Something changed last week.
Emil Johansson was a hair away from disaster. And then Adolf Silva went for it…
In case the above embed code from Adolf Silva and Road2Recovery’s Instagram post doesn’t work, the post contains some not hugely surprising news; Silva has no sensation from the chest down.
In the past I have not been one of the hand-wringers as regards Red Bull Rampage. My arguments were kind of along the lines that these riders would be doing daft, dangerous stuff even without Rampage.
But during the men’s event last weekend something changed. I think, like a lot of televised infamy, it was partly due to the instantly-iconic actual camera angle/footage of the horror crash and the instant, total silence that descended on the desert.
And let’s not forget the whole sketchy, panicky, desperation of Silva’s run immediately before the crash. He’d clearly already made up his mind to attempt the double backflip before he set-off from the start platform. This was Rampage; you gotta do something ‘special’ to claim the top spot.
And then, here’s the thing that did it for me, the announcers finally piped up with some hushed words, the event was put ‘on hold’ and they threw to some commercials. Commercials for Red Bull events, shows and stunts. All of which shared the common promotional vibe of risk and/or likelihood of something going wrong.
This doesn’t feel the same as Evel Knievel. The Knievel was the principal risk-taker. He was also the principal benefactor. Rampage didn’t feel like that this year. This year felt like Ancient Rome and the Colosseum. With Emperor Taurine sat on high calling for the next competitor to head into the gladiatorial pit.
Let’s be honest, it doesn’t even feel like Rampage and it hasn’t for a number of years now. As soon as the sandbags arrived, it was no longer true to the spirit of Rampage. It became an event that wasn’t even primarily aimed at mountain bikers anymore. It was now just another viral clip that can also be built into a sizzle reel for Red Bull.
It’s over for me with Red Bull Rampage. I certainly haven’t felt like running the usual post-event result stories and highlight vids on singletrackworld.com this week.
Surely, it’s now over for Rampage. Certainly in its current twisted form at least.
All of us here at Singletrack Magazine hope Adolf Silva’s condition improves. Good luck Adolf.
Road2Recovery Adolf Silva Fundraiser
“Adolf faces an intense and expensive road: daily therapy, adaptive equipment, home adjustments, and ongoing medical support. All funds raised will go toward Adolf’s ongoing medical care, rehabilitation, and transport to Barcelona, as well as adaptive home and vehicle modifications and specialized mobility equipment essential for his long-term independence and quality of life. Your help makes a direct difference in his recovery and stability — giving him every chance to rebuild his life.“
Nah. I’ve seen nothing on this outside of this site, it’s had no penetration of mainstream media and so it’ll have almost zero impact on Redbull. Any tiny negative will be forgotten when a repeat the Stalen Ros is on Dave, or the F1 team wins again. Don’t forget what a niche sport MTB is, and the Rampage type stuff is even nicher, just because it’s on your algorithm it doesn’t mean it’s on everyone else’s.
Â
Â
Yes I do see them as broadly the same. Sure there are different levels of risk. The reason I see them as the same is because the ability to enter is controlled by invitation, not by ability. With the World Cup series there is a route from being good on a bike, through national series onto continental series and then the WC series. Im sure it’s hard and there are many obstacles in the way but the path is there. With the RB events and Crankworx the way in is to be invited by the event organisers and thats it.Â
Â
Sadly this is the reality of the situation.
I was kind of curious as to how Red Bull’s revenue streams break down. If you believe Google, profits come overwhelmingly from drink sales driven by a colossal marketing spend going into sports – F1, ‘extreme sports’, football, e-sports and Tom Pidcock’s helmet mostly. They do, apparently, make some money from sports, but it’s primarily about marketing.Â
Again according to google, their customer base is 18-34 year-olds, skewed towards men and thrill-seeking, urban, ambitious, energetic etc. I suspect the macro take on Rampage would be a ‘extreme sports are dangerous and this proves it’ rather than any concern over their favourite drink brand’s moral ethical duty of care towards competitors, but obviously that’s very much a guess.
I don’t know what Red Bull would have to do to alienate their consumer base tbh, but I think it would have to be something a lot more heinous that organising Rampage.Â
A question for anyone whom has now decided to stop watching it as a result of this years injuries… Would you still watch repeats of previous years events?
What sets Rampage (and any freeride) apart from things like F1 racing or three day eventing’s cross-country (that horse thing), both of which had issues with a spate of deaths and/or life-changing injuries and then changed things radically, is that the course is designed by the organisers and the competitors try to complete the course as fast as possible. With Rampage the competitors design their own course and then try to go as big/tricksy as possible on it. This puts the risk management almost wholly in the hands of the competitors’ own judgement.
Does the judging criteria need to have a fifth element which is risk management? But that’s the opposite of some of the other elements such as amplitude and exposure. And what’s risky for one rider might be much less risky for another because they’re so much more precise in their riding style (like Semenuk). If it wasn’t scored would that change behaviour much? I doubt it – no-one with a normal view of personal safety and risk management gets into freeride, they’re wired differently.
Regarding insurance, someone over on pinkbike with decades of insurance experience on similarly big stuff said that an event like Rampage is uninsurable from the point of view of the competitors, no underwriter will take on the risk. (He said he’d have been asked to quote on it at some point in the last 20 years if it was possible). I don’t know if that’s true but it makes a lot of sense.
It’s very sad.
How much do these riders earn that makes it worth their while to take these risks?
25/30 years ago i imagine the majority of Red Bull’s revenue stream came from pubs/clubs as folk necked their vodka/red bulls by the shitload…
I know I contributed my fair share to their bank balance when under the influence of drugsÂ
Recently watched an insta clip of a bmxer getting up at silly-o-clock in the morning to go training, starting with a swig of redbull 🤢 🤢 🤢 He’s one of the older BMXers and shredded AF so really find it difficult to believe he actually drinks that shit.
Â
Redbull/monster etc provide cans filled with water for use by athletes as product placement to fulfill their contract requirementsÂ
Â
Â
pretty sure 10s of millions is pocket change to redbull.Â
Â
Well it is wrongly described as being a race and the date on the article is on the Friday before the men’s event took place but this does mention the two major crashes so was obviously written or updated afterwards.Â
https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/cycling/red-bull-rampage-utah-freeride-racing-b2850920.html
They pay Max Verstsappen $55m a year
Â
Â
.. plus people working long hours or 2 jobs trying to make ends meet and other less glamorous or marketer-appealing demographics that could well make up the majority of sales. It’s like all the betel nut chewing that goes on in Asia.Â
I’ve struggled to read the aftermath of this and understand where responsibility lies and what is fair when the blame game starts going.
Accepting all the points in this thread that the actual behind the scenes support being provided is extremely murky, and also the free will acceptance of risk by individuals, it doesn’t seem to fully add up.
The bit that strikes me is that most/all of the riders at Rampage seem to have been treated like zero hours contract workers – like Extreme Deliveroo. They have their own insurance as pro athletes, or they don’t. No barrier to participation, their choice. No insurance available, no sponsor guarantees, no problem.Â
As a very casual spectator my unease is that I don’t think I was really aware of that until the spotlight on this one young guy who really seems to taken maximum risk with minimum backup plan.
What do people want?Â
You want it to simply stop and go away as it’s not to your taste?
You want something similar with a better rider support plan for the inevitable injuries?
Other options are available. The option 1 isn’t really an option as it will simply come back with another name, and god help us/you/them may well reincarnate as an even more wild west option. Personal taste isn’t a reason to ban this either..Â
I asked before, but don’t know, what happens if someone has a big , life changing stack at Hardline, or one of the urban downhill races, or any downhill race in particular?
I was never brave enough to combine it with other stimulants, but I wonder how popular Jagerbombs are these days?
Likely the same contributor that made exactly the same point on page 1 of this thread.Â
I don’t know, but those events are likely more insurable as there is a set course that has been tested prior to the event (eg that massive canyon gap the wasn’t used for hardline a couple of years ago), rather than having riders turn up and let their imaginations run wild. Plus, no requirement for doing big tricks to win.
They pay Max Verstsappen $55m a year
Â
Â
Â
bloody hell thats a fair wack to play fancy go-karts
Â
It’s a cultural issue in certain adrenalin sports where a small % of the elite have arguably a dysfunctional attitude to personal safety, but this is allowed to set the terms of events they participate in and run. Which coerces other athletes who are further towards the ‘normal’ end of the ‘attitude to risk’ spectrum to push beyond their limits.
It would be a bit like a solo rock climbing competition where you have Alex Honnold as a judge, and competitors rewarded for attempting harder and harder routes. Obviously Alex would never sign up for that, as he understands that these judgements and decisions are entirely personal and should be made entirely free of sponsor or peer pressure.
Compared to Rampage, F1 is very safe (IMHO).Â
Almost everything in the F1 space has been tested to comply with rules that the FIA produce and are geared towards driver and spectator safety. The crash needs to be huge, or the driver needs to be spectacularly unlucky (or both) for there to be a death (again, IMHO). The circuit is, for all intents and purposes a controlled area with known risks that can be assessed and mitigated. You win by being a good driver, having a good pit strategy and crew an, potentially, by not being overly aggressive and crashing.
Another example: I skydive. It’s an extreme sport. People in it die or get life changing injuries far too often (three this season that I knew well).
I continue to skydive because I consider the risks associated with it manageable _IF_ I stick to the plan I make before each jump, if I don’t do stupid things and if i land in a sensible manner. I plan around reasonable worst case (both in freefall and under canopy) and have safety equipment that I can trigger both manually or which will activate automatically if I am not able to. I invest a lot of time training for what I do in the off season so that the first jumps of the year are not alien to me and I jump equipment that, for my jump numbers, is not crazy. That is how I manage risk, but there is never a huge amount of money hanging on my performace, never the expectation to perform unless I am competing and, even then, safety comes first and my assosciation’s rules reinforce the safety aspect.
Contrasting with Rampage. There is limited safety equipment, no ruleset governing safety (as I understand it) and the lack of a defined route means that the rider needs to assess the route they are making themselves. Small things can change between practice and their competition runs that are outside their knowledge until they arrive at the feature. All this is framed in a background of “need to go big or I don’t get paid/win" which, to me, shifts the risk far too much the other way. Rampage is dangerous and it’s being run to make RedBull money (IMHO), not as a sport.
Red Bull Technology (the F1 team) is run as a completely separate business concern from the mothership.
Â
Mateschitz Jnr is a person with significant control though. Technicalities aside, I’d bet all the money comes from, and contributes to, the same pot.
Thing is Redbull aren’t a little enterprising team trying to progress our hobby. They’re big enough and rich enough to be held to a far higher standard of rider safety and welfare.
Though even if the riders were being paid millions, I think my problem with it is because of the judging element, given I enjoy DH MTB. In races, it’s all about the rider against the clock. Risk vs reward is measured in 10ths of a second vs DNF. In Rampage riskier=showier=points, and accountability for success is with judges rather than just the rider.
It’s an incredible sporting spectacle, but so is heavyweight boxing, or gladiators, but we’ve moved on from them too, for the most part.
Â
In 10-15 years, I see Red-Bull being viewed as Marlboro is today.