More injuries?

ck1racerx

ck1racerx

PR Addict
We all know that this is a dangerous sport. Each and every time you throw your leg over a motocross bike, you run the risk of serious injury. Does moto have a higher risk then other sports? Maybe, (I don't want to do the numbers on that). ALL sports have some sort of risk and every sport I can think of has had Superstars, and field fillers sustain serious and or fatal injuries. What should be most alarming to the motocross community is the lack of response on future prevention.
Football is constantly changing rules, testing and updating equipment and beating around ideas such as completely eliminating kick-offs just for the safety of the athletes.
Baseball has changed the rules for catcher collisions and "suggesting" pitchers wear helmets.
Nascar has mandated head restraints, created tested and implemented soft walls, created flaps on cars to keep them on the ground during a crash, added roof hatch for driver extraction and tons of other things to protect its athletes and fans.
Motocross has done... well I'm sure they have done something... Right?

Bikes have gotten more powerful, overall speeds have increased, every track in the world has multiple obstacles designed for increased challenge, yet nothing has been done to PREVENT injuries.

Sure, someone created knee braces, neck braces, chest protectors, and a litany of other "safety" equipment but not one single organization has made ANYTHING mandatory since helmets.

We as riders or parents of riders are given a nearly infinite amount of options when it comes to selecting equipment. The market is saturated with different companies offering basically the same goods at various prices. How do we make the selections? Is it based on test results? Experience? Word of mouth? or the all mighty dollar? Go out to your garage and look at your bike. Did you pay $150 for the graphics? Now look at your helmet.... Did that $150 make you a better rider or protect your well being?

I would really like to see an organization such as the AMA step up and say enough is enough. Start testing equipment and give approvals for competition. Change the rules mandating neck braces, knee braces, QUALITY helmets (Not the China made crap) and other PPE. Yes, we know, some don't like neck braces. Get over it. If your equipment does not pass an inspection, you are not allowed to race.
I would also like to see a safety "inspector" for the facilities holding events as well. Someone with the power to stop or cancel races if safety changes are not made.

Compared to other sports, motocross makes up a tiny parentage of athletes. When injuries happen it is felt on a much wider scale then most other sports. What needs to happen before improvements are made? Injuries are expensive. Not working on preventing injury is the expense we can no longer afford.
 
Lol.....nothing is going to change on this front. People get hurt regularly yet nothing is done to organize real life safety testing of equipment.

Neck braces.....the argument will never end because there hasnt been independent testing. I truly believe the braces that put the load of a crash on your spine can paralyze you in a bad crash. The argument is better that than to die. How do you prove what the load is without comprehensive independent testing? I believe the Atlas brace which has no load going to the spine is the way to go. But that is only my uneducated opinion. Fact is no one is going to pay for the testing required.

I think the same with knee braces holds true.

And chest protectors, pros used to wear them but not now. Why?

Tracks need to evaluate layouts. Multiple life flights in one season should be an indicator that there is an issue. 4th gear tapped on a 450 isnt warranted at the amateur level IMO. And yes I know, if you dont like it then dont go that fast. Well thats a bad attitude to take. The biggest issue with that mentality is slower riders with less ability to handle that type of riding want to keep up. They want to show off, they want to prove something by doing it. If you build it those riders will hurt themselves. The last few years I have been to many tracks, larger ones that hold national events. I rarely and Im serious RARELY do the speeds get to 4th tapped on a 450. And those are premier tracks so there cant be an argument about the fun factor. Jumps can be big and fun without going that fast. Going that fast is asking to get hurt. Who wants to go down in 4th instead of 2nd or 3rd? Speed is more of a factor for injury than the big jumps IMO. A lofty 2nd pinned jump can still be 80' and fun. The same 80' jump can be built needing 4th gear to clear it. Which is safer?

Go ahead and call me a pussy or what ever you want but facts are facts. The go big or go home mentality from a track building standpoint is asking for life flights.

Until there is a body that actually puts the pro riders first there will be no change in the safety rules. The next guy is willing to come up and replace the ones that get hurt. When the pro ranks put safety into the lime light it will trickle down from there.
 
Injuries do happen in other sports, but serious injuries per 100 participants has GOT to be exponentially higher in MX than any other sport. Gymnastics defies gravity, and I doubt that gymnasts even have the same or near the same numbers.

We've had these conversations on here many times, but no definitive answers really. I've suggested prohibiting the obstacles that C riders are allowed to do, and quite a few other things. It seems that many serious injuries aren't because of high speeds, or the big jumps. Look at Dan H's recent getoff. That was an overscrub on a little table. Another guy almost died a couple years ago at BC by making a mistake on a little jump on the C track. There really isn't any way to know how your next crash is going to play out. The best you can do is to police yourself the best you can, and use your head when you ride. Sometimes that won't be enough either. --L*64
 
All of these are good points, but to me this one is simple. Bikes are too fast and too heavy. I realize injuries occurred before the 4-strokes became popular, but the number of life threatening injuries was significantly smaller. I also agree with regulating safety gear as well as outside testing for that gear.
 
It's definately complicated. All sounds good until they do something taking something away from you and/or requiring something you don't wanna do...then WATCH out... How much do you put on the rider to BE safe and how much on the track, AMA, parents, etc., etc., etc...
 
It really seem like certain tracks have a much higher occurrence of injuries and that the injuries are more serious, life changing and even life ending. I believe that good track owners understand how to build, maintain and manage a facility that is exciting, enjoyable and as safe as possible. On the other hand there are a number of irresponsible (immature) owners/promoters that believe more is better, bigger is better, higher is better without the maturity to understand the consequences.
 
An organization like Underwriters Laboratory UL started as a completely independent and not for profit testing lab for fire and electrical equipment. It has grown into a must have certification for thousands if not millions of products. Not sure if they test PPE but someone has to. Again sounds like another opportunity if someone is will to make the jump
 
Most of the injuries we see result from rider or machinery failure. This is in my opinion is kind of like saying guns kill people. So is a 30' table top out of a corner dangerous? It has delivered two flights this year alone. Guess how how many crashes, not flights, have occurred at the bottom of the high speed straights? I can think of 1-2 crashes, no ambulance rides. Step number one: maintain your equipment, step number two: ride within your limits.

Not arguing, just presenting data.

In general I like a slower technical track, but I disagree that it is completely safer. Bad stuff can happen to anyone, anytime, anywhere. This is a fact.
 
You can attribute rider error or machinery failure to every crash in history. That's a simple argument that you can always make. However, in the spirit of making progress, I think it's fair to at least consider other causes and protective gear that could lessen those outcomes.
 
BriarcliffMx said:
Most of the injuries we see result from rider or machinery failure. This is in my opinion is kind of like saying guns kill people. So is a 30' table top out of a corner dangerous? It has delivered two flights this year alone. Guess how how many crashes, not flights, have occurred at the bottom of the high speed straights? I can think of 1-2 crashes, no ambulance rides. Step number one: maintain your equipment, step number two: ride within your limits.

Not arguing, just presenting data.

In general I like a slower technical track, but I disagree that it is completely safer. Bad stuff can happen to anyone, anytime, anywhere. This is a fact.
Click to expand...

Then yes, its dangerous. Thats 2 more life flights than most tracks have had in Ohio this year. Maybe it is the rider but maybe its because they are given the opportunity to make that error. Not trying to offend you here but if it were my track ( I know its not ) that would warrant a rediesign of that jump. Fast straight aways arent dangerous, fast jumps are. I know the jump in question isnt fast but it will kick your back end high and you need to be prepared for that. In general Im saying jumps that need you to be in 4th gear to clear are more likely to hurt you seriously if you go down than jumps that require 2nd gear to clear. If slow technical tracks are what you prefer then why not build it that way? Inherently they are safer even though "anything can happen to you any where." Thats not a good track building mantra though.
 
KX514 said:
You can attribute rider error or machinery failure to every crash in history. That's a simple argument that you can always make. However, in the spirit of making progress, I think it's fair to at least consider other causes and protective gear that could lessen those outcomes.
Click to expand...

That was in response to Mike and Hershey, their posts clearly blame track layouts. Yes some layouts are better than others, but there still is someone pulling the trigger or twisting the throttle.

Also keep in mind, the medical staff is far more sensitive to liability nowadays. Just ten years ago, half of the flights we see now, wouldn't have happened. I can think of three in the last ten years that were truly life threatening. The rest were CYA
 
You get too effing defensive.

Yes I believe track layouts are to blame. BUT so are many other things. Rider error is a big one, probably the biggest one there is. Machinery failure is one also. And many times things just happen. Part of rider error though can be eliminated by changing track layouts. If you have a tough jump that throws you funny and requires lots of rider input to correct your bike midflight in order to land properly then change it. If you need to be pinned in 4th to clear a jump change it. Do the best you possibly can to provide an exciting fun track while limiting the opportunity for riders to make errors. There are many examples of tracks that use this thought process when designing and still have national caliber tracks. The fun factor, the challenge , the reason we ride is all still there just a little safer.

Maybe if the medical staff is more sensitive to liability ( which really means safety of the injured person ) then maybe tracks should be also. But eff it, the riders still show up.
 
Has anyone stopped to consider that maybe the reason there are more accidents at B.C. Is that there are considerably more riders that attend practices over the course of the year. It's kind of common sense more riders = more crashes. I would be willing to bet the percentage of accidents based on rider numbers is no higher at B.C. Than anywhere else.

Dave, you and I were at a race about a month ago where it was rock hard, slick and half the jumps had holes in the faces. Was that safe??????? Did you come on here and voice safety concerns?? No, all we heard from you was that you knew it was suck and went anyway. WTF??
 
Maybe if the medical staff is more sensitive to liability ( which really means safety of the injured person ) then maybe tracks should be also. But eff it, the riders still show up.[/QUOTE]


Yep, just like you showed up to the race I'm talking about. Thank you for illustrateing my point!
 
Comparing to years ago, I'm sure injuries are a little bit higher, but I'm also sure with social media and forums like this, we just hear about it much more than we did years ago. It's probably not much different than it always has been.

I also agree with Jason that higher # of riders is going to mean higher # of injuries.

It's hard to draw the line between a safe/boring track and challenging. If its too safe, the fast guys will just try to scrub/whip everything harder, and when it goes bad..its going bad. If its too technical...the slower guys will be trying stuff they shouldnt be.

Its a lose/lose situation, I don't know that there is a right answer, other than I'm glad I don't own a track o_O
 
BriarcliffMx said:
That was in response to Mike and Hershey, their posts clearly blame track layouts. Yes some layouts are better than others, but there still is someone pulling the trigger or twisting the throttle.

Also keep in mind, the medical staff is far more sensitive to liability nowadays. Just ten years ago, half of the flights we see now, wouldn't have happened. I can think of three in the last ten years that were truly life threatening. The rest were CYA
Click to expand...

I wasn't trying to blame tracks. It came out that way, but I blame horsepower more so than tracks. I wasn't trying to make it sound like the riders have nothing to do with it because that's simply not true.
 
Dave, I think electricity is dangerous, too many people die from electricity. We need to find a safer means of powering our lives. Now don't get defensive because your an electrical contractor! Come on seriously? You can drive over 100 mph on the freeway, does that mean its a good idea? I don't attempt Larrocos Leap, why? because its probably not a good idea. Do you ride my track pinned on every square inch? if you have over 5000 unique people safely complete an obstacle, and 1 person doesn't, is it unsafe?

These are all questions, thinking out loud. Not arguing.
 
The world we live in has changed so much. Nothing is anyone's own fault anymore. Now a days when riders get hurt we get out the excuse wagon. Bikes are to fast, bikes are too heavy or my favorite,the track wasn't designed to have the perfect mixture safety and challenge. You know this type of mindset would not surprise me coming from today's youth on Instagram. However it is bothersome to hear it from vet riders.

Having said all that, it does not mean that a track cannot have a "bad" jump or a section that needs addressed. It's just frustrating that the knee jerk reaction now a days is to point the finger elsewhere and not take responsibility for our own actions and decisions.
 
malvernmx said:
Has anyone stopped to consider that maybe the reason there are more accidents at B.C. Is that there are considerably more riders that attend practices over the course of the year. It's kind of common sense more riders = more crashes. I would be willing to bet the percentage of accidents based on rider numbers is no higher at B.C. Than anywhere else.

Dave, you and I were at a race about a month ago where it was rock hard, slick and half the jumps had holes in the faces. Was that safe??????? Did you come on here and voice safety concerns?? No, all we heard from you was that you knew it was suck and went anyway. WTF??
Click to expand...

I did not start by calling out BC, JO got defensive and assumed it was his track that was being called out. So if thats where he wanted to take it then I went there with him. Why must you guys get so defensive and argue? My opinion wasnt directed at or calling anybody at fault for anything. That doesnt help anyone. But since we are here, how many other life flights from Ohio tracks were there this year? None that I have heard about but I dont hear everything. Beans had one last year or the year before.....guess what? He changed that section of the track so no one else could attempt that jump. Its not about injury rate IMO because thats inherent with our sport. The OP was talking about reducing injuries and severity. Look at the severity compared to others. Maybe Knox can crunch numbers on attendance for races and practices.

Yes I went to that race, I also attend BC every chance I possibly get. Its one of my top 5 favorite tracks Ive ridden, and now my favorite Ohio track. How could that be if Im bashing his track? I consider myself an above average rider for my age and I know my limitations. I have made plenty of mistakes in my time that have caused injuries and never once blamed the track for any of them. I know when to back off. Im old enough to know when its not worth the risk for me. But my injuries were my responsibility.

Do I think that race was safer than BC? They each have their problems. And yes I voiced that it was bad prep but that I knew it. But look at the turnout......They dont come there do they? If prepped properly they would come and it would be much safer too. That comment was directed to the mentality that appears to say " I dont care if I can make a track safer, the riders are coming here so why change anything?" And it is a correct statement in that case. But for me that isnt how I think. At my track I have changed it every year to make things a little safer, I listened to others who didnt like parts of the layout or jump faces and changed them. I even one jump face that I really liked because of how it threw you really high.

My original point was simply......if you can build a fun and challenging track with slower speeds the injuries wont be as bad. Some tracks have succeeded at this. If you guys dont agree with Mike, I and others here so be it. That is your opinion. I wasnt calling anyone out or saying someone was to blame for anything. I was only replying to Knox's post about making things safer, not "What track do you think is dangerous".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top