Last laugh
[email protected]Hutch
Dr
Should you wear a helmet? It is
entirely up to you, says the Doc
have occasionally been
known to explain to
people that their helmet
isn’t fi tted correctly. Usually the
issue is that it’s on the back of
their head rather than the top,
where it would only be any use if
they fell straight backwards — an
eventuality I’ve only witnessed
once, when a rider in a bunch
sprint threw his bike at the line in
the approved fashion, but let go of
the bars as he did so. The result
was as spectacular as it was dumb.
His bike won the race. He was
about fourth.
On the other hand, I’ve never
criticised anyone for not wearing
a helmet at all. There is probably
a word for someone who will scoff
at the rakish angle of your lid
while not caring a jot if it’s missing
altogether, but we might not agree
exactly what word it is.
I have very strongly held views
on helmet wearing. They are thatit’s up to you. I am zealously liberal
about this. There are good reasons
to wear one. There are quite
acceptable reasons not to. There
are excellent reasons not to make
them compulsory, including the
reduced levels of cycling that have
come about in places that have
done so. You wearing a helmet or
not makes no difference to me,
my wearing one or not makes no
difference to you. That should be
an end to it.
But the argument won’t go away.
Start any discussion about cycling
and safety and third on the list
after running red lights and cycling
on the pavement you’ll fi nd you’re
talking about helmets. You’ll never
get any further. If I were cynical
I’d suspect it’s a ploy to distract us
from more important matters.
And all of this ends up giving
people a very exaggerated
impression of their usefulness.
I crashed during a race over the
summer and went to the local
A&E with a fairly advanced case
of exfoliation. The nurse who was
bandaging me up said, “Were you
wearing a helmet?”
I said I had been. She said, “Just
as well. Just think what might
have happened if you weren’t.”
“But my head didn’t touch the
ground! My helmet doesn’t have so
much as a scuff!”
“All the same. If you hadn’t been
wearing it you might not be here to
say that.”
“But... ow!”
“Sorry, did that sting a bit?”
She might equally have
speculated on what would have
happened if the council hadn’t
left a pothole, so deep it had cavepaintings at the bottom, stealthily
lurking under a shady tree. But she
didn’t. No one ever does.
I encountered a very similar
bit of logic one Christmas. I was
out for a pre-lunch ride, when I
got overtaken with millimetres to
spare by a car that, it turned out,
was being driven by a member of
my family on his way to join us.
Before lunch, I politely
mentioned this to him. It’s not
impossible that I was strivingI was thinking back to the Hammer Series last season,
and its attempt to reinvent road racing with points
races and that weird team time trial handicap race.
And I thought it might be a better idea to steal from a
different track discipline.
So how about an elimination race on the road
— 200km and a 200-rider fi eld, with the last rider
eliminated every kilometre? The tactics would be
fascinating. Get your domestiques in a break to save
them for later? Always make sure there’s a team-mate
behind you, like a lead-out train working in reverse? I
think it would be brilliant.
Dave, email
Dave, you’re a genius. I am forwarding your
nomination papers for next UCI president, and I
regret only that you didn’t get in touch sooner.Dear Doc
“There is
probably a word
for someone
who will scoff at
the rakish angle
of your lid while
not caring a jot
if it’s missing
altogether”
60 | December 7, 2017 | Cycling Weekly