While Katy Marchant’s horror crash at the Lee Valley Velodrome on Saturday night appears to have reignited the debate on track racing safety protocols – particularly when it comes to trackside barriers seemingly ‘protecting’ spectators from the action on the boards – cycling’s decision makers also continue to be locked in an ongoing discussion about safety on the road.
And, after a 2024 road season marred by a horrendous high-speed crash at the Itzulia Basque Country and the tragic deaths of Swiss junior rider Muriel Furrer and Norwegian pro André Drege during races, Groupama-FDJ boss Marc Madiot has claimed “there’s only solution” that would make the sport safer: “slow down the bikes”.
The outspoken French manager’s suggestion, which he says could emulate Formula 1 by “saving lives” while not hindering the spectacle on display, comes just two weeks after Tour de France director Christian Prudhomme argued that crashes such as the one in the Basque Country in April – which left two-time Tour winner Jonas Vingegaard with serious injuries, hindering his eventual yellow jersey defence – are caused by riders “going too fast”.
> EF boss Jonathan Vaughters slams “fat cats who have never raced so much as a child’s tricycle” after Tour de France director blames crashes on “riders going too fast”
Speaking at the annual general assembly of the association of race organisers (AIOCC) in Italy, Prudhomme said: “Beyond the behaviour of the athletes and the work of the organisers, it is absolutely necessary to reduce speed by appropriate measures: the riders are going too fast.
“The faster they go, the greater the risk and the more they endanger themselves and others.
“We already said it here last year: our car and motorbike drivers no longer have a safety margin! Imagine the consequences if one of our drivers, subjected to too much pressure, lost control on a mountain descent or when racing through a built-up area.”
And while the Tour director’s stance has drawn criticism from the likes of EF Education-EasyPost manager Jonathan Vaughters, who branded the comments “absolutely infuriating” and dismissed Prudhomme as one of the sport’s “fat cats who have never raced so much as a child’s tricycle”, it has nevertheless attracted some degree of support from Vaughters’ fellow team bosses, namely Groupama-FDJ chief Marc Madiot.
Marc Madiot (ASO/Pauline Ballet)
In an interview with Le Parisien, Madiot, who’s managed the French squad since 1997, said that slowing down the technology on offer is key to creating a safer environment who “don’t want to understand” the inherent risks they face during races.
“The equation is impossible,” the two-time Paris-Roubaix winner and expert car door panel beater told the French newspaper.
“The guys are riding faster and faster on terrain where everything is designed to slow down the vehicles. And downhill, it’s worse than anything.
“And since a lot of guys don’t want to understand anything, there’s only one solution: slow down the bikes.
“Formula 1 has never stopped restricting cars. Not only has it saved lives, but its spectacle has lost nothing. Honestly, is a race at an average of 48kph less exciting than one at 55kph?”
> "Profound safety problem" in elite cycling, finds report... but riders union president says it's "getting safer"
The great leap forward in bike technology over the past decade – which promoted one smiling French “champion” to tell Le Parisien that the bikes “almost ride by themselves” these days – and its effect on safety was also noted by France’s philosopher cyclist Guillaume Martin, who’s set to move to Madiot’s Groupama-FDJ team in 2025 after five years at Cofidis.
“The equipment allows you to go faster,” Martin told the paper. “I have the impression that the bikes break every time you fall, which means they are more violent.
(ASO/Billy Ceusters)
“We can do like in F1 where everyone has the same tyres. That way we wouldn’t have any differences in grip. We can choose a brand that isn’t hyper-efficient with tyres that make you go a little slower. From one tyre to another, the speed can vary by 3kph.”
> Tour de France pro slams "heavier" Look bike for poor performance, but Cofidis team unimpressed and point out same "cutting-edge equipment" has been ridden to numerous big Grand Tour wins
Meanwhile, other suggestions for reducing speed, such as increasing the UCI’s 6.8kg minimum weight for bikes, were dismissed as “stupid” by Groupama-FDJ’s performance director Frédéric Grappe.
“Heavier, the bikes would go faster downhill. There are other avenues, however,” Grappe said, before calling on cycling’s governing body to act on certain aero-focused rider positions on the bike.
“The centre of gravity has been moved forward,” he said. “The saddles are too high and the handlebars too low. As a result, riders’ arms are too straight and they can no longer bend their elbows when it comes to reacting quickly to a problem.
“Seeing riders skidding off the front wheel on a descent is completely abnormal. Everything is done to get themselves into trouble.
“Smaller handlebars are also making turning more complicated. And another consequence is that, in a peloton, the guys are closer together. That increases the danger.”
(SprintCyclingAgency)
Also speaking to Le Parisien, Kiko Garcia, the general director of the International Association of Cycle Race Organisers, argued that a “lot of things are possible” on the bike tech front to help make the sport safer.
“We race organisers can’t secure everything and we ask for help from the bicycle industry and other bicycle families,” he said.
“But the very good news is that equipment manufacturers are not at all closed to the idea of building slightly slower bikes. The will is common. I’m sure that changes will be decided soon.”
Add new comment
45 comments
Let them race Boris bikes. That 'd slow the buggers down!!!
Get them to do it on UK cycle infra and they'd really be slow (some is more suitable for cyclocross / trials afficionados)!
Wouldn't pass the risk assessment though, plus it might cause some folks to have heart attacks with happily confirmed prejudice. Actual TdF non-wannabes literally racing many-abreast...
Blah blah blah. Sir Merckx Cavedish blah blah blah. Cyclists blah blah blah. Cars blah blah blah. Me blah blah blah. Them blah blah blah.
FFS
You do know that reading websites that you don't like isn't actually compulsory?
I think they're just frustrated that some virus keeps replacing all their carefully crafted cogent comments with 'blah blah blah'.
btw please correct the mention of Ben Obese-Jecty, he is MP for Huntingdon, Kingston has Ed Davey
Could the UCI mandate a minimum tyre width? say 35mm, it'd increase the grip, be slightly heavier and less aero without massively changing the way the bikes ride. Still leaves the space for different brands to sponsor teams, and is pretty simple to enforce.
The majority of the safety issues are course design/setup related, so they should probably address those first, but if they want to be seen to be doing something to slow the riders down then that could work.
Tyre width is not a straightforward correlation. On certain road surfaces ( such as the UK, which is usually relatively course), rolling resistance is reduced with a wider tyre requiring lower pressure. If the tyre width gets up around 30mm, frame redesign would be required. Making riders use inner tubes might be a better option as it would increase weight and moment of inertia, as well as reducing catastrophic punctures. However you would probably only reduce speed by about 1-2 mph. I agree that course design is likely to be the best to tackle.
Narrow tyres could have more grip on bends because a smaller area is in contact with the road, so there is more weight on this area, making the tyre dig into the road, especially on warm days. Also, riders take more risks when wearing helmets because they feel safer.
That is of course impossible accurately to quantify in terms of professional racing, but from an empirical perspective of watching road racing for 40 years I would say that riders in the days before compulsory helmets took just as many risks, in fact greater risks given that they did not have such good tyres and brakes as are available to the modern professional. It's in the nature of top professional riders to push everything absolutely to the limit and that has always been the case, helmets or not.
Let them go as fast as they want, but put them in a moto GP suit and full face helmets! Alternatively a full set of downhill MTB pads if the leathers are to restrictive give them the non-aero goggles too. If everyone has the same handycap it's still a test of who's the better athlete?
After decades of watching F1 I recently stopped all following of the 'sport', the main reason is because it has become so boring and quite predictable.
Switch to trophy trucks mate. F1 ain't nothing next to those aussies. Still comes across as a proper hold-my-beer sport (at least if you go by the gut size of some of the drivers). Whoever thought to put massive metal jumps on the circuit... genius... if u haven't seen them specifically I highly suggest a look on YouTube...
Re slowing professional bikes down. A lot of the serious crashes occur in sprint stages. I think race organisers need to stop introducing downhill sections, sharp bends, restrictions, or chicanes in the last few hundred metres of such stages.
Ahem. First of all, I think you probably mean the Eucharist, or Communion. And generally the term is 'giving' or 'distributing'. Other than that, spot on.
Controversial comment: I think that the new Colnago looks quite nice.
I think it has a certain brutal aero aesthetic going for it... I dont mind it. Form follows function...
Another controversial comment: I think it looks like a bike.
Can someone explain this to me.
We'd never (?) say that drivers no longer had a safety margin, "in the wild": we'd just say that they weren't leaving a decent gap or were close passing.
Surely the support cars shouldn't be that close to the riders, if they're concerned about the safety margin?
I think the quote is about keeping up with the riders on a descent or in because they're going too fast, and the vehicles can't match the speeds safely the peloton or lone breakaway can hit now.
Maybe safety would be improved if the driver just *drove*.
The cars in question are the team / race cars who follow the race. Also the TV etc motorbikes are getting to the point that keeping up is becoming dangerous.
Motorbikes normally have 2 people on board - TV cameraman, commission, ex-pro with a mic etc as well as the driver. They haven't been able to match the speed of the riders in the corners for decades, and it's getting worse as the riders descend and corner faster.
And cars usually aren't solo, they're can only go as fast as the one in front - who may be slowing down due to a rider who has a mechanical and has stopped, or crashed, an idiot spectator, etc etc.
Stop. Trying. To. Make. A. Big. Deal. Of. Who. Gets. Picked. For. Sports. Personality. Of. The. Year.
It is not important. Cavendish was well paid throughout his career. He has been lauded by the people who matter: his peers, contemporaries, and dedicated cycling fans. That Joe Bloggs is shown a two-minute VT about some runner or footballer or cricketer and not a cyclist won't make one iota of difference to the popularity of cycling as a sport or the safety of cyclists on the road.
Isn't the claim about rider positioning and higher speeds somewhat undermined by the fact that we very rarely see crashes in dry time trials, even though they are riding faster and less manoeuverable bikes with poorer visibility? I'm fairly convinced that a lot of the problems arise from the extreme youth of many riders nowadays, so they are coming into top-flight races without the requisite experience to stay safe riding at high speeds in a pro peloton; that's alongside the number of riders who are coming in from other sports or even Esports (Zwift champions et cetera) who seem to be given places based solely on their power numbers rather than all-round cycling skill. Perhaps the UCI should run a compulsory training course on race skills for all new riders run by experienced former professionals that has to be passed before a racing licence is awarded? The other thing that I believe would hugely improve safety would be a version of the safety car concept as used in motor racing, e.g. if a steep descent has been made dangerous by rain then a commissaire car/motorbike should neutralise the race and this should be communicated to all riders (a good reason for retaining race radio) and slow it right down until they reach safer terrain. Possibly when they do so any riders who had a lead over the summit could be released first so they wouldn't lose their advantage, although not sure how realistic that would be logistically.
I think a 'Safety car' is warranted, and shouldn't be hard to implement - though we are talking about the UCI, so there's the possibility of them messing it up.
I've also been wanting to see a (FCY) Full course Yellow in cycling for years when there are huge crashes, and chaos ensues.
Sir Mark Cavendish you say? He's not a sir according to the BBC
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/articles/c2dl678wz6jo
There's rumours Sir Mark is getting a lifetime achievement prize, not that it should exclude him from the main prize imo.
But its a joke of a list, again, the guy who actually beat the darts kid to the world championship and won stack full this year, ranked number 1 in the world, doesn't even make the list as he predicted.
From Wikipedia: "The panel produces a shortlist that reflects UK sporting achievements on the national and/or international stage, represents the breadth and depth of UK sports and takes into account 'impact' within and beyond the sport or sporting achievement in question."
That last clause is the key, someone like Luke Littler has clearly had a massive impact on the public consciousness to the extent that even someone who doesn't follow darts like yours truly knows his name, I can't tell you the name of the other person to whom you are referring. Similarly, if it just went on sheer sporting excellence in the calendar year then Harry Brook should be the cricketer nominated, not Joe Root. Ironically that criteria makes it more surprising, rather than less, that Mark isn't included, but on the general point it doesn't make the list a joke just because not every nominee is the world #1.
Pages