Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/17/84; site twitch.UUCP
Path: utzoo!decvax!bellcore!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!twitch!grt
From: grt@twitch.UUCP ( G.R.Tomasevich)
Newsgroups: net.bicycle
Subject: USCF Helmet Rule
Message-ID: <279@twitch.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 14-Feb-86 13:11:12 EST
Article-I.D.: twitch.279
Posted: Fri Feb 14 13:11:12 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 15-Feb-86 10:29:25 EST
Distribution: na
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Holmdel
Lines: 24

One consideration people have been ignoring, at least in the cycling press,
is insurance.  I think that in part, the USCF was trying to create a better
image to insurers concerning their safety consciousness.  In fact, see
the recent Velo-News; it appears that racing may be dead for lack of
insurability.  I would never run a race without plenty of coverage.

Concerning heat load, I am not sure.  I have done plenty of centuries in
high-heat high-humidity weather, both before and after hard-shell helmets
were available and cannot attribute a large effect to the helmet (Pro-Tec).

One interesting comparison is high-speed driving on race tracks.  I have
to wear a full helmet (car helmets are like motorcycle helmets), long sleeves
and pants.  The cars get quite hot in the summer, mainly from engine heat.
I have never gotten hotter or more sweat-soaked on the bike as I have
gotten in the car in such weather.  The people running the events warn
the drivers about dehydration.

Overall, I think bike racing is safer than riding in traffic (commuting
in particular) or riding in club training rides, based on accidents I
have had in 20 years, PROVIDED that the races have separate events
by categories.
-- 
	George Tomasevich, ihnp4!twitch!grt
	AT&T Bell Laboratories, Holmdel, NJ