"No sports mistake is supposed to be fatal"
Mike Jacoubowsky
a death. No sports mistake is supposed to be fatal," President Mikheil
Saakashvili told reporters Saturday.
As tragic as the death of the luger was, and as seemingly-obvious the
dangers of that track were, it's still hard to believe someone making that
statement, and have it embraced by so many others.
Cycling, *all* motorsports, and (rarely but sometimes) high school football,
both American and European, and many others, have had their share of
"mistakes" that lead to death. We are, in our daily lives, presented with
endless possibility for mistakes that could lead to our demise. We are
expected to learn how to drive safely, how to ride safely, learn & respect
the limits of the equipment we use.
In sport, the game is to push those limits to the edge, and the penalties
for going beyond that edge have always been harsh. What would we have to do
to remove those penalties? Neutralize descents in cycling? Where do we draw
the line? How long before we see a reasonable dialog on the terrible Luge
accident as opposed to "shocked" sports writers who relish the spectacle but
not the potential outcome?
--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA
Robert Chung
Shorter Mike Jacoubowsky: "A sports mistake *is* supposed to lead to a
death."
Bob Schwartz
> In sport, the game is to push those limits to the edge, and the
> penalties for going beyond that edge have always been harsh. What would
> we have to do to remove those penalties? Neutralize descents in cycling?
> Where do we draw the line? How long before we see a reasonable dialog on
> the terrible Luge accident as opposed to "shocked" sports writers who
> relish the spectacle but not the potential outcome?
Just curious Mike, have you seen the video?
In cycling it is very common to put haybales in front of
stuff like what killed the luger. In facilities that are
purpose built for cycling, stuff like that doesn't exist.
Preventing that death wasn't a particularly difficult or
expensive task. It was totally unnecessary.
Bob Schwartz
Mike Jacoubowsky
"Bob Schwartz" <bob.sc...@sbcREMOVEglobal.net> wrote in message
news:VuqdnWsrFJv23OXW...@giganews.com...
Bob: I agree that the death was preventable. Padding poles is no different
from placing hay bales around parking meters on a crit course. It's so
obvious you just do it without much thought. Why wasn't it done? I don't
know.But I disagree with the idea that all sports have to be so safe that
the possibility of death can be removed completely.
The basic concept of competitive sledding, luge or otherwise, is inherently
dangerous. The Georgian President's quote, and all those who have seized
upon it, is a reactionary response to something that goes a lot deeper than
the safety of a luge course.
A. Dumas
> In cycling it is very common to put haybales in front of
> stuff like what killed the luger. In facilities that are
> purpose built for cycling, stuff like that doesn't exist.
bjwe...@gmail.com
wrote:
> "One thing I know for sure is that no sports mistake is supposed to lead to
> a death. No sports mistake is supposed to be fatal," President Mikheil
> Saakashvili told reporters Saturday.
>
> As tragic as the death of the luger was, and as seemingly-obvious the
> dangers of that track were, it's still hard to believe someone making that
> statement, and have it embraced by so many others.
Mike,
No sports mistake is supposed to be fatal.
A sports mistake may accidentally lead to fatality,
but it isn't _supposed_ to be fatal. That would be
gladiatorism, not sports.
The Georgian president's statement is perhaps
overly broad, but in the heat of the moment it is
understandable.
The luge track situation looks like a clusterf*k and
after reading this article
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/14/sports/olympics/14longman.html
the officials aren't exactly behaving with distinction.
Ben
cur...@the-md-russells.org
>No sports mistake is supposed to be fatal.
>A sports mistake may accidentally lead to fatality,
>but it isn't _supposed_ to be fatal. That would be
>gladiatorism, not sports.
Think you parsed the statement wrong. At the very least, some sports
mistakes are by their nature probably fatal. If the probability is
over 50%, IMO the statement is simple sophism. Having watched a few of
the new snowmobile sports where taking air is just the beginning of
the spectacle, I don't believe that the possibility of serious injury
and death is not part of why people watch. Flipping snowmobiles in the
air and say, "Gee, nobody expected him to die when he only made 180
degrees of the 360?"
Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...
bjwe...@gmail.com
> On Sun, 14 Feb 2010 11:19:00 -0800 (PST), "b...@mambo.ucolick.org"
>
> >No sports mistake is supposed to be fatal.
> >A sports mistake may accidentally lead to fatality,
> >but it isn't _supposed_ to be fatal. That would be
> >gladiatorism, not sports.
>
> Think you parsed the statement wrong. At the very least, some sports
> mistakes are by their nature probably fatal. If the probability is
> over 50%, IMO the statement is simple sophism. Having watched a few of
> the new snowmobile sports where taking air is just the beginning of
> the spectacle, I don't believe that the possibility of serious injury
> and death is not part of why people watch. Flipping snowmobiles in the
> air and say, "Gee, nobody expected him to die when he only made 180
> degrees of the 360?"
First, let's agree that parsing the Georgian president's
statement very closely is probably silly because it was
almost certainly translated. That said I'll do it anyway.
Yes, I chose one of two ways to parse it, to make a point.
"Supposed" is ambiguous because it implies intentionality
but doesn't make clear whose intention. One obvious
way is the way Mike parsed it, essentially "I don't suppose
that any sports mistake should ever be fatal." Another
is suppose as in the implication of an action, like
"You were supposed to take out the trash" or
"When you press the Prius brake pedal, the car is
supposed to stop." One does not enter an Olympic
event with the supposition that a mistake will _necessarily_
lead to death.
It's all about probabilities of risk. Course designers are
supposed to design a course such that the consequences
of a mistake are highly unlikely to be fatal, but, I admit, not
zero. There have been fatalities in Olympic-type events before,
if not at the Olympics (World cup skiing is the example I can
think of), but they aren't common.
If the probability of somebody getting killed is really high
(IMO it doesn't have to be 50%, even 5% is extremely high)
than I don't think it's sports, it's gladiatorial exhibitionism.
Snowmobile jumping, for me, falls in that category, even
more so than motocross.
Motorsports are clearly a lot more dangerous than most
other events. However, there are no motorsports events
at the Olympics.
Ben
Amit Ghosh
wrote:
>.But I disagree with the idea that all sports have to be so safe that
> the possibility of death can be removed completely.
dumbass,
no one is saying that.
we had a person from our insurer come talk to us (group of organizers)
and they agreed, the riskiness makes the sport exciting so you can't
eliminate it, but there has be proper care of participants and
spectators (proper course design, safety equipment, medics, etc.).
Revtom
wrote:
The Olympics ask for faster, higher, and stronger. Great aspirations
for all of us, but the TV networks also want speed, danger, and
glamor. They regale us with back stories on the athletes, hype the
darlings of the various sports, and then go all mealy mouth when a
hyped athlete crashes and burns. Is Lindsey Vonn a sociopath because
she hid a (possibly) performance-limiting injury? No. She's a high-
visibility skier, with sponsors to satisfy, as well as records to
pursue. The Olympic ideal(s) were sold out decades ago; the Olympics
and their respective organizations are deeply corrupt, and not likely
to change when billions change hands around venues, TV networks, and
vendors/sponsors. It's a racket. People will get killed - either by
having construction trucks crush them, or by smacking into obstacles
on a course.
Tom
Michael Press
Bob Schwartz <bob.sc...@sbcREMOVEglobal.net> wrote:
Without the struts the sledder has a better chance,
but a minuscule chance of escaping serious injury.
In 2006 an olympic snowboarder lost it,
fell on the course, hit only snow and died.
The sledder left the course at high speed.
The reason he left the course is lack of skill.
He got too high on the turn, overcompensated,
went down and into the inside of the turn.
The tangent to the inside of a turn leads where?
Answer: off the course. Don't steer into the
inside of the turn because the sled cannot hold it,
and will go off course.
--
Michael Press
DirtRoadie
wrote:
> a death. No sports mistake is supposed to be fatal," President Mikheil
> Saakashvili told reporters Saturday.
>
> As tragic as the death of the luger was, and as seemingly-obvious the
> dangers of that track were, it's still hard to believe someone making that
> statement, and have it embraced by so many others.
I understand that statement to be a response to the bizarre
implication from some official sources that the competitor was at
fault or somehow not up to the task of competing. But even the
defending gold medalist crashed. Yes, the fatal crash was unusual,
maybe not foreseeable. But they have acknowledged an issue with the
track by making precautionary modifications. I don't think the intent
was ever that only the survivors would be entitled to medals.
DR
Howard Kveck
Bob Schwartz <bob.sc...@sbcREMOVEglobal.net> wrote:
Or the airfence stuff that they're starting to use in motorcycle racing. You can
easily pad hard objects where speeding racers are going to impact. Admittedly,
sometimes people crash in unexpected areas but the officials can respond to that.
http://www.airfence.com/airfencebike.html
--
tanx,
Howard
Caught playing safe
It's a bored game
remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?
Fred Fredburger
Even shorter:
"Life leads to death."
Ryan Cousineau
Bob Schwartz <bob.sc...@sbcREMOVEglobal.net> wrote:
I saw the video. The implication is that they never expected a racer to
leave the course there, which is possibly fair. It was super-late: he
was actually past the last corner, but had such a drawn-out corner-exit
incident that he ended up riding up a (fairly tall) wall and popped out
of the chute.
Heaven knows the obstacles at the roadside on TdF are far worse, though
rarely do cyclists hit 140 km/h.
Deaths in the Olympics:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/02/12/sportsline/main6202560.shtml
One cyclist died during the road race. He's arguably the only Olympian
to actually die during his competition.
--
Ryan Cousineau rcou...@gmail.com http://www.wiredcola.com/
"In other newsgroups, they killfile trolls."
"In rec.bicycles.racing, we coach them."
Mike Jacoubowsky
news:bc5abead-0632-4c34...@s17g2000vbs.googlegroups.com...
On Feb 14, 1:44 pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky" <Mi...@ChainReaction.com>
wrote:
>.But I disagree with the idea that all sports have to be so safe that
> the possibility of death can be removed completely.
=========
dumbass,
no one is saying that.
we had a person from our insurer come talk to us (group of organizers)
and they agreed, the riskiness makes the sport exciting so you can't
eliminate it, but there has be proper care of participants and
spectators (proper course design, safety equipment, medics, etc.).
=========
But there's more to it than that, isn't there? You're also depending
upon the governing cycling federation to provide guidelines for who is
allowed to be out there. You can hold a category 1/pro event without
worrying that you're going to get a cat-4 guy in there who might be
strong but way over his head in terms of skills. You don't have to be
concerned about being all-inclusive for who gets to race.
Different story at the Olympics, at least for the luge. Every country
wants to have their people in there, regardless of how well qualified
they are for the particular event. We get some great stories from that;
who will forget Eddie the Eagle? But that particular case brought light
to a situation that may have some parallels here... he wasn't capable of
competing at the same level as the best athletes, potentially
endangering himself. As a result, the ski federation passed the "Eddie
the Eagle" rule, which basically says you have to place in the top 30
percent in international competition in order to compete in the
Olympics.
I'm just saying there's a lot more to this than quick soundbites, harsh
as that sounds. There are many implications for sporting events and
their governing bodies.
--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com
Bob Schwartz
> I saw the video. The implication is that they never expected a racer to
> leave the course there, which is possibly fair. It was super-late: he
> was actually past the last corner, but had such a drawn-out corner-exit
> incident that he ended up riding up a (fairly tall) wall and popped out
> of the chute.
Seriously? No one would expect someone to come off the
course at the bottom when speeds are highest? Over the
lifetime of the facility, which will host competitions
where Olympic level skills are the exception rather
than the rule?
Seriously?
Bob Schwartz
Bob Schwartz
> "Amit Ghosh" <amit....@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:bc5abead-0632-4c34...@s17g2000vbs.googlegroups.com...
> On Feb 14, 1:44 pm, "Mike Jacoubowsky" <Mi...@ChainReaction.com>
> wrote:
>
>> .But I disagree with the idea that all sports have to be so safe that
>> the possibility of death can be removed completely.
> =========
> dumbass,
>
> no one is saying that.
>
> we had a person from our insurer come talk to us (group of organizers)
> and they agreed, the riskiness makes the sport exciting so you can't
> eliminate it, but there has be proper care of participants and
> spectators (proper course design, safety equipment, medics, etc.).
> =========
>
> But there's more to it than that, isn't there? You're also depending
> upon the governing cycling federation to provide guidelines for who is
> allowed to be out there. You can hold a category 1/pro event without
> worrying that you're going to get a cat-4 guy in there who might be
> strong but way over his head in terms of skills. You don't have to be
> concerned about being all-inclusive for who gets to race.
Eh? Don't know about Canada but that ain't how it works
in the US. I can insure any cycling event under the same
terms as a USAC race and no one cares about any of that
crap. Insuring an XC ski race through the USSA costs
about the same too. I'll bet you can trace all those
policies back to the same risk pool.
Bob Schwartz
Ningi
Also, they've designed the fastest, steepest track ever on which several
people have crashed, including alot of experienced competitors. To me
that means they should be taking extra safety precautions.
This death looked eminently preventable. The simple changes they have
made since - a wooden barrier on the exit - would likely have prevented
the death.
Pete
Ryan Cousineau
Bob Schwartz <bob.sc...@sbcREMOVEglobal.net> wrote:
Expected to fall off their sleds? Yes. Expected a luger to exit there?
Well, one assumes a basic level of non-ghoulishness among the course
designers.
What is obvious in retrospect is less so beforehand.
Heck, every cyclocross race I tend to have disagreements with designers
about what I consider a reasonable route, and acceptably consequential
obstacles. Sometimes I get my way* and sometimes I don't. So far,
despite my qualms, there have been no deaths and I can recall only one
or two minor injuries. There may have been a broken bone in the last few
seasons, but I haven't seen it. Worst CX injury I ever saw was on a
training ride, when my friend BP sprinted into an invisible ditch in a
park, broke his fork, and couldn't remember his own phone number.
Sorry, back to my point. The course was vetted by numerous agencies,
including the luge federation. They may not have known what they were
doing, but presumably "kill riders" was not part of the plan. It was
also in use for a few years. We're also talking about a sport that
involves unpadded racers on ice at 150 km/h.
In hindsight, the barrier needed to be higher there. I'm glad they did.
I hope there are no further injuries. I hope nobody skis into a
snow-making machine, or collapses during their event and hits their head
(two actual ways Olympians have previously died).
*mainly because my friend and club-mate Jak designs two of the courses
each year, and I do some of the pre-riding.
Mike Jacoubowsky
Bob: Something got lost in the translation. I was talking about the fact
that races are safer because you have pre-screened who's in each event. You
don't have less-experienced cat-4 guys mixing it up with your cat-1s. And
while they generally ride the same course, they're not riding the same
distances. The skiing federation has taken that thinking to the Olympics,
where you can't compete, even if you're the best in your country, if you're
not competitive on a world stage.
--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA
"Bob Schwartz" <bob.sc...@sbcREMOVEglobal.net> wrote in message
news:WpWdnYvPz_Yq9eTW...@giganews.com...
Michael Press
<96016453-fe64-4f0a...@b1g2000prc.googlegroups.com>,
DirtRoadie <DirtR...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Feb 14, 11:22 am, "Mike Jacoubowsky" <Mi...@ChainReaction.com>
> wrote:
> > "One thing I know for sure is that no sports mistake is supposed to lead to
> > a death. No sports mistake is supposed to be fatal," President Mikheil
> > Saakashvili told reporters Saturday.
> >
> > As tragic as the death of the luger was, and as seemingly-obvious the
> > dangers of that track were, it's still hard to believe someone making that
> > statement, and have it embraced by so many others.
>
> I understand that statement to be a response to the bizarre
> implication from some official sources that the competitor was at
> fault or somehow not up to the task of competing. But even the
> defending gold medalist crashed. Yes, the fatal crash was unusual,
> maybe not foreseeable.
I expect any luge guy will tell you not to steer into the
inside of a turn; and so it is foreseeable.
--
Michael Press
Bob Schwartz
No, nothing got lost in the translation. None of the things
you mention, none of them, matter in the insurer's risk
assessment. They don't care.
I can run a bike race in the US ignoring all the stuff you
talk about. I can insure that event without going through
USAC, and I can get the same terms that USAC would give me
or better. The risk management people think the stuff you
are talking about is irrelevant.
And I think it's irrelevant too. Some of the most dangerous
and most crash prone riders I know are very highly skilled
Cat 1s.
Bob Schwartz
Amit Ghosh
wrote:
> But there's more to it than that, isn't there? You're also depending
> upon the governing cycling federation to provide guidelines for who is
> allowed to be out there. You can hold a category 1/pro event without
> worrying that you're going to get a cat-4 guy in there who might be
> strong but way over his head in terms of skills. You don't have to be
> concerned about being all-inclusive for who gets to race.
>
dumbass,
from what i've read it seems like luge has a system where a coach (or
some official) has to sign off on an athlete if they are fit to
compete.
in bike races you will still have different categories or events with
combined categories and you will get people who are in over their
head. that is part of the risk that you have to deal with and have a
risk management system in place.
for example if i thought a race was especially technical i might limit
the field or not accept 1-day licenses or force riders to register as
part of a team.
in any case most riders are worried about run of the mill pile ups
(and the other riders that might cause them) but I am more worried
about the kinds of mishaps that might kill or paralyze someone.
William R. Mattil
>
> And I think it's irrelevant too. Some of the most dangerous
> and most crash prone riders I know are very highly skilled
> Cat 1s.
>
Maybe their carbon forks self destruct ?
Bill
--
William R. Mattil
bjwe...@gmail.com
wrote:
>
> But there's more to it than that, isn't there? You're also depending
> upon the governing cycling federation to provide guidelines for who is
> allowed to be out there. You can hold a category 1/pro event without
> worrying that you're going to get a cat-4 guy in there who might be
> strong but way over his head in terms of skills. You don't have to be
> concerned about being all-inclusive for who gets to race.
>
> Different story at the Olympics, at least for the luge. Every country
> wants to have their people in there, regardless of how well qualified
> they are for the particular event. We get some great stories from that;
> who will forget Eddie the Eagle? But that particular case brought light
> to a situation that may have some parallels here... he wasn't capable of
> competing at the same level as the best athletes, potentially
> endangering himself. As a result, the ski federation passed the "Eddie
> the Eagle" rule, which basically says you have to place in the top 30
> percent in international competition in order to compete in the
> Olympics.
Armin Zoeggeler crashed on the same luge course
in practice. He wasn't hurt, but it is not as simple as
saying that the guy who crashed and was killed was
not good enough to be on the course and that his
crashing is prima facie evidence of that. That is what the
luge federation would like to say because it takes the
responsibility off their hands. It's distasteful, I think.
I expect some level of ass-covering, but this suggests
they are determined not to lose any sleep over the
death of one of their athletes. This is not an Eddie
the Eagle situation - the guy wasn't a top luger, but he
had been competing on the world cup circuit without
reaching Eddie-levels of flailing.
Ben
Mike Jacoubowsky
>> that races are safer because you have pre-screened who's in each event.
>> You don't have less-experienced cat-4 guys mixing it up with your cat-1s.
>> And while they generally ride the same course, they're not riding the
>> same distances. The skiing federation has taken that thinking to the
>> Olympics, where you can't compete, even if you're the best in your
>> country, if you're not competitive on a world stage.
>
> No, nothing got lost in the translation. None of the things
> you mention, none of them, matter in the insurer's risk
> assessment. They don't care.
But I never brought up anything about insurance. I don't know why you're
bringing that point up with me. You could say that I don't care that they
don't care.
Except that you're wrong.
The insurance companies would care very much if you ran races that were too
dangerous, and the cycling federation has set up rules and requirements to
try and keep things reasonably safe. There are *expectations* that you will
run a safe event, and if you fail in those expectations, you'll likely not
get a permit for your event next time. Because a series of unsafe events,
leading to injury claims, is going to scare away the insurance companies. So
there is, in fact, an almost-direct linkage between insurance and holding an
event that's relatively safe. The insurance companies would certainly care
if you had a mixed-class event in which people were getting tangled up
because competitors were in an event beyond their skill level.
> I can run a bike race in the US ignoring all the stuff you
> talk about. I can insure that event without going through
> USAC, and I can get the same terms that USAC would give me
> or better. The risk management people think the stuff you
> are talking about is irrelevant.
They wouldn't if there were too many claims. You are already doing things to
reduce that likelihood. If you did not, if claims increased in general, you
wouldn't be able to get affordable insurance (if at all).
> And I think it's irrelevant too. Some of the most dangerous
> and most crash prone riders I know are very highly skilled
> Cat 1s.
That is relevant, and probably goes to an increased willingness to take
greater risks in exchange for a podium placing at the higher levels of any
sort of competition.
By the way, none of this is new to me. My father put together and ran the
Redwood City Criterium for a number of years, a race famous/infamous for its
every-other-lap beer prime. We had Coors as a sponsor, and it was amazing
what guys would do for a case of beer. These days, not so sure that would be
very PC. But it sure made for spirited racing, surprisingly more so than
primes for cash that would have been greater than the value of the case of
beer. Go figure.
More on-subject, we had to deal with a whole lot of parking meters, and
figure out which ones required hay bales and which ones would be OK. And, of
course, on a long straightaway, someone somehow managed to find one that had
no hay bale and got nailed pretty good. Came out OK in the end (broken bones
which healed). Should every single one of possibly hundreds of parking
meters been protected? We took care of any parking meters in and near
corners, as well as the finishing stretch. What do people do these days?
> Bob Schwartz
Mike Jacoubowsky
news:63465b2b-9c63-46a3...@e19g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
On Feb 15, 1:33 am, "Mike Jacoubowsky" <Mi...@ChainReaction.com>
wrote:
>
> But there's more to it than that, isn't there? You're also depending
> upon the governing cycling federation to provide guidelines for who is
> allowed to be out there. You can hold a category 1/pro event without
> worrying that you're going to get a cat-4 guy in there who might be
> strong but way over his head in terms of skills. You don't have to be
> concerned about being all-inclusive for who gets to race.
>
> Different story at the Olympics, at least for the luge. Every country
> wants to have their people in there, regardless of how well qualified
> they are for the particular event. We get some great stories from that;
> who will forget Eddie the Eagle? But that particular case brought light
> to a situation that may have some parallels here... he wasn't capable of
> competing at the same level as the best athletes, potentially
> endangering himself. As a result, the ski federation passed the "Eddie
> the Eagle" rule, which basically says you have to place in the top 30
> percent in international competition in order to compete in the
> Olympics.
Armin Zoeggeler crashed on the same luge course
in practice. He wasn't hurt, but it is not as simple as
saying that the guy who crashed and was killed was
not good enough to be on the course and that his
crashing is prima facie evidence of that. That is what the
luge federation would like to say because it takes the
responsibility off their hands. It's distasteful, I think.
I expect some level of ass-covering, but this suggests
they are determined not to lose any sleep over the
death of one of their athletes. This is not an Eddie
the Eagle situation - the guy wasn't a top luger, but he
had been competing on the world cup circuit without
reaching Eddie-levels of flailing.
Ben
===============
The Luge federation is exactly who has blood on their hands in this one.
They signed off on the course, they determine who is allowed to race. And
"this guy" was well below the standards of anyone who could even come close
to a medal. It wasn't "this guy's" fault (Nodar Kumaritashvili) that he was
out there on a track too dangerous for any but the most-skilled Lugers.
The Luge federation was well aware of every aspect of the course, and how in
the world someone could walk the course and not notice the dangers is beyond
me. The photo at the top of this story-
http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/35369187/ns/sports-olympic_sports/ - how can
anyone see that and not believe the Luge federation shares substantial blame
in this accident???
But this thread has gone into something entirely different than what I first
brought up, which was the idea that there should be no opportunity for a
mistake in sports to be fatal.
Mike Jacoubowsky
news:rubrum-2DAF76....@news.albasani.net...
Foreseeable, yes. But when you look at the photo I referenced elsewhere, at
the top of this page-
http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/35369187/ns/sports-olympic_sports/ - you may
come away with a different feeling about it. Yes, a higher skill level is
relevant, but balancing the cost of a mistake and its consequences vs the
pretty low cost of raising the side of that wall...
DirtRoadie
> In article
> <96016453-fe64-4f0a-ab42-e58625352...@b1g2000prc.googlegroups.com>,
I would think a broad application of "Shit happens" and/or Murphy's
law should dictate how safety precautions would be implemented - i.e.
take every precaution possible.
It would not seem that the racer was unqualified.
http://www.nbcolympics.com/news-features/news/newsid=419540.html#luger+told+will+either+die
http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/35369187/ns/sports-olympic_sports/
"But the International Luge Federation and Vancouver Olympic officials
said their investigation showed that the crash was the result of human
error and that 'there was no indication that the accident was caused
by deficiencies in the track.' '
My take on it - Crash no. Injury yes.
DR
Amit Ghosh
wrote:
What do people do these days?
>
barriers. if that's not possible I'd narrow the road somehow to keep
the racers away from the edge of the road.
Bob Schwartz
>>> Bob: Something got lost in the translation. I was talking about the
>>> fact that races are safer because you have pre-screened who's in each
>>> event. You don't have less-experienced cat-4 guys mixing it up with
>>> your cat-1s. And while they generally ride the same course, they're
>>> not riding the same distances. The skiing federation has taken that
>>> thinking to the Olympics, where you can't compete, even if you're the
>>> best in your country, if you're not competitive on a world stage.
>>
>> No, nothing got lost in the translation. None of the things
>> you mention, none of them, matter in the insurer's risk
>> assessment. They don't care.
>
> But I never brought up anything about insurance. I don't know why you're
> bringing that point up with me. You could say that I don't care that
> they don't care.
Mike, you responded to a post on risk assessment in cycling
that referenced an interaction with the representative of
an insurer. You expressed an opinion that both I and the
major cycling event insurer disagrees with.
> Except that you're wrong.
And here you respond in the future tense to something that
I am stating in the present tense. Yes, if the shit hits
the fan things will be different. But no matter, today I
can still cover the risks of a cycling event with an
insurer and today they do not care about any of the things
you claim they care about. Today. Now.
I haven't run an event under USAC rules in years. I'm
telling you, they are completely, totally, utterly
irrelevant to the risk that the people that are professionals
at such things assign to the event. Today.
Yes, if I bring a gun to an event and start picking off
yellow line violators I might have difficulty permitting a
future event. As if I needed a permit.
But that wouldn't change what is available to me today.
Henry
> On Feb 15, 10:44 am, Michael Press <rub...@pacbell.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > In article
> > <96016453-fe64-4f0a-ab42-e58625352...@b1g2000prc.googlegroups.com>,
>
> > DirtRoadie <DirtRoa...@aol.com> wrote:
> > > On Feb 14, 11:22 am, "Mike Jacoubowsky" <Mi...@ChainReaction.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > "One thing I know for sure is that no sports mistake is supposed to lead to
> > > > a death. No sports mistake is supposed to be fatal," President Mikheil
> > > > Saakashvili told reporters Saturday.
>
> > > > As tragic as the death of the luger was, and as seemingly-obvious the
> > > > dangers of that track were, it's still hard to believe someone making that
> > > > statement, and have it embraced by so many others.
>
> > > I understand that statement to be a response to the bizarre
> > > implication from some official sources that the competitor was at
> > > fault or somehow not up to the task of competing. But even the
> > > defending gold medalist crashed. Yes, the fatal crash was unusual,
> > > maybe not foreseeable.
>
> > I expect any luge guy will tell you not to steer into the
> > inside of a turn; and so it is foreseeable.
>
> I would think a broad application of "Shit happens" and/or Murphy's
> law should dictate how safety precautions would be implemented - i.e.
> take every precaution possible.
>
> http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/35369187/ns/sports-olympic_sports/
> "But the International Luge Federation and Vancouver Olympic officials
> said their investigation showed that the crash was the result of human
> error and that 'there was no indication that the accident was caused
> by deficiencies in the track.' '
>
> My take on it - Crash no. Injury yes.
> DR
I feel a lawsuit coming on
DirtRoadie
That would not seem to be out of the question, although that makes me
wonder what sort of waivers, if any, are signed by Olympic athletes.
Or, for that matter, any athlete competing in an elite level
international sport with some inherent risk. Anybody know?
DR
KurganGringioni
"Ryan Cousineau" <rcou...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:rcousine-8F148D.09060415022010@[74.223.185.199.nw.nuvox.net]...
: In article <eP2dnROZZpgr1uTW...@giganews.com>,
Dumnbass -
In bike racing the finish line isn't contested going downhill at 90mph.
If it were, there'd be some elaborate safety precautions wouldn't there?
thanks,
Kurgan. presented by Gringioni.
Amit Ghosh
wrote:
> And here you respond in the future tense to something that
> I am stating in the present tense. Yes, if the shit hits
> the fan things will be different. But no matter, today I
> can still cover the risks of a cycling event with an
> insurer and today they do not care about any of the things
> you claim they care about. Today. Now.
dumbass,
this has been my experience as well. they will naturally care about
issues that might lead to claims.
they never card about the skills of riders or any sort of vetting
process. they didn't even see a need to make a distinction between a
race, an organized ride, tour or some other type of event like say a
bmx freestyle competition.
Howard Kveck
Ryan Cousineau <rcou...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sorry, back to my point. The course was vetted by numerous agencies,
> including the luge federation. They may not have known what they were
> doing, but presumably "kill riders" was not part of the plan. It was
> also in use for a few years. We're also talking about a sport that
> involves unpadded racers on ice at 150 km/h.
Well, no one has tried to say that the track was designed with fatalities as a
positive part of the plan. But I heard this afternoon that the course designer (who
has done the last three Olympic luge tracks) stated that the athletes are going
almost twenty mph faster than he expected. He wasn't sure what happened between the
design and the construction that could account for the extra speed. As for how long
the track had been in use, I read yesterday that the Canadians (yeah, you!) had made
it kind of hard for competitors from other countries to get runs in. The average
Canadian team member had something over 250 runs while other countries' teams were at
a fraction of that number. Kumaritashvili (the Georgian) only had about 25. But even
the best guys are crashing on the track - the extra speed probably has a lot to do
with that. As for the place Kumaritashvili ended up going off, it's at the exit of
the turn, isn't it? The athlete that crashes ends up sliding for ages and at the
speed they're going it's not all that surprising that someone could crash in a way
that launches them out. Even if they thought the wall was tall enough, it couldn't
heve been out of the question to pad the poles that are inches away from the course.
That kind of thinking isn't in the realm of "making it so safe that it's not real
sport," it's simple common sense insurance.
Henry
> In article <rcousine-8F148D.09060415022010@[74.223.185.199.nw.nuvox.net]>,
now I REALLY feel a law suit coming on.
the media (and organisers too ?) need a f*cking good kicking for
releasing images of the poor bast*rd crashing to his death; beyond
despicable. I'd like to see criminal charges too.
Michael Press
"KurganGringioni" <soulinth...@gmail.com> wrote:
Yes, they would have a brace of ambulances at the finish.
--
Michael Press
Michael Press
Howard Kveck <YOURh...@h-SHOESbomb.com> wrote:
> In article <rcousine-8F148D.09060415022010@[74.223.185.199.nw.nuvox.net]>,
> Ryan Cousineau <rcou...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Sorry, back to my point. The course was vetted by numerous agencies,
> > including the luge federation. They may not have known what they were
> > doing, but presumably "kill riders" was not part of the plan. It was
> > also in use for a few years. We're also talking about a sport that
> > involves unpadded racers on ice at 150 km/h.
>
> Well, no one has tried to say that the track was designed with fatalities as a
> positive part of the plan. But I heard this afternoon that the course designer (who
> has done the last three Olympic luge tracks) stated that the athletes are going
> almost twenty mph faster than he expected. He wasn't sure what happened between the
> design and the construction that could account for the extra speed. As for how long
> the track had been in use, I read yesterday that the Canadians (yeah, you!) had made
> it kind of hard for competitors from other countries to get runs in. The average
> Canadian team member had something over 250 runs while other countries' teams were at
> a fraction of that number. Kumaritashvili (the Georgian) only had about 25. But even
> the best guys are crashing on the track - the extra speed probably has a lot to do
> with that. As for the place Kumaritashvili ended up going off, it's at the exit of
> the turn, isn't it? The athlete that crashes ends up sliding for ages and at the
> speed they're going it's not all that surprising that someone could crash in a way
> that launches them out.
He did not go off course because he crashed.
--
Michael Press
Michael Press
"Mike Jacoubowsky" <Mi...@ChainReaction.com> wrote:
> "Michael Press" <rub...@pacbell.net> wrote in message
> news:rubrum-2DAF76....@news.albasani.net...
> > In article
> > <96016453-fe64-4f0a...@b1g2000prc.googlegroups.com>,
> > DirtRoadie <DirtR...@aol.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Feb 14, 11:22 am, "Mike Jacoubowsky" <Mi...@ChainReaction.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> > "One thing I know for sure is that no sports mistake is supposed to
> >> > lead to
> >> > a death. No sports mistake is supposed to be fatal," President Mikheil
> >> > Saakashvili told reporters Saturday.
> >> >
> >> > As tragic as the death of the luger was, and as seemingly-obvious the
> >> > dangers of that track were, it's still hard to believe someone making
> >> > that
> >> > statement, and have it embraced by so many others.
> >>
> >> I understand that statement to be a response to the bizarre
> >> implication from some official sources that the competitor was at
> >> fault or somehow not up to the task of competing. But even the
> >> defending gold medalist crashed. Yes, the fatal crash was unusual,
> >> maybe not foreseeable.
> >
> > I expect any luge guy will tell you not to steer into the
> > inside of a turn; and so it is foreseeable.
>
> Foreseeable, yes. But when you look at the photo I referenced elsewhere, at
> the top of this page-
> http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/35369187/ns/sports-olympic_sports/ - you may
> come away with a different feeling about it. Yes, a higher skill level is
> relevant, but balancing the cost of a mistake and its consequences vs the
> pretty low cost of raising the side of that wall...
At no time have I discussed what was in the exit trajectory.
I am perfectly clear about something that was foreseeable.
--
Michael Press
Michael Press
<fd634446-7bb5-44d6...@e19g2000prn.googlegroups.com>,
DirtRoadie <DirtR...@aol.com> wrote:
Agree. The reason he went off course is piloting.
--
Michael Press
Michael Press
<63465b2b-9c63-46a3...@e19g2000prn.googlegroups.com>,
"b...@mambo.ucolick.org" <bjwe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 15, 1:33 am, "Mike Jacoubowsky" <Mi...@ChainReaction.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > But there's more to it than that, isn't there? You're also depending
> > upon the governing cycling federation to provide guidelines for who is
> > allowed to be out there. You can hold a category 1/pro event without
> > worrying that you're going to get a cat-4 guy in there who might be
> > strong but way over his head in terms of skills. You don't have to be
> > concerned about being all-inclusive for who gets to race.
> >
> > Different story at the Olympics, at least for the luge. Every country
> > wants to have their people in there, regardless of how well qualified
> > they are for the particular event. We get some great stories from that;
> > who will forget Eddie the Eagle? But that particular case brought light
> > to a situation that may have some parallels here... he wasn't capable of
> > competing at the same level as the best athletes, potentially
> > endangering himself. As a result, the ski federation passed the "Eddie
> > the Eagle" rule, which basically says you have to place in the top 30
> > percent in international competition in order to compete in the
> > Olympics.
>
> Armin Zoeggeler crashed on the same luge course
> in practice.
Did he go off course?
> He wasn't hurt, but it is not as simple as
> saying that the guy who crashed and was killed was
> not good enough to be on the course and that his
> crashing is prima facie evidence of that.
Going off course is prima facie evidence.
--
Michael Press
KurganGringioni
"Howard Kveck" <YOURh...@h-SHOESbomb.com> wrote in message
news:YOURhoward-40AC3...@news.giganews.com...
: The average
: Canadian team member had something over 250 runs while other countries'
teams were at
: a fraction of that number. Kumaritashvili (the Georgian) only had about
25.
Dumbass -
The fatality notwithstanding, that just poor sportsmanship.
KurganGringioni
: >
: > http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/35369187/ns/sports-olympic_sports/
: > "But the International Luge Federation and Vancouver Olympic officials
: > said their investigation showed that the crash was the result of human
: > error and that 'there was no indication that the accident was caused
: > by deficiencies in the track.' '
: >
: > My take on it - Crash no. Injury yes.
:
: Agree. The reason he went off course is piloting.
Dumbass -
One could say the same thing about crashes in crits, but that doesn't
prevent us from haybaling traffic lights, parking meters, telephone poles
and the like.
Mike Jacoubowsky
>
> In bike racing the finish line isn't contested going downhill at 90mph.
>
> If it were, there'd be some elaborate safety precautions wouldn't there?
>
> thanks,
>
> Kurgan. presented by Gringioni.
You never raced Nevada City did you? No, not 90mph, but it does finish on
the downhill, and every single lap you're flying down a *fast* descent
straight into a 90 degree turn. It was more fun when they made the turn a
bit further up the hill, onto a much-narrower, just over one-lane road.
One year I raced it, I watch a guy lose his nerve on that descent and not
even try to make the corner. Just plowed straight into the elaborate safety
precautions (hay bails).
KurganGringioni
"Mike Jacoubowsky" <Mi...@ChainReaction.com> wrote in message
news:GoqdnTaYh_9g7-bW...@earthlink.com...
:> Dumnbass -
: >
: > In bike racing the finish line isn't contested going downhill at 90mph.
: >
: > If it were, there'd be some elaborate safety precautions wouldn't there?
: >
: > thanks,
: >
: > Kurgan. presented by Gringioni.
:
: You never raced Nevada City did you? No, not 90mph, but it does finish on
: the downhill, and every single lap you're flying down a *fast* descent
: straight into a 90 degree turn. It was more fun when they made the turn a
: bit further up the hill, onto a much-narrower, just over one-lane road.
:
: One year I raced it, I watch a guy lose his nerve on that descent and not
: even try to make the corner. Just plowed straight into the elaborate
safety
: precautions (hay bails).
Dumbass -
Yep. Hay Bales. Padding.
bjwe...@gmail.com
>
> "b...@mambo.ucolick.org" <bjwei...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
>
> > Armin Zoeggeler crashed on the same luge course
> > in practice.
>
> Did he go off course?
>
> > He wasn't hurt, but it is not as simple as
> > saying that the guy who crashed and was killed was
> > not good enough to be on the course and that his
> > crashing is prima facie evidence of that.
>
> Going off course is prima facie evidence.
http://www.gfisk.com/gallery/BicycleRacing/2004USProCrit/DSC_0874.jpg.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_JuJQwOsaG4
Ben
Kurgan Gringioni
>> saying that the guy who crashed and was killed was
>> not good enough to be on the course and that his
>> crashing is prima facie evidence of that.
>
> Going off course is prima facie evidence.
Dumbass -
That is a weak position.
Everyone crashes. Supposedly the dead luger wasn't the best, but he wasn't
the worst either.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/SPORT/03/23/cycling.armstrong/
(CNN) -- American cyclist Lance Armstrong suffered a shattering blow in his
comeback bid on Monday when he broke his right collarbone after falling on
the first stage of a five-day race in northern Spain.
<snip><end>
Michael Press
<6b933d22-19a0-46fb...@z1g2000prc.googlegroups.com>,
"b...@mambo.ucolick.org" <bjwe...@gmail.com> wrote:
Okay.
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_JuJQwOsaG4
My computer gets indigestion when I turn on that stuff,
so it is lost to me.
--
Michael Press
Michael Press
"Kurgan Gringioni" <kgrin...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Yes, everybody crashes. Every pilot did something
or somethings that contributed to the crash. The
luge guy did something luge guys absolutely must
never do: he steered down into the inside of the turn.
It launched him off course. How many luge guys and
gals went off course at these games? Going off course
in luge is prima facie evidence of grievous pilot error.
--
Michael Press
Henry
> In article <hlg8li$ul...@news.eternal-september.org>,
so those responsible for safety are off the hook because his pilot
error was unforeseeable ?
Kurgan. presented by Gringioni.
> In article <hlg8li$ul...@news.eternal-september.org>,
Dumbass -
The steel beam should be padded.
bjwe...@gmail.com
> "b...@mambo.ucolick.org" <bjwei...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Feb 16, 4:02 pm, Michael Press <rub...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> > > "b...@mambo.ucolick.org" <bjwei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Armin Zoeggeler crashed on the same luge course
> > > > in practice.
>
> > > Did he go off course?
>
> > > > He wasn't hurt, but it is not as simple as
> > > > saying that the guy who crashed and was killed was
> > > > not good enough to be on the course and that his
> > > > crashing is prima facie evidence of that.
>
> > > Going off course is prima facie evidence.
>
>
> Okay.
>
> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_JuJQwOsaG4
>
> My computer gets indigestion when I turn on that stuff,
> so it is lost to me.
It's a short clip of Herman Maier's spectacular crash
on the downhill course at Nagano 1998, or rather off
the downhill course. Calling it a ski crash doesn't
really begin to describe it. He looks like he's suddenly
taken up parasailing without a parachute.
Everyone momentarily thought he was dead, although
in fact he won the super-G and giant slalom a few days
later.
(BTW, youtube videos play fine on my ancient laptop
running Linux, so they are fairly playable unless one
is making a principled statement against Adobe Flash
or something like that. Which is fine, but being able to
watch videos is helpful for discussing action sports.)
Skiers crash more often than lugers, I think, and perhaps
with fewer serious consequences. But my point is this:
Racing is not like riding, especially in skill sports as opposed
to endurance sports. Time differences are very small at
elite levels, and so top athletes are shaving the very edge
of what they can control. This is why even a Zoeggeler
or Maier can crash and burn, and Robbie Ventura slid
out in the last corner of his last pro criterium. A ski racer
who has never crashed out is probably too conservative to
be a top ski racer.
I never had it in me to go really balls-out during a bike
race (I would get passed on descents in MTB races and
then pass them back on climbs), and was a poor
technical descender compared to the Norcal riders
with lots of MTB and twisty road experience that I rode with.
(That still put me at about 98th percentile of century riders;
watching recreational riders descend can be frightening).
I just didn't have the lack of inhibition you need to test
the limits of how far you can go. That attitude keeps you
upright (most of the time), but it doesn't get you to the Olympics.
Ben
Michael Press
<708b314a-2eb6-462c...@k2g2000pro.googlegroups.com>,
Henry <snogfest_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> so those responsible for safety are off the hook because his pilot
> error was unforeseeable ?
In another message I stated that the consequence
of that error is foreseeable.
--
Michael Press
Michael Press
DirtRoadie
> How much padding?
Somewhere between 5 and 10 feet should be sufficient to make 90 mph
impacts survivable.
DR
Kurgan Gringioni
>> >
>> > Yes, everybody crashes. Every pilot did something
>> > or somethings that contributed to the crash. The
>> > luge guy did something luge guys absolutely must
>> > never do: he steered down into the inside of the turn.
>> > It launched him off course. How many luge guys and
>> > gals went off course at these games? Going off course
>> > in luge is prima facie evidence of grievous pilot error.
>>
>> Dumbass -
>>
>> The steel beam should be padded.
>
> How much padding?
Dumbass -
I dunno, but when they've got people going 90 mph . . . .
kinetic energy increases with the square of velocity. If someone hits a bare
steel beam going that fast, it'd be more surprising if they lived than if
they died.
Meaningless anecdote time: my neighbors used to be into high speed
offroading (Baja 1000 style). One of them constructed a roll cage for his
truck using seamless cro-moly because the seamed tubing was rupturing.. Very
expensive when the cromoly is 2 inch diameter .125 thickness tube. He said
that he tried to avoid going faster than 80mph because even when protected
by a roll cage like that the chances of survival starts to diminish
exponentially. <end of meaningless anecdote>
bjwe...@gmail.com
> "Michael Press" <rub...@pacbell.net> wrote in message
>
> news:rubrum-2F20C7....@news.albasani.net...
>
>
>
> >> > Yes, everybody crashes. Every pilot did something
> >> > or somethings that contributed to the crash. The
> >> > luge guy did something luge guys absolutely must
> >> > never do: he steered down into the inside of the turn.
> >> > It launched him off course. How many luge guys and
> >> > gals went off course at these games? Going off course
> >> > in luge is prima facie evidence of grievous pilot error.
>
> >> Dumbass -
>
> >> The steel beam should be padded.
>
> > How much padding?
>
> Dumbass -
>
> I dunno, but when they've got people going 90 mph . . . .
>
> kinetic energy increases with the square of velocity. If someone hits a bare
> steel beam going that fast, it'd be more surprising if they lived than if
> they died.
Dumbasses,
Right. The solution to this problem is not padding,
but to not build a track with giant obstructions just
above it in the first place. Failing that, they should
have plexiglassed in the area above the track, the
exit region from the turn. (They hastily did a
makeshift version of that with plywood, too late.)
Plexi isn't as yielding as padding, but the
rider would have struck the plexi barrier a glancing
blow rather than dead-on, and tumbled down the
track, which probably would have hurt a lot but
wouldn't have been fatal.
Ben
Michael Press
<c4154bf1-c8e9-4820...@c34g2000pri.googlegroups.com>,
"b...@mambo.ucolick.org" <bjwe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Skiers crash more often than lugers, I think, and perhaps
> with fewer serious consequences. But my point is this:
> Racing is not like riding, especially in skill sports as opposed
> to endurance sports. Time differences are very small at
> elite levels, and so top athletes are shaving the very edge
> of what they can control. This is why even a Zoeggeler
> or Maier can crash and burn, and Robbie Ventura slid
> out in the last corner of his last pro criterium. A ski racer
> who has never crashed out is probably too conservative to
> be a top ski racer.
The point I am drifting toward is this.
Yes, elite competitors are risk takers.
They don't walk the edge, they sprint.
_However_, there are some risks they
do not take.
--
Michael Press
Howard Kveck
Michael Press <rub...@pacbell.net> wrote:
Micahel, I don't think he intentionally "took [that] risk" - it was an accident.
He made a mistake.
cur...@the-md-russells.org
>It's a short clip of Herman Maier's spectacular crash
>on the downhill course at Nagano 1998, or rather off
>the downhill course. Calling it a ski crash doesn't
>really begin to describe it. He looks like he's suddenly
>taken up parasailing without a parachute.
>Everyone momentarily thought he was dead, although
>in fact he won the super-G and giant slalom a few days
>later.
The Womens downhill yesterday was borderline ridiculous. I've watched
the sport for years (know nothing about it from experience) and I
can't recall a course that seem to cause so much obvious problems for
so many of the elite of the elite competitors. To this casual
observor, I had to wonder if it was time to stop calling it a
challenging course and start calling it a failure. Half of the final
six crashing out is not supposed to be how it is IMO. Real skiiers can
feel free to say how I'm wrong on this.
Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...
Kurgan Gringioni
"b...@mambo.ucolick.org" <bjwe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:5205eeb4-0672-4f14...@b1g2000prc.googlegroups.com...
>
> >> The steel beam should be padded.
>
> > How much padding?
>
>> Dumbass -
>>
>> I dunno, but when they've got people going 90 mph . . . .
>>
>> kinetic energy increases with the square of velocity. If someone hits a
>> bare
>> steel beam going that fast, it'd be more surprising if they lived than if
>> they died.
>
>Dumbasses,
>
>Right. The solution to this problem is not padding,
>but to not build a track with giant obstructions just
>above it in the first place. Failing that, they should
>have plexiglassed in the area above the track, the
>exit region from the turn. (They hastily did a
>makeshift version of that with plywood, too late.)
>Plexi isn't as yielding as padding, but the
>rider would have struck the plexi barrier a glancing
>blow rather than dead-on, and tumbled down the
>track, which probably would have hurt a lot but
>wouldn't have been fatal.
Agreed.
William Asher
>
> The Womens downhill yesterday was borderline ridiculous. I've watched
> the sport for years (know nothing about it from experience) and I
> can't recall a course that seem to cause so much obvious problems for
> so many of the elite of the elite competitors. To this casual
> observor, I had to wonder if it was time to stop calling it a
> challenging course and start calling it a failure. Half of the final
> six crashing out is not supposed to be how it is IMO. Real skiiers can
> feel free to say how I'm wrong on this.
I'm like you, I only watch the women's skiing because I like watching
womenn who can crack unhusked coconuts betweenn their thighs, but I
interpreted what happened to be that Vonn was so fast the womenn who wanted
to winn recognized they had to push their ownn limits. Whenn you are
running flat out mistakes happenn, like Dave Zabriskie crashing at the end
of the TTT.
Inn fact, Vonn was so fast I assume she is a doper, using the Lemond
criterionn.
--
Bill Asher
Michael Press
Howard Kveck <YOURh...@h-SHOESbomb.com> wrote:
I am trying to make sense of it, so thinking of it as an accident
does not shine any light. As far as I know, no other sledders went
off course. The reason he went off course is because he took a
line that _guarantees_ going off course; not a risk, a guarantee.
--
Michael Press
Ryan Cousineau
William Asher <gcn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Possibly true. I assumed we were seeing that the depth in women's
downhill is quite low. See also: Canada 18, Slovakia 0.
Also, did you see the skiier who got about 5 metres from the start
house, and then toppled over sideways? Not the best.
--
Ryan Cousineau rcou...@gmail.com http://www.wiredcola.com/
"In other newsgroups, they killfile trolls."
"In rec.bicycles.racing, we coach them."
William Asher
Yes. That was one of the "crashes" but it just looked like a senior
moment. On the other hand the Frenchwoman was painful to watch. She was
so close and it looked like she ran out of gas at the end because she had
to go so hard.
Did Slovakia pull their goalie in the second period or something?
--
Bill Asher
bjwe...@gmail.com
> William Asher <gcn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > wrote:
>
> > > The Womens downhill yesterday was borderline ridiculous. I've watched
> > > the sport for years (know nothing about it from experience) and I
> > > can't recall a course that seem to cause so much obvious problems for
> > > so many of the elite of the elite competitors. To this casual
> > > observor, I had to wonder if it was time to stop calling it a
> > > challenging course and start calling it a failure. Half of the final
> > > six crashing out is not supposed to be how it is IMO. Real skiiers can
> > > feel free to say how I'm wrong on this.
>
> > I'm like you, I only watch the women's skiing because I like watching
> > womenn who can crack unhusked coconuts betweenn their thighs, but I
> > interpreted what happened to be that Vonn was so fast the womenn who wanted
> > to winn recognized they had to push their ownn limits. Whenn you are
> > running flat out mistakes happenn, like Dave Zabriskie crashing at the end
> > of the TTT.
>
> > Inn fact, Vonn was so fast I assume she is a doper, using the Lemond
> > criterionn.
>
> Possibly true. I assumed we were seeing that the depth in women's
> downhill is quite low. See also: Canada 18, Slovakia 0.
I am not a real skier, but agree with Asher. Actually I also
think that, apart from Vonn, Mancuso's run was so impressive
that all the other skiers were compelled to ski the ragged
edge of control. Vonn was the only one who appeared
strong enough (physically, mentally) to do that and keep it together.
When you have someone like Anja Paersson crashing out,
that isn't a limited-depth problem. In general, as Curtis
alluded to, the final few skiers are most likely to be top flight
so crashing suggests pushing too hard rather than
limited skills.
One of my cow orkers said that in addition to the course
difficulty, the women hadn't practiced on the lower part
at full speed. They had to divide the practice runs in half
and only got one run due to bad weather.
In Paersson's flameout, you could see that she was in
the backseat (weight too far back) when she hit the takeoff
of that last jump, which gave her basically no chance
of landing it successfully. I don't know that one could
blame that on problems with the course or snow surface,
other than that it was an indication of overall difficulty
and fatigue. The section immediately before didn't
look like the hardest part of the course.
Possibly the last jump was bigger than it needed to be,
intending to make a good show for the spectators -
Paersson went 190 feet before landing. Yikes.
> Also, did you see the skiier who got about 5 metres from the start
> house, and then toppled over sideways? Not the best.
Yes. That to me is an indication of the intensity of nerves rather
than either course or physical-skill problems.
Ben
Bob Schwartz
> Dumbasses,
>
> Right. The solution to this problem is not padding,
> but to not build a track with giant obstructions just
> above it in the first place.
Dumbass,
No one could have ever imagined someone screwing up at
140kph and leaving the track.
Bob Schwartz
Ryan Cousineau
William Asher <gcn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Oh, of course. I guess, with this being the land of dumbasses, I should
clarify that I didn't think the talent pool in women's downhill was
_that_ shallow (reminiscent of the joke on The Simpsons about the '84
Olympics, where some of the non-American swimming contestants come from
countries that don't have pools.)
> Did Slovakia pull their goalie in the second period or something?
The women's Olympic hockey tournament qualifies 8 teams. You could
probably determine the medals just fine with 6 qualifiers, but the last
two spots give second-tier national teams something worth fighting for.
The second factor is that seeding and tiebreaking is done by goal
differentials. With the US and Canada wanting good seeds entering the
medal rounds, the only thing to do is for all teams to go all-out for
goals in every game, no matter how lopsided.
So Canada will get a better seeding now, because over in Group B the US
only managed to paste their three opponents 31-1, while Canada managed
to brutalize its opponents 41-2.
http://www.ctvolympics.ca/hockey/standings/gender=w/index.html
Fun facts: Canada and the US were so dominant that they were the only
two teams to finish the Groups with positive goal differentials. They
are the only two teams who have ever contested the IIHF women's world
championships (run annually since 1990 except in Olympic years):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IIHF_World_Women_Championships
Finland has won 9 of 12 IIHF bronze medals, and has played every
bronze-medal game.
In the three women's Olympic hockey tourneys, Canada has two golds, US
one, and the Swedish upset of the US team at Torino (pushing the US into
the bronze game) was enormous.
Robert Chung
> See also: Canada 18, Slovakia 0.
I hadn't realized Slovakia beat Bulgaria 82-0.
Howard Kveck
Michael Press <rub...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> In article <YOURhoward-CFD7E...@news.giganews.com>,
> Howard Kveck <YOURh...@h-SHOESbomb.com> wrote:
>
> > In article <rubrum-3F909D....@news.albasani.net>,
> > Michael Press <rub...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> > > The point I am drifting toward is this.
> > > Yes, elite competitors are risk takers.
> > > They don't walk the edge, they sprint.
> > > _However_, there are some risks they
> > > do not take.
> >
> > Michael, I don't think he intentionally "took [that] risk" - it was an
> > accident. He made a mistake.
>
> I am trying to make sense of it, so thinking of it as an accident
> does not shine any light. As far as I know, no other sledders went
> off course. The reason he went off course is because he took a
> line that _guarantees_ going off course; not a risk, a guarantee.
I should have been more expansive - sorry about that. What I'm trying to point out
is that he took that line because he may have misjudged where he was on the course,
nudged a wall (which made him turn) or some other reason. Going by what I've read,
those luges are pretty sensitive to steering input. Since they were going 15 to 20
mph faster than they normally do at that point on a course, he couldn't correct and
get back on the more proper line.
Kurgan Gringioni
"Robert Chung" <anonymou...@address.invalid> wrote in message
news:hlla3r$tri$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
> Ryan Cousineau wrote:
>> See also: Canada 18, Slovakia 0.
>
> I hadn't realized Slovakia beat Bulgaria 82-0.
Dumbass -
Man.
That is very bad sportsmanship. They should've quit shooting.
Donald Munro
>> See also: Canada 18, Slovakia 0.
Robert Chung wrote:
> I hadn't realized Slovakia beat Bulgaria 82-0.
Presumably the cycling equivalent is getting lapped on a 100Km circuit.
Robert Chung
> "Robert Chung" <anonymou...@address.invalid> wrote in message
> news:hlla3r$tri$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>> Ryan Cousineau wrote:
>>> See also: Canada 18, Slovakia 0.
>>
>> I hadn't realized Slovakia beat Bulgaria 82-0.
>
>
>
> Dumbass -
>
> Man.
>
> That is very bad sportsmanship. They should've quit shooting.
1. Maybe they did.
2. Canada or Slovakia?
Michael Press
<468b2ce2-c56c-4a3b...@s25g2000prd.googlegroups.com>,
"b...@mambo.ucolick.org" <bjwe...@gmail.com> wrote:
Could Lindsay Vonn's injury beenn played up to befuddle the competitionn?
(Lindsay Vonn what? They never say.)
--
Michael Press
Ryan Cousineau
"Robert Chung" <anonymou...@address.invalid> wrote:
Can't speak to Slovakia v. Bulgaria, but as I explained elsewhere, goal
differential matters in Olympic tournament seedings. So Canada and the
US were in a competition to see who could out-brutalize their
overmatched competitors.
It's an honor just to be blown out,
William Asher
> In article <hlm9ih$u15$1...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> "Robert Chung" <anonymou...@address.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Kurgan Gringioni wrote:
>> > "Robert Chung" <anonymou...@address.invalid> wrote in message
>> > news:hlla3r$tri$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>> >> Ryan Cousineau wrote:
>> >>> See also: Canada 18, Slovakia 0.
>> >>
>> >> I hadn't realized Slovakia beat Bulgaria 82-0.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Dumbass -
>> >
>> > Man.
>> >
>> > That is very bad sportsmanship. They should've quit shooting.
>>
>> 1. Maybe they did.
>> 2. Canada or Slovakia?
>
> Can't speak to Slovakia v. Bulgaria, but as I explained elsewhere, goal
> differential matters in Olympic tournament seedings. So Canada and the
> US were in a competition to see who could out-brutalize their
> overmatched competitors.
>
> It's an honor just to be blown out,
>
Shouldn't it be "scissored out" for women's hockey?
--
Bill Asher
Ryan Cousineau
Michael Press <rub...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> Could Lindsay Vonn's injury beenn played up to befuddle the competitionn?
>
> (Lindsay Vonn what? They never say.)
Lindsay Vonn's injury could have been played up to befuddle the
competition. Lindsay Vonn's injury could have been played up to give Bob
Costas something to say while they pulled skiiers out of the crash
fencing. Lindsay Vonn's injury could have been played up because it was
the only news most people knew about Lindsay Vonn*.
Among other things, I gather several of the top competitors are friends
as well, and I would think that downhill, with its pure
against-the-clock nature, would lend itself poorly to head games
involving the health of your competition, and to savage rivalries.
It's not boxing.
*I like to imagine that it's going to turn out Lindsay has a cat named
Mittens, and Bob Costas was not informed, and so the interns will be
beaten soundly.
Donald Munro
>> It's an honor just to be blown out,
William Asher wrote:
> Shouldn't it be "scissored out" for women's hockey?
Well if you prefer being scissored to being blown.
Donald Munro
> Lindsay Vonn's injury could have been played up to befuddle the
> competition. Lindsay Vonn's injury could have been played up to give Bob
> Costas something to say while they pulled skiiers out of the crash
> fencing.
Never mind that is this Vonn whatever chick hot and does she play chess
and can she be persuaded to stock Lafferty II ?
Kurgan Gringioni
"Robert Chung" <anonymou...@address.invalid> wrote in message
Dumbass -
They definitely did not.
They were clearly so overskilled compared to Bulgaria that they could've
just played "four corners", never putting the puck on net.
KurganGringioni
"Bob Schwartz" <bob.sc...@sbcREMOVEglobal.net> wrote in message
news:0Kidnevk1d4EkePW...@giganews.com...
Dumbass -
You're being sarcastic I hope.
A. Dumas
> "Bob Schwartz" wrote:
> : No one could have ever imagined someone screwing up at
> : 140kph and leaving the track.
>
Oh Henry.
Robert Chung
>>>>> See also: Canada 18, Slovakia 0.
>>>>
>>>> I hadn't realized Slovakia beat Bulgaria 82-0.
>>>
>>
>> 1. Maybe they did.
>
> Dumbass -
>
> They definitely did not.
Maybe they decided to quit shooting at 82.
Ryan Cousineau
Donald Munro <no...@mailinator.com> wrote:
There's such a thing as too much Lars von Trier.
Robert Chung
That would be irony.
A. Dumas
Oh really?
William Asher
"Oh Henly" would be racism. Or a shirt.
--
Bill Asher
cur...@the-md-russells.org
wrote:
Yes, maybe and the last would require more than the combined resources
of rbr. All put together.
Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...
Robert Chung
That would be ironing.
Donald Munro
>> "Oh Henly" would be racism. Or a shirt.
Robert Chung wrote:
> That would be ironing.
There's too much dirty laundry around here.
Donald Munro
> There's such a thing as too much Lars von Trier.
>
Donald Munro
>> Never mind that is this Vonn whatever chick hot and does she play chess
>> and can she be persuaded to stock Lafferty II ?
cur...@the-md-russells.org wrote:
> Yes, maybe and the last would require more than the combined resources
> of rbr. All put together.
Well I doubt if any chick would be impressed by a pile of fleshlights.
Vibrators maybe, but not fleshlights.
Michael Press
<rcousine-757362.10233819022010@[74.223.185.199.nw.nuvox.net]>,
Ryan Cousineau <rcou...@gmail.com> wrote:
> In article <rubrum-772C66....@news.albasani.net>,
> Michael Press <rub...@pacbell.net> wrote:
>
> > Could Lindsay Vonn's injury beenn played up to befuddle the competitionn?
> >
> > (Lindsay Vonn what? They never say.)
>
> Lindsay Vonn's injury could have been played up to befuddle the
> competition. Lindsay Vonn's injury could have been played up to give Bob
> Costas something to say while they pulled skiiers out of the crash
> fencing. Lindsay Vonn's injury could have been played up because it was
> the only news most people knew about Lindsay Vonn*.
>
> Among other things, I gather several of the top competitors are friends
> as well, and I would think that downhill, with its pure
> against-the-clock nature, would lend itself poorly to head games
> involving the health of your competition, and to savage rivalries.
>
> It's not boxing.
>
> *I like to imagine that it's going to turn out Lindsay has a cat named
> Mittens, and Bob Costas was not informed, and so the interns will be
> beaten soundly.
Okay, except for the savage rivalries;
they compete as hard as anybody.
--
Michael Press
bjwe...@gmail.com
wrote:
> "Bob Schwartz" <bob.schwa...@sbcREMOVEglobal.net> wrote in message
>
> news:0Kidnevk1d4EkePW...@giganews.com...: b...@mambo.ucolick.org wrote:
>
> : > Dumbasses,
> : >
> : > Right. The solution to this problem is not padding,
> : > but to not build a track with giant obstructions just
> : > above it in the first place.
> :
> : Dumbass,
> :
> : No one could have ever imagined someone screwing up at
> : 140kph and leaving the track.
>
> Dumbass -
>
> You're being sarcastic I hope.
Dummer Schwartzkopf slightly messed up the quote.
It's either
"I don't think anybody could have predicted ... "
or "I don't think anyone anticipated ... "
Ben
bjwe...@gmail.com
> Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> > Lindsay Vonn's injury could have been played up to befuddle the
> > competition. Lindsay Vonn's injury could have been played up to give Bob
> > Costas something to say while they pulled skiiers out of the crash
> > fencing.
>
> Never mind that is this Vonn whatever chick hot
Your skills with the Google are slipping.
> and does she play chess
> and can she be persuaded to stock Lafferty II ?
Lafferty II has too many imaginary stockers at this
point to notice a real one.
Ben
KurganGringioni
"b...@mambo.ucolick.org" <bjwe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ad2538b4-c677-4265...@k2g2000pro.googlegroups.com...
On Feb 19, 2:12 pm, "KurganGringioni" <soulinthemach...@gmail.com>
> Dummer Schwartzkopf slightly messed up the quote.
> It's either
> "I don't think anybody could have predicted ... "
> or "I don't think anyone anticipated ... "
Dumbass -
The probability of them leaving the track goes up as speed (and therefore
kinetic energy) increases. The top speed anyone reached before they modified
the course was 96mph.
That's fucking fast for someone not in a roll cage. There should be no
immovable objects whose surface is perpendicular to a potential velocity
vector of the luger.
Motorcycle racing (MotoGP and Superbike) is a similar situation where the
racers reach extremely high speeds, crash, and rarely die because they have
runoff (the surfaces are *parallel* (not perpendicular) to the velocity
vector of the racer).
Whomever designed the luge track fucked up.
bjwe...@gmail.com
wrote:
> "b...@mambo.ucolick.org" <bjwei...@gmail.com> wrote in message
Dumbass,
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q="i+don't+think+anybody+could+have+predicted+that+these+people+would+take+an+airplane"&aq=f&aqi=&oq=
or use http://tinyurl.com/y9ubg5d
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q="i+don't+think+anyone+anticipated"&aq=f&aqi=&oq=
or use http://tinyurl.com/y8dmybt
It's a line from that Alanis Morrisette song. She's
Canadian, you know, so it fits.
Ben