too would pull in. Continuing on the road would be inadvisable as riders are on both sides of the road. That's nothing to do with my courtesy to other road users but rather me having two choices:

1. Pull in and wait.
2. Continue and have bikes coming both sides of me (possibly) and/or the riders on the wrong side of the road force their way back over the line putting others at risk.

My comment is not a jab at race organisers but merely a response to a CI moto comm's comments.

Lusk_Doyle

wav1 wrote: »

Huge difference between making a decision themselves to pull in and being forced in..They were motorists being courteous to the race..I don't know..Do you riders really want races promoted for YOU at all..If they do they should stop nit picking at every effort of promotions to be as well run as possible

What exactly is the huge difference that you mean?

wav1

Lusk_Doyle wrote: »

What exactly is the huge difference that you mean?

Huge huge difference..No motomarshall has any right to force anyone to pull in..How oh how could you force someone to pull in?Its simply a request.

GMCI

Huge difference being that on the day in question the cars were reacting to a slow down motion from me by pulling in to the left and reducing their speed. In the majority of the cases the oncoming drivers would not have seen the riders at that stage and reacted favourably to the gesture of warning been made to them.

Cond0r

GMCI wrote: »

If this is in relation to the A4 race at the Boyne GP, I find your views massively inaccurate. You see it from the peloton that cars were being forced over to the other side of the road. As the moto marshal for the A4 race, I can confirm to you that by way of warning traffic (within the boundaries of the law) of an approaching hazard (the peloton) 90% of the drivers took the action themselves to pull in and give as much room as possible in order to allow the race pass safely. They were never "forced in". So before naming events that are promoted for your leisure and pleasure, take view of the bigger picture that would have given reason to why actions took place in the way they did. There was no element of safety concern at the Boyne GP which was down to good cooperation with the Gardaí and the work of the moto and static marshals on the day

No, I was in the A3 race. There's a very fine line between "being forced to pull in" and "pulling in out of courtesy". If you're coming down the road in your car and there are 130 guys ditch to ditch I posit that 99% of people will opt to pull in rather than play chicken with the bunch of cyclists coming towards them.

There were numerous occasions where the cars were not warned in that race, and ended up pulling in literally to avoid having a head-on collision with the riders on the wrong side of the road. I already pointed out that this was down to rider behaviour (stupidity) and not any deficiency on the part of the mashals, whom I commended for their work at that event.

Using the "why are you complaining about the race that was put on for you" line is a deflection from the real safety issues at events. Constructive criticism is not the same as empty complaining about the event. I used the Boyne GP as an example because of the size of the bunch and the rider behaviour I witnessed first hand. Neither of these are criticisms levelled directly at the organisers or marshalls.

Cond0r

wav1 wrote: »

I never once suggested sending 200 riders down a single lane boreen is safe.I just asked you what would you do,and you answered me.'close the roads simple'' aBSOULOUTELY THE CORRECT ANSWER.
So whats the problem?The problem is that if the roads were expected to be fully closed for especially stage races that go from A to B it wouldn't happen.What I suggested several posts ago is to bulid a relationship with the garda in the area..Thats the only real workable solution[as indeed many have].You also have to bulid a relationship and rely on the goodwill of locals/residents in areas where circuits are being used year after year.Advance signage before events helps so that they know whats coming their way.I have been to races where locals didn't know what was happening.Its all about building relationships where you get to the situation where an event is welcomed or at the very least tolerated..Sometimes the road closures could create more problems than they solve.Yes the cyclists will feel a lot safer but you could get grief from motorists for a different reason[diversions etc]Bottom line is that its not an easy solution.

I agree 100% about building relationships, but unfortunately I don't think it's a sustainable solution. That might have worked until a couple of years ago when you had far fewer numbers turning up at events, but I really don't think it's going to continue working that way. It's quite evident what can happen when those relationships break down (see Fingal).

I also think we're reaching a point where those relationships are going to become more strained. Another great example was the A3 bunch at the Des Hanlon yesterday. 200 were allowed to sign on and race. It was absolute insanity. I have to commend the CI commisaire in the car behind the race who consistently told riders to move in, and began taking numbers of those who repeatedly strayed onto the wrong side of the road. However it also showed how hard it is to control a bunch of that size. In that situation, irrespective of the relationship you have with the Gardaí in that area, it's simply not safe to have oncoming traffic into a bunch like that. It's a miracle that there wasn't a massive pile up yesterday.

Why do you think that properly managed closed roads wouldn't happen? For large A to B stage races it's arguably easier, because the road is only closed for a very short period of time, during which it should be fairly straight forward to have a diversion in place for the oncoming direction, and allow traffic in the same direction as the race. I'd argue it's more difficult for circuits.

morana

its too many. That will work against the sport in the long run. I really feel they should have 2 races when the field is that size.

Cond0r

morana wrote: »

its too many. That will work against the sport in the long run. I really feel they should have 2 races when the field is that size.

I heard afterwards there were 40 juniors alone? Surely they could have their own races at this stage.

bwalsh1983

This is not in any way a post complaining about the juniors, if someone cannot compete with them I think they will struggle in A2 either way...but given that the numbers are that large it may be time for CI to start thinking about numbers in these races. 200 strong fields are too much for local roads without any closures - and lets not get into that as I think what has gone on in in Fingal is showing which way local authorities would want it to go which cannot happen.

Think of the other races where 200 in the field is the norm, Ras Mumhan - practically rolling closures, The Ras - rolling closures. 200 bodies yesterday is plain dangerous and the comical threats from the commissaires will not stop a race spilling over white lines and being hazardous. the handling skiils of a Mumhan or Ras bunch are a lot healthier than a standard A3 rider too I would assume. I heard the commissaire give a '4th' warning to a rider yesterday....not a very effective warning system I feel!

The sport is growing in popularity, it is fantastic, and yesterday was a superb event and a pleasure to ride/be a part of but a serious examination of the field sizes is required...pre-registration..caps at 140 etc etc. It will eventually become a bigger issue for the Garda and at that stage a bit too late to start doing something about it.

bwalsh1983

michael196 wrote: »

course assessments needed to gauge (as best possible), the maximum safe field size, based on risk assessment and course history , then on line entry to restrict the field entry.

worst thing to have 200 turning up for a category on a circuit that can only safely handle 130.

not always feasible to split a huge a3 into two separate races. ( not enough lead cars or commissaires present ).

This is it. It needs to be online and closed, a 'not in tough luck' situation. What if 250 turned up yesterday? Theres no reason why they wouldnt have, what would the organising club have done then? As Michael says, you cant split a race on the day, it has to be pre-planned.

manwithaplan

I'm not sure how much better a smaller field would have behaved yesterday in the first 30k. Everyone knew you needed to be in the top half of the field come Castlecomer. I stayed put near the back until we turned on to the Castlecomer road. I managed to move up in the bunch on the drags on that road without needing to take any chances but it was nigh on impossible to defend a position from there to the crucial turn without going wide a few times. Even then I was further back than I wanted to be. I suppose it would have been a bit better with a smaller field but the particular circumstances of yesterday's race had a lot to do with it also.

I was up the front from then on so I'm not sure what it was like further back but it seemed ok once we got a couple of hills out of the way. But yeah, the first 30k weren't at all nice.

smurphy29

manwithaplan wrote: »

I'm not sure how much better a smaller field would have behaved yesterday in the first 30k. Everyone knew you needed to be in the top half of the field come Castlecomer. I stayed put near the back until we turned on to the Castlecomer road. I managed to move up in the bunch on the drags on that road without needing to take any chances but it was nigh on impossible to defend a position from there to the crucial turn without going wide a few times. Even then I was further back than I wanted to be. I suppose it would have been a bit better with a smaller field but the particular circumstances of yesterday's race had a lot to do with it also.

I was up the front from then on so I'm not sure what it was like further back but it seemed ok once we got a couple of hills out of the way. But yeah, the first 30k weren't at all nice.

Yeah, I did the same. I moved right to the front on that long draggy bit on the main road, and got over the prime 4th in the bunch. There was a funny moment where the moto-marshall told the lad at the very front that he was wasting his time: 'What are you doing pulling at the front? The heavy hitters are all sitting on you.' But it was miles too early to defend anything and the swarms up the right kept coming. I settled into a position in the left hand gutter after a while and it worked ok, I took every opportunity I could to move forward and ended up in a halfway-reasonable position, but it was nervous as hell. Even on the climb the road was so full of riders it was hard to move forward, and after the initial steep bit, the pace wasn't really on over the second section of the climb. The second climb was also fairly benign until we took that left hander and all hell broke loose...

3102derek

I was out for my sunday spin yesterday going in the opposite direction to the race. Forgot it was on. I meet the first group just before Ballickmoyler A1/A2 i think. Man they were flying. Savage pace but very neat and close together.

But the second group, christ........ I had to stop and stand in the grass on the side of the road. They were all over the place spread right across the road on a long sweeping right hand bend. It was crazy.
around here => https://www.google.com/maps/@52.855196,-6.976186,3a,75y,114.32h,69.28t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sDZTnJbePQpNgzqb0m1ED1Q!2e0

doozerie

I agree that the big numbers are only part of the problem, there are many factors that contribute to the risks. I rode the Annaclone GP in A4 up north a few weeks ago. I believe the A4 field was capped at, so about half the number in yesterday’s A3 race. For the most part it felt like a safe race but when a break went off the front it suddenly wasn’t any longer, and for mostly the same reason that I believe yesterday’s race was so dodgy - basically, riders moved out to the right and chose to stay there.

In that case I reckon that some of the riders didn’t have the legs to ride through but stayed out there for fear of losing ground to fresher riders that might fire off up the road. I reckon that others were playing the tactical game of giving themselves some empty road in front of themselves in order to be able to respond to any further attacks. Whatever the reasons though it ended up with the road filled from ditch to ditch. Quite a few of us stuck behind this effective blockade wanted to get through, some of us were more impatient than others and a few guys tried to force a gap. Eventually something had to give, and there was a crash.

I reckon the pattern yesterday, and in many other races, is the same, that for quite a few riders the opposite side of the road is where they want to be and want to stay. Ending up out there at some stage is almost inevitable for anyone that wants to move up the bunch - you take what you hope is a calculated risk and overtake when you can, just as you would if using the road for transport. The real problem though, in my opinion, are those that don’t just use it for overtaking, they treat the other side of the road as a valid part of the race circuit. The worst of them also assume that oncoming traffic are somehow in the wrong and hold their own line in the mindless expectation that the oncoming motorists will yield. Which most motorists do, ‘cos no-one in their right mind wants to be involved in a collision. Which seems to bolster the sense of entitlement and immortality of those who ride out there.

It’s a disaster waiting to happen, I’m just amazed that so few “accidents” have occurred. They have occurred though, even as recently as within the last few weeks from what I’ve read, but for what I assume are a variety of reasons few people point to them and go “Look! See what can happen? Do you want to be the next one to end up on/in/under a car?” - there was what I took to be a subtle reference to that before yesterday's race, or maybe it was less subtle and I just didn't hear it properly, but it should be spelled out clearly to get the message across. No-one wants to focus on bad stuff that happens, but clearly lots of people are not learning from others’ mistakes and bad choices and need to be reminded. And if they refuse to learn then they shouldn’t be allowed to race because they don’t just endanger themselves, they endanger everyone else too, so pull out repeat offenders.

I think that capping numbers would help, although it raises its own tricky issues, but I think the root of the problem is rider attitude and unless commissaires show some genuine commitment to tackling that I think that races will continue to be unnecessarily dangerous regardless of numbers. Are commissaires willing to really take the problem on though? I’m certainly not convinced - I have sympathy for the difficult position they find themselves in but I would have thought that rider safety is a fundamental part of their job and they need to find the balls to deal with it.

I also think there is an onus on us as riders to call out the repeat offenders. Peer pressure might well achieve more than the threat of punishment, if it is applied consistently. So I think we should consistently yell the ears off riders that choose to sit out on the wrong side of the road, of the many stupid and dangerous things you can do in a bike race that’s the one that I perceive as too easily and too readily overlooked (in the heat of the moment) all too often.

wav1

Just home from a provincial meeting.We have absouloutely no powers to change anything,but an interesting notion arose tonight and we are suggesting to Cycling Ireland in the morning to consider reopening the amnesty for a week or two to allow A3s who have now raced for a few weeks with maybe no joy in getting the points,to upgrade if they wish.No idea whether they will take it any further or not or indeed what the take up would be,but as I said its just an idea to maybe balance the race field sizes.

ericzeking

I'm wondering is the A3 field size issue being compounded further by the ease with which one can get out of A4 now. From a distance it appears that the A4 bunches are getting smaller (I would suggest that, in this particular cycling boom, almost anyone that was going to take up racing has done so at this stage and A4 numbers are petering out as a result-could be wrong). It is thus much easier to negotiate to get the 2 results you need to get up.

Maybe part of the solution would be to allow regrading to A4 if a rider wanted to at the end of a year with no points or an increase in the points required to move up to A3.

The standard is so high in A1/A2 that self upgrades or giving A3s in 15th or 16th place points can hardly be the solution, sending weaker riders up through the system by hook or by crook doesn't seem right, guys will just end up packing it in.

It makes sense that the majority should be in the lower categories but balance is needed here.

I'm going to pre-empt the call that A4 is the beginner grade but as I said above I reckon at this stage the number of absolute newbies to racing is possibly on the wane, though I could be wrong on that.

There is also the argument that we need a vibrant A2 bunch for separate races for them to lessen the jump up from A3 but I'm not sure we will ever have enough A1s of the required quality to allow the A2s go it alone, we are a small country after all. It's the same 4 or 5 A1s every week that do the business in the different provinces.

I say all this as an A3 with points (to give some context).

1bryan

As someone who's come to cycling having previously been involved in another (team) sport, I think it beggars belief how easy it is for anyone to just get a bike and race. If you play soccer or gaa you have to join your local club, train, break into a team, then you get to play. In cycling, you just send away for a license and away you go.

IMO cycling needs to become a more club-centric sport. If it was down to clubs to enter teams into races, then they could have their own criteria for who gets to ride (the assumption being they would pick the best team available), and caps could be placed on a per-club level. If you're not good enough or if you're deemed inexperienced, you don't get to ride.

I realise that club structures are a little disjointed in a lot of cases, but maybe something like the above could be a catalyst to change that.

Unattached riders (of which, I admit, I am one) won't like this suggestion, but its a tried and trusted approach and, were it introduced, I know I'd be joining my local club in the morning with a view to getting myself onto one of the racing teams.

Just my 2 cents worth

colm_gti

I was going to post it before but decided against it....

Why don't they just implement the same system as in the uk?

Online entry month(s) in advance, limited places for each race, reserve list and maybe ~10 eol places on the day. Races are planned by hosting clubs long in advance so they can all be opened for entry in Jan. That way people are forced to sit down at the beginning of the year and actually plan out their season rather than turning up to every race because they can. The reserve list and slim chance of eol means every race should be filled.

I think they held separate a4, a3 and a1/2/3 races. That way you're opening up an extra race that might have limited numbers of a1/2 riders for a3's that are out for a training race. You'll bulk up a potentially small a1/2 field, account for a3 riders that didn't get into the separate a3 race, and have controllable numbers.

A lot of people will be upset, but hey, you can't please everyone. It would be better than cancelled races and big crashes.

couerdelion

ericzeking wrote: »

I'm wondering is the A3 field size issue being compounded further by the ease with which one can get out of A4 now. From a distance it appears that the A4 bunches are getting smaller

I don't think the A4 fields are getting any smaller or any easier to get out of and I know from my own club that those who were promoted out of A4 last year have been replaced by a new crop of racers eager to get promoted. We've probably more A4's this year than last - although I think we might be getting a bit of a repuation for being more of a racing club these days.

1bryan wrote: »

As someone who's come to cycling having previously been involved in another (team) sport, I think it beggars belief how easy it is for anyone to just get a bike and race.

It's a double edged sword. If the clubs start taking responsibility for riders then who gets blamed if a rider causes a crash through a stupid mistake. The same with mandatory courses before racing. If CI are licensing on the back of showing competency do they become more liable?

Don't get me wrong - It makes sense to me that you need to be in a club - it should mean you've group riding experience at least - but is part of the reason racing has boomed the accessibility?

Chips Lovell

I've moved a dozen posts over from the Des Hanlon thread as they are better suited to this thread.

aworthycause

On the upgrades suggestion by Wav.

Do you not think that maybe upgrades are part of the problem? A3 seems to be swelling, but presumably mostly with guys who have upgraded themselves rather than taking points and places? Just axing like...

Cond0r

wav1 wrote: »

Just home from a provincial meeting.We have absouloutely no powers to change anything,but an interesting notion arose tonight and we are suggesting to Cycling Ireland in the morning to consider reopening the amnesty for a week or two to allow A3s who have now raced for a few weeks with maybe no joy in getting the points,to upgrade if they wish.No idea whether they will take it any further or not or indeed what the take up would be,but as I said its just an idea to maybe balance the race field sizes.

Apologies wav, and please don't take this the wrong way, but I think this is yet another stop gap solution to a bigger problem that needs to be addressed. They already made the self upgrade option permanent at the last AGM, which was a mistake IMHO.

The focus should be on making the upgrade process a natural progression from one category to the next. The biggest problem seems to be that juniors and super vets (to a lesser degree) are causing a bottleneck at the A3 level.

Allowing any random A3 rider to upgrade will dilute the level of riders at A2, rather than allowing the strongest ones to upgrade naturally.

wav1

Cond0r wrote: »

Apologies wav, and please don't take this the wrong way, but I think this is yet another stop gap solution to a bigger problem that needs to be addressed. They already made the self upgrade option permanent at the last AGM, which was a mistake IMHO.

The focus should be on making the upgrade process a natural progression from one category to the next. The biggest problem seem to be that juniors and super vets (to a lesser degree) are causing a bottleneck at the A3 level.

Allowing any random A3 rider to upgrade will dilute the level of riders at A2, rather than allowing the strongest ones to upgrade naturally.

Juniors are the source of many A3s not getting up FACT
Now tell me what do you do with the juniors?
Not enough yet to have races on their own,and even if there was enough,it would add an extra race to an already crowded programme.
Upgrade them like in the past?To me that's a big no no.
No doubt theres lots of them able to go up and ride the A1 races now,but by the time they reach 20 they wont be heard of..So suggest a solution.
At least the amnesty upgradeis an attempt at a solution to solve the field sizes and you can only try

Cond0r

wav1 wrote: »

Juniors are the source of many A3s not getting up FACT
Now tell me what do you do with the juniors?
Not enough yet to have races on their own,and even if there was enough,it would add an extra race to an already crowded programme.
Upgrade them like in the past?To me that's a big no no.
No doubt theres lots of them able to go up and ride the A1 races now,but by the time they reach 20 they wont be heard of..So suggest a solution.
At least the amnesty upgradeis an attempt at a solution to solve the field sizes and you can only try

If juniors mop up the points, assign points to the unplaced A3 riders.