Not going to insure Enduro events anymore.

British Cycling Drop Enduro

new guidelines say you can’t coach anyone to do drops higher than “hub height”. You can race on them though, like some of the drops at Cathkin Braes, you just can’t train on them!!!
really stupid and backward of them.

I understand that there may be more claims from Enduro, but they could just charge a little more to compensate.

new guidelines say you can’t coach anyone to do drops higher than “hub height”. You can race on them though, like some of the drops at Cathkin Braes, you just can’t train on them!!!
really stupid and backward of them.

😯 Seriously? That’s incredibly backwards. If training/coach can’t compare to the real racing then how are athletes meant to compete safely and at speed?

I think what they are basically saying is they don’t want to spend any money on Enduro because the UCI don’t.

Not really a surprise, and better than some of the other rule proposals getting bandied about, for example full line-of-site marshalling on all timed stages, like a DH race.

As soon as UCI and EWS fell out, this was inevitable.

Seen it mentioned on other threads but I think what is needed in the UK is a MTB National body to oversee the sport.

SBC = Some British Cycling.

If Enduro becomes a Olympic sport they BC will be all over it like flys on poo.

And lets face theres two things you don’t want to happen.

hels – Member

As soon as UCI and EWS fell out, this was inevitable.

Ties in with what I heard from BC- I spoke to the gravity development guy- Roger?- a couple of years back, and it really was a case of “we haven’t a clue, so we’re waiting for the UCI to tell us what to think”.

Hmmmmmmm. Hels, if you don’t mind me asking- what’s better overall in your opinion? BC doing their best to run the sport, with mixed benefits and drawbacks… Or no BC at all and, basically, market forces?

Having been involved in some coaching, most noticeably UKCC L2, my impressions of BC is not positive.
.
I just feel it is all about skinny tyres, getting money out of you and not wanting to address some of the challenges out there.
.
I also feel that the UKCC L2 that I am about to be assessed on, so I may need to be careful about what I say, was a poor course. It was full of inaccurate information, little input into what is good coaching or technique and will not turn out L2 coaches of the same standard that BCU/SCA and others do.

Northwind – I don’t mind you asking, but I believe that would be an ecumenical matter !

Speak to you next time I see you.

Could another cycling body perhaps take up the regulation and insurance for Enduro? CTC perhaps?

Assuming that you could live withthem being “de-coupled” from the UCI would it really matter?

the BC rulebook is usually a cut and paste job from the UCI one and if there are issues there then that won’t help

on the insurance issue I would say that BC are in a difficult position, Enduro is effectively DH “lite” in the timed sections. There has been a spectator fatality in DH which is yet to go to an inquest which probably means the insurers and lawyers are flagging Enduro as an activity that has issues as the control measures are less onerous than for DH

but….

BC are unable to come up with a decent off road strategy for XC/DH/Enduro and Brian Cookson prior to moving to the UCI was of the opinion that BC put in more than what the sport gives them despite the clear evidence that BC are the authors of their own problems.

I say, was a poor course

By contrast, my Level 2 Coaching Course and assessment was excellent. Will complete the mtb course presently. As a coach, I have BC insurance, but only for certain activities. If drops greater than hub height are excluded, then I can’t coach that – as per road coaching can’t be conducted on the road.

hels – Member

Northwind – I don’t mind you asking, but I believe that would be an ecumenical matter !

😆 Coming up to Kinlochleven?

Brian Cookson prior to moving to the UCI was of the opinion that BC put in more than what the sport gives them

They should stop rubbing embrocation on each others ‘legs’ and check the DH results this year. It could be argued that we did rather well.

Really need a decent national body for mountain biking. This seems very counter productive position considering how much positive interest Enduro is generating for cycling. We have several race series in the UK with 300+ people attending each event.

Really need a decent national body for mountain biking.

Agreed a National body could also add more weight with access issues and promoting Mountain Biking.

Well shot of BC imho, their actual regulations regarding DH helmets, are incredibly vague, they only specify the very basic of standards of helmet, insist it must be ff but give no minimum standards as they don’t want to be held responsible if one fails (is my reading of their wishy washy regs)

Well it’s easier to type things here than in facebook kimbers because of paragraphs 😉

I’ve not been able to get the full text of the F1952, and not willing to pay for it… but I got this from a manufacturer’s briefing a while back which apparently applies to F1952 and F2032

“A headgear with faceguard that fails to meet any one of the requirements of this specification is considered to have failed the specification, and shall not be sold with any indication that it meets parts of the specification.” Which seemed simple but not all full face chinpieces are regarded as “faceguards”, if they’re not designed to give full DH face protection they’re just “chinpieces”. The test award distinguishes between the two but consumers will never see that.

It’s kind of like the difference between a CEN chest protector and a roost guard- you can still sell a CE-approved protective suit in which the spine protector is CE-approved but the elbow pads or chest protector aren’t. This strikes me as incredibly unhelpful bullshit, but I suppose gives the option of an intermediate level of protection- a parachutey helmet with a lightweight chinpiece would fail the test, but could still give more useful protection than a pisspot which passes.

All in all, it seems to be pretty much a failed standard, which is a shame. If they’d split it into 2 tests, parallel for with and without face protection, it’d be far more effective… But they’ve not got manufacturer buyin for the standard either.

All the success this country has had in DH seems to have absolutely nothing to do with BC – it’s all been passionate motivated individuals who are picked up by teams, BC seem to be all about the track & road racing to a certain degree.

In Australia they split road/track and MTB governing bodies apart.
Not sure that it really paid off – but it might be better than the current situation of paying subs to BC as a mountain biker and seeing no return.

One thing I can praise BC on – the L2 MTB specific coaching course is very good.

If Enduro becomes a Olympic sport they BC will be all over it like flys on poo.

This +1000

In Australia they split road/track and MTB governing bodies apart.
Not sure that it really paid off – but it might be better than the current situation of paying subs to BC as a mountain biker and seeing no return.

But the needing 2 licenses to do anything is a right PITA. The thing that is so different in the UK from what I have seen is the Club scene, yes it’s mostly just Roadies riding off road but there are kids programs, funded trips to races, lots of events etc.

In some ways does Enduro need BC? Reading the article it’s as if BC like most people couldn’t agree anything more specific about enduro than

Please be aware that this policy concerns only those events termed “Enduro” in the currently accepted sense – a series of time sections joined by linking stages.

I’m not sure what people are compaining about here. The statement reads that BC made the decision they could no longer insure enduro events. Through meetings with the current organisers, for enduro to meet the insurers requirements, enduro would have to change which as both BC and the current BC organisers agreed, would be detrimental to the dicipline. Enduro has succesfully taken place and will continue to take place through its own insurance policy as have many other events.
Regarding BC support for mtb, the 2014 world champs team included 15 dh’ers. Thats massive and fully recognises the successes of the UK in dh. Or am i wrong? A while back an analysis was made of the make up of bc members, it was recognised that mtb (be it dh, xc, 4x) made up a massive minority of members, therefore is it not right that funding is proportinate to its members?
There is a lot of complaining about BC, how they fail to support mtb etc. but very little in constructive suggestion in what could be done. How could BC better support mtb? What else could bc do to support Dh?
I think ipt also worth understanding where bc regulation is derived: the uci. This includes the controversial helmet camera rule, no skinsuits in dh etc (which was a response to dh’ers complaining about skin suits giving an unfair advantage). I guess the point being the uci do listen and respond to rider feedback? Perhaps mtb could gain more support from bc if a greater number of members were mtbers, or if we had representation on the board, but to do that you need to volunteer and get involved in the sport beyond riding. Anyone done that or willing to? (I dont think you get paid btw)

Wonder if it has anything at all to do with the fact that the term enduro has no specific meaning. It started out as long distance events and many still are. Long XC races really. Now there is a new version which is really down hill racing plus getting the bike to the top under your own steam.
Both can’t be enduros and to me that which came first is the real thing. I bet if the new version was something different enduros could be insured etc.
I some how suspect that the new version is hard to police as you can’t watch the riders all of the time and first aid cannot be on the spot as it can with a downhill. Throw in the fact that riders get mixed up which doesn’t really happen in down hill and your have a recipe for a risk averse society to become unenthusiastic.

“Please be aware that this policy concerns only those events termed “Enduro” in the currently accepted sense – a series of time sections joined by linking stages.”
Really? I beg to differ.

Well shot of BC imho, their actual regulations regarding DH helmets, are incredibly vague, they only specify the very basic of standards of helmet, insist it must be ff but give no minimum standards as they don’t want to be held responsible if one fails (is my reading of their wishy washy regs)

If you would like to propose a standard to which BC should work I’d be happy to take it to commission for you. We’ve been looking for one for years.

ernie – Member

I’m not sure what people are compaining about here. The statement reads that BC made the decision they could no longer insure enduro events.

I’m a BC member and I want them to support the sport. Because it’s their job, and all. In some ways I’m glad because let’s be honest, they’re basically incompetent in some ways, and I’d rather they said “we’re not fit to do this job” as they have done rather than try, and **** it up, which they probably would. But still, that’s just an acceptance of failure.

There’s no way to say this without sounding like an Offended of Coventry, but I shall be cancelling my membership forthwith 😉 I may even tear up my car sticker!!1!

al – Member

If you would like to propose a standard to which BC should work I’d be happy to take it to commission for you. We’ve been looking for one for years.

Lots of stuff on the UKGE facebook about this- “Is the Bell 2R certified as a fullface”. The answer is no- but your fullface probably isn’t either 😆

Helmet standards really are shit.

This tweet summed it up for me last night, don’t know whether the originator is on the forum but it was this

” @BritishCycling choose not to insure Enduro as racing in Lycra on 23c tyres on open A roads is safer. Oh wait….”

Sadly last year there was a fatality on one of the BC Road Races around the Severn area, where a rider was in collision with a car, so to say that Enduro is not insurable due to risk is laughable, unless they start running them at the same time as Green Laners are using the trails.

As regards to National bodies Mountain Biking seems to be the poor relation compared to road/track. Look how much success the road/track have had with backing from BC. Now look at XC, at the 2012 Olympics we had one Male rider competing for Team GB. Now I don’t believe that for a minute that we have a lack of talent in this Country, it probably just needs some nurturing as has happened with road/track. The success of our DH riders probably has very little to do with BC, but they’ll happily take the glory.

It’s for the best. BC/UCI will only screw it up by making us follow stupid rules.
They’ll turn it into “serious” racing, and take the fun out of it for the average rider.

Bc are idiots… Let them stick to the lycra brigade…

But I thought lycra had been banned in DH?

Sadly last year there was a fatality on one of the BC Road Races around the Severn area, where a rider was in collision with a car, so to say that Enduro is not insurable due to risk is laughable

Not really. The rider at the Seven race was briefed not to cross the white line and he did. There is thus no case for BC to answer and the case has no hope as the organiser had fulfilled their duty of care. Its is way more difficult to say that about a mountain bike event, which is what worries insurers.

While I have some sympathy with the view that perhaps the UCI to BC relationship is too influential, and also I think Enduro should be prioritised over DH because it’s a lot closer to a participatory sport the “typical” MTBer can be a part of (real DH being a bit niche really, which is exactly the reason Enduro has found a place and is growing), it seems fair to observe:
* this is probably the insurer’s decision, not BC’s. I really doubt they underwrite the insurance themselves
* they may well be working behind the scenes to resolve the issue

Is Enduro best kept out of the hands of the UCI? Yes probably.

Bc are idiots… Let them stick to the lycra brigade…

I have some experience of BC through having done the MTB Leadership award. I found the course materials, delivery and assessment were of high quality and were most definitely not the work of idiots.