Gloves, Body Protection Required at La Bresse

scottyl

8/6/2011 12:27 PM

Mountain Bike New Zealand just amended their armor rules. Because Kiwis don't like wearing gloves... well, a lot of the fast ones don't.

Feedback has generally been that some riders prefer to ride without gloves, as they do in World Cup rounds and at the World Champs, from a safety perspective neck, elbow and knee protection offer significantly more protection than a thin pair of gloves, gloves may in some cases increase the likelihood of injury, particularly if they become slippery, etc, etc.

This single requirement regarding gloves for DH events has caused the most controversy for riders and officiating Commissaires in the last 2 years.

bturman

8/5/2011 4:58 PM

Blenki's gloves... BAHAHAHAH!



Thanks to WideOpen for the pic.

esstinkay

8/5/2011 11:21 AM

several world cup riders have had serious injuries recently.. if you're not pushing the limits and riding on the edge, you won't win races..

t.martin

8/5/2011 8:41 AM

The guys riding at the world cup level are very aware of their limits and the inherent dangers of racing a bike. If personal injury is of their concern, then the choice to wear body armor is always there. It's not like these guys have difficulty getting their hands on the products.

Body armor should always remain optional, there is no question about it. It's the people that push their limits and are exposed to the reckless side of riding DH that have these concerns and push these dumb mandates.

Ride within your ability and you'll reduce your chances of falling 95%.

I Only Go Down

8/4/2011 10:05 PM

Knee pads and a FF helmet, and your good! It's ridiculous to force professional downhill mountain bikers to wear back protection. Sorry blenky about the glove thing. Haha

redride

8/4/2011 8:53 PM

kids look up to them... they are idols. lead by example.

Hubbard

8/4/2011 8:41 PM

It is a good rule for the juniors but other then that its crap.

kjl845

8/4/2011 7:01 PM

I dont see the point in forcing professional athletes to wear something they dont want to wear. Look at the NFL, the players are wearing considerably less padding now than ever and the game is faster and harder hitting. In the NHL eye injuries are always at risk but many choose not to wear a clear visor, same with soccer shin pads are smaller and thinner than before. At the pro level in any sport its all about winning and the athletes are willing to take the injury risk to get there.

sspomer

8/4/2011 4:51 PM

so why are roadies immune to padding/protection rules in france?

esstinkay

8/4/2011 4:40 PM

It's not surprising when governments having endless medical benefits in the form of universal health care require bodily protection and then their citizens complain about it. You know who you are.

""Most involve superficial trauma such as abrasions (“road rash”), contusions and lacerations.
-Puranik S, Long J, Coffman S. - Profile of pediatric bicycle injuries.

I'd go out on a limb and say that gloves/knee/elbow pads would take care of most "superficial trauma" injuries saving folks trips to the complimentary hospital to get their booboos kissed and made better.

USA cycling caps insurance payouts at $25k (and requires a helmet and a shirt) and hopefully you have personal insurance also because real injuries get expensive quick. Some interesting reading http://www.singletracks.com/blog/singletracks/mountain-biking-full-restriction/ . If you pay your own bills, then I guess you can do what you want.

If anything, I'd say the FFC rules are dated and considering the popularity and availability of neck braces these days, those should be required also.

Btw, I'm sorta thankful for the shirt requirement.. seriously :-)

leopineda

8/4/2011 3:32 PM

Blenky with gloves is not something new http://www.pinkbike.com/photo/4738416/

Christian_Gonzalez

8/4/2011 3:28 PM

troy lee makes a really good one, they are designed for the leatt and are amazingly comfortable. here is the link

http://www.troyleedesigns.com/product.php?cat=104&id=15505

Dingo Dave

8/4/2011 3:07 PM

This is silly.... the FQSC (Quebec's cycling federation) mandates the same thing and because of this I do not race on the Quebec cup.

In an inherently dangerous activity such as mountain biking (and especially DH) it is simply a matter of choice to wear certain types of protective equipment or not. JUST LIKE IT IS YOUR CHOICE TO RIDE OR NOT.

If you ride a downhill bike, let alone race, then it is your responsibility to ensure your safety. Whether that means not riding trails that are "too dangerous", going slower, not hitting jumps you haven't adequately practiced for, ensuring your body is physically prepared for the challenge... or wearing certain protective devices. Plain and simple.

The number of poorly fit, f@#$%g shitty ass backplates I've seen on people lately is startling. What's the point of even wearing armour if it's so minimal? And don't even get me started on the effectiveness of armour in preventing season-ending and life-threatening injuries....

Besides, if they're going to mandate spinal protection, then it should probably be a neck brace. I'd rather be a paraplegic than a quadraplegic (no offense to either groups).

Uncle Cliffy

8/4/2011 2:39 PM

Maybe someone can paint gloves on Blenki?

joshp

8/4/2011 2:32 PM

I am running the Demon Dirt Leviathon vest with a Leatt. It works perfect, just had to trim the spine padding off the top to allow the Leatt's back strut to fit correctly on my back. Minimal padding, but just enough to make me feel a little better about doing dumb shit on my bike ;-).

In general, I say the riders should be allowed to wear what they want, but I am under the impression that they have known about this all year, and have had plenty of time to prepare, so I don't expect it to affect anyone (well maybe Blenki, I mean honestly how can he be expected to ride with gloves on, the horror). Can't wait to watch the race Sunday morning though.

Cobra Panda

8/4/2011 2:27 PM

is there any body armor out right now that is compatible with neck braces? The few i have tried always seemed to mash the brace into the bottom of my helmet, and gave me no head and neck mobility. I opt for no armor in favor of wearing a neck brace. so this makes me wonder if the WC racers have neck and back protection that is compatible with each other, or are they forced to run with no brace?

Ty_Nelson

8/4/2011 2:17 PM

It should be up to the rider whether he wants to wear armor or not. Especially something as trivial as gloves. I can understand requiring to wear helmets, as the head is the most easily location on the body to have a serious injury. But Gloves? they dont even protect the hands from a serious injury. Anything that is going to cut off a finger isnt likely to be stopped by a bit off cloth. Gloves maybe protect you from road rash at the most, but offers no protection from broken fingers.
So I say if you are going to require it only require the armor that protects from life threatening injuries, like helmets and neck braces... any other armor should be up to the racer.

Varaxis

8/4/2011 2:05 PM

Well, I personally like the benefits armor and I hate poorly designed armor that's simply uncomfortable and makes you not want to wear it. This is more of a Yes and No deal for me...

Hate to see it required, but it protects the pros since they're at substantial risk pushing it to the limits. If it slows them down in regards to pedaling performance, better to slow 'em all down to make sure they're racing responsibly. If it makes them take even greater risks and go even faster, that'd be amazing from a spectator's perspective.

By requiring it, it'll likely force a push for higher quality armor. Something you'd want to wear on a more regular basis. If something really good trickles down to consumers that's a great improvement over what's currently available and doesn't cost an arm or a leg (is that a pun?), I'm all for it.

I know some kids that don't wear gear, basing their stance that pros don't wear it. I've seen some kids get hurt pretty bad, though armor probably wouldn't have helped much. I'm actually out for an injury right now for a week or two and shouldn't be riding, but still am. I know it's gonna heal poorly, but I can't stay off the bike. Wonder how much I could've mitigated the injury by wearing some good armor.

bjenson

8/4/2011 2:04 PM

curious that they wouldn't require a neck brace if they were going to require anything...

will be entertaining to see riders like blenki in gloves. i bet we'll see some cardboard "protection" this weekend. haha.

dphilpott

8/4/2011 2:02 PM

currently tipped in favour of yes.. only by 1 vote though. Surprising as i thought the majority were against it