Ducati.ms - The Ultimate Ducati Forum banner

2020 Pikes Peak motorcycle race canceled

4K views 37 replies 23 participants last post by  iamzombie 
#1 · (Edited)
It's not like you're forced to ride that race.
Riders know the risk and it's up to them to decide.

Let's cancel Isle of Man while we're at it. /[sarc]
What a bunch of stupid snowflakes!
 
#5 · (Edited)
That's pretty sad. This race is growing by the year. If you're racing Pikes Peak, you understand the risk involved. I seriously doubt any rider wants to see the race canceled, even only for a year. If the race board of directors wants to be involved, maybe they should focus on making the race safer. At a minimum, why not try to fix some of the road hazards most riders were pointing out?
 
#6 ·
Racing is dangerous, everyone knows that and accepts the risk. Have there been any high speed mountain races that haven’t had fatalities ?The car guys run the race and it sounds like they were looking for an excuse to exclude bikes.
 
#7 ·
All I ever cared about with dangerous races was racers leaving family members behind, often in poor financial situations. I know that's been the case with several IOM TT deaths.

Yeah they know the risks. But the racers are generally a self centered bunch with no regards to their families they leave behind.

There is a two part solution. Part 1: If the racer is married, the wife is required to sign a waiver that she understands the risks. No signature, no race. Part 2: If the racer is married, $500K minimum of life insurance is required from one of the several special risk insurers that is available. No life insurance, no race.

BTW, if you think this kind of insurance isn't real, get yourself learned because I had it on myself when I raced.

That might be enough to make the snowflakes shut the hell up and leave our races alone. I would be happy with it.
 
#8 ·
You guys seem to forget that the pikes peak race is a car race first and foremost and it is run by car guys who are completely ignorant when it comes to racing motorcycles - in the same way that most average non-riding Americans are ignorant about motorcycles. It is not OUR race it is their race. There have been bike deaths in the last 3 PP races and crashes but few (zero?) deaths from the 4 wheel classes. They have no clue what to do about it and dont really care whether motorcycles are included or not so it's just easier to ban them.
 
#9 ·
Part of the problem is that since they paved that last upper section, the road has been deteriorating and receiving minimal maintenance. Given that they don’t seem to be able to maintain the road, and that they also have such a crowded schedule that the motorcycle riders don’t even get a full set of practice sessions in, I don’t know if there’s another good option at this point.
 
#10 ·
Let's start a pool; I say two more days before this thread gets locked. It went from motorcyclists getting shut out to who voted for President Trump ~just that fast~. Gun control, gay marriage, the American President ... all have been splattered against the wall in this thread. 2 more days, max.

On topic here; My dad and I used to go to Ascot Park every chance we had. I saw a man die right before my wide open 14 year old eyes on my 14th birthday there. One year later I watched another man die, again as my wide open eyes were glued to the battle between three racers went on and the racer was killed as he ran straight into the crash wall at 90mph.

Those were but two flat track racers that were killed among a long list of them over the years, many of which were at Ascot. This is something easily verified if one wishes to doubt what I've written here. Ascot was not closed due to rider risk, it was closed in the very early 1990s due to the owners of the property wanting to convert it into an industrial park ... and to this day the property remains a large, useless, parking lot. But it was not repurposed due to rider danger. This too is easily verified.

And yet, American flat track racing not only continues, but it grows. It's seeing a wonderful resurgence of late, actually. Riders still get killed racing flat track, even today. Shall we ban it as well?

If it's ok to "ban" motorcycles from Pikes Peak due to it's "dangerous and deadly nature" ... then we had best look at banning motorcycles from being built, sold, owned, and especially ridden .. AT ALL .. in the USA. Bikers die every day, mostly on public roads and highways. FAR FAR FAR more than on race tracks. So, with the logic used by yet another committee (PP) that insists on saving us motorcyclists from ourselves, then all motorcycle use, ownership, selling, importing, manufacturing, must be banned out of existence. Y'know, cuz we're all too stupid to know any better and we MUST be saved from ourselves.

And what of cars? Tens of thousands of people die every year ... woopsy! ... time to ban cars. People die every year of alcohol use (either long term use or from alcohol poisoning at parties or during hazing events) ... time to ban alcohol!

That insurance notion? ... yet another idea that would preclude less wealthy people from participating in the Pikes Peak race and only permitting the wealthiest and/or most sponsored to participate ... reeks of elitism. Same thing with the spousal "permission slip" ... what happens in a falling-apart marriage with a mean spirited spouse that won't sign the permission slip just to spite the would-be participant? Bad idea from the get-go.

People die by the hundreds ... all at once ... flying in commercial airliners ... ban them as well?

This idea of saving people from themselves just plain old sucks. Fix the upper portion of the track at Pikes Peak? Why, that would cost too much because the weather causes so much damage it would need annual repair efforts (the roads freeze during winter, which makes the surface crack and deteriorate) ... so the entry fee would need to triple ... yet another cost of entry fee increase.

No-one held a gun to Collin's head to force him to go as fast as he did on the final portion, he made that decision on his own. He knew the risks of going as fast as he did ... he made his own choice to do that ... he gambled, and lost. That's on him.

:|
 
#14 ·
That insurance notion? ... yet another idea that would preclude less wealthy people from participating in the Pikes Peak race and only permitting the wealthiest and/or most sponsored to participate ... reeks of elitism. Same thing with the spousal "permission slip" ... what happens in a falling-apart marriage with a mean spirited spouse that won't sign the permission slip just to spite the would-be participant? Bad idea from the get-go.
Har. The racer's life insurance notion is for the wealthiest and reeks of elitism? If it worked for a loser like me, you better re-think that idea. It doesn't cost that much. There's all kinds of special risk insurance. I looked into it when I wanted to try skydiving.

I got my special risk coverage right through my regular work plan and it was super easy. I just called them up, told them what I was doing, told them how I wanted my family set up should I bite it, and they just took the premium out of my paycheck. But other racers I know have used ridersurance.com to get a life insurance quote for a racer. I heard they aren't bad at all.

As for the falling apart marriage with a mean spirited spouse... get a freaking divorce and go racing. Man... you're really grasping for ideas to fight against. Put your anger to better use.

Once again since this raging thread is is meandering, I contend that the only problem with a death while racing is if it's an irresponsible one - One that leaves family members behind, unprepared both mentally and financially. Racer's life insurance and spousal sign-off is the answer.

I don't expect you change your mind but this is for anyone else.
 
#11 ·
It may be "too soon' or even in bad taste to ask this question, but, if bad road conditions helped cause his accident do you you think he may have survived if riding a Multistrada? Did the bike he was riding have suspension equal to the Multistrada he has won on in the past?
 
#12 ·
Doesn't matter. If he had a machine with 'superior' anything, he would have then pushed that 'anything' to its limit just as he did with the machine he was on. And, when you push to your/your machine's limits, bad things can happen. Sadly, something did. To somehow think that 'if he'd only had this or that, he wouldn't have crashed' shows a complete separation from the many times' harsh reality of motorsports.

I've also read comments (not just here) about some 'defect' in the racing surface having caused the crash. Again, even if it had been a contributor, that's part of the risk. Make every last square inch of the pavement billiard table smooth and as grippy as technology will allow. The racer will just push to the new, higher, riskier limit. And, eventually, exceed it. But, now that the limit's been raised, the consequences of a mistake become more grave.
 
#13 · (Edited by Moderator)
The hill as it stands is to dangerous in parts to race bikes. It needs repairs first. Repair the fucking hill, America lags behind the world in not only race riders, but quality race tracks that suit Motorcycles. Fix the fucking hill, make it safer, its an iconic race and needs to keep growing
 
  • Like
Reactions: dharma
#15 ·
And, as of yet, I have not seen a single photo of the spot that was supposed to have lead to him losing control. How does one go about 'fixing the fucking hill, making it safer'? There was a bump. That's all I've read. Anywhere. So, you fix the bump. Then, as I explained earlier, they go faster. Because they can. Someone else crashes and is maimed or killed. Then what? Guardrails? Another injury/death. Air fences? Catch fences? They're racing the clock up a damned mountainside. In the grand scheme of things, what sense is there in doing it at all? You know, because that's not a terribly safe thing to do.
 
  • Like
Reactions: John
#33 ·
"Fixing the fucking hill" won't change a thing ... participants will only go even faster yet because the track will permit higher speeds, and you can bet your ass that riders will take full advantage of that. As has been pointed out the racers will always push the limits of the track and the machines. Anyone else that has ever raced pretty much anything knows this. I know it, so do a number of other members here.

Racers die every year on perfectly groomed race courses that have grass runoff areas and air fences ... because they push the limits. That's the very point of racing in the first place, to be the one willing to push the outer limits of the track, the bike, and themselves. Deaths on track have nothing to do with the track itself, it has everything to do with racers not listening to their better judgement and riding over their heads, or making poor judgements ... Marco Simoncelli comes to mind ... he tried to add a third wheel to his motorcycle with his elbow when it wanted to low-side, but didn't take into consideration there were other riders on the track and he got hit by Colin Edward and Rossi when he crossed the racing line. Track's fault? No. Bike's fault? No. Other rider's fault? No. Helmet's fault? No. It came down to Marco making a bad judgement call and paying with his life for it. The two men I saw die at Ascot ... same thing. They got wound up in the spirit of the race and didn't listen to their better judgement.

So this idea of "Fix the fucking track!" won't fix anything. American riders or anyone else for that matter.

There is only one "fix" for this particular situation, and even that is a questionable action; Reduce the size/power of the motorcycles permitted to use on the Pikes Peak course. Reaction times that riders have are the limit here. Slow down the bikes, and the riders have more time to correct for bad judgement calls. Make the max displacement something like a 450cc single (or whatever, you readers get my point here). The motorcycles will be slower, which creates a greater amount of time to respond to an upset in the motorcycle's suspension or a "bad call" by the rider.

But even doing that won't completely mitigate the risk.

Dunne knew full well that the bump or hole (or whatever it was) was there ... he knew full well that the track had problems especially where he ate it. He knew of every risk along the entire length of the course. He knew there were massive drop offs, he knew his motorcycle had limits, he knew he had limits. He elected to ignore one or more of those limits for the sake of a win trophy and the accolades of being the fast guy on the course.

The entire issue comes down to his unwillingness to listen to his judgement. The entire sad story is 100% on him. No one else. No tangible ~thing~ else. No bad track. No under prepared bike. All on him and him alone. It has nothing to do with "America's bad tracks" ... or "America's bad riders" (both are bullshit anyway). It has everything to do with the spirit of the racer ... the will to push the limits to the 50/50 chance (or even higher) of riding beyond those limits to outperform all of the other riders in pursuit of a win.

Look how boring and lousy NASCAR has become. The risk factor has been all but eliminated. Consequently there is far less interest in it from a spectator's point of view ... and even worse, from a participant's point of view. Just like anything and everything that the mainstream do gooders get involved with it becomes homogenized and overly regulated ... which translates into boring.

If racing motorcycles was a safe/easy thing ... everyone would be doing it. But it's not safe nor easy. It takes courage, skill, money, and a will to outrun every other rider on the course. Without those elements the racer is just another "also ran". It's an accepted notion that winning means taking some risks. It's goes with the territory. It has great appeal to the human that wishes to be a champion and leave his mark on the world. One either accepts that idea, or doesn't. It's that simple.



.
 
  • Like
Reactions: duc96cr
#20 ·
What I understand from reporting here in colorado, the motorcycle ban was instituted partly because each MC accident causes long delays of the race. This on top of the other reason being that with the asphalt to the top the speeds have increased to apparently unbearable danger for the snowflakes of today. Hopefully the organizers will come back to their senses.
 
#22 ·
As much as I hate to see this, it was probably bound to happen once they paved the top portion. The freeze/thaw cycle at those elevations is murder on pavement, take a ride up nearby Mount Evans next year if you want a great example. There are dips in the road large enough to contain a small car, some of which didn't exist the previous year. They would probably have to tear out, regrade, and repave the upper section every year to make it safer for MC racing, which of course means everyone goes faster.

Sign of the times we live in. I imagine the only reason IOM TT still runs is because it brings gobs of money into that community every year, and is an MC only race.
 
#27 · (Edited)
Sign of the times we live in. I imagine the only reason IOM TT still runs is because it brings gobs of money into that community every year, and is an MC only race.
Sign of the times, indeed.
Although the economy of Colorado Springs is dependent on the military which employs one fifth of the work force in the area, its economy is broadly based and consequently not dependent on tourism with events such as Pikes Peak.

To a great extent, the same thing can be said of the Isle of Man. Because of low taxes, the Isle of Man's economy is supported by financial services, online gambling and manufacturing. Surprisingly, tourism does not play a big part of the Isle of Man's economy. However, the TT is a high-viz MC race which keeps it alive. But I wouldn't put it past the paternalistics to shut it down someday because of its lack of run-off. It's the nanny world we're forced to live in (and pay for).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Siddo
#26 ·
All of the racers know the danger of the event. What is unacceptable is the lack of professionalism of the race itself. IOM TT has line of sight of the whole course by officials. PP is far from it. How long did it take to find Greg Tracy a few years ago? 10 minutes? 15 minutes? To put on an event like this is no small effort. But to half-ass it relying on the reputation of the event is disgusting. The current coverage is equivalent to calling for an ambulance for a crash on a track. Provide adequate support of marshals and medics. Also, don't cover up stories and throw out journalists for reporting facts. The race organizers are their own worst enemy.
 
#28 ·
One of the reasons I encourage people to become a dues paying member of the AMA. The United States is increasingly hostile to motorcyclists, and I don't see any sign of that trend changing. It won't surprise me a bit if we start to hear talk of banning them in a decade or so, once the last of the boomers hang it up.

It has always seemed to me that some people use safety as a thin veneer over bigotry, and there's certainly enough of that aimed at riders of all types.
 
#31 ·
IOM has marshals around the circuit, all marshals have a line of sight to the marshals before them and after them. It's run like a race must be run. The IOM will keep going until no one turns up to race.
PP will not train/can't get enough marshals for the course therefore easier to can moto race.
 
#32 ·
The reality is that most racing series where vehicle performance has outstripped the ability of the venue to provide a reasonable level of predictability to the surface have performance limits in place. The world, it seems, disagrees with the old school "stay off my lawn" folks... so arguing the point with them feels like a waste of time. I'm not saying anything there's not already a LOT of literature discussing. When physics far outpaces physiology you can't use "well REAL men" as an excuse to let people die needlessly... it's a silly argument and amounts to "we've always done it that way and I don't want it to change".

Also... the idea that there ever was an "unlimited" tolerance for folks getting killed racing is silly - what there was is a HIGHER tolerance. Since we understand the limits of human physiology a lot better than back then - it's pretty easy to understand when we're surpassing those limits and staying "unrestricted" is converting a skills based sport into a luck based sport where bad luck means you die.

So... complaining about the truck that's going to run you over anyway is pointless (the most likely outcome of absolute thinking is no motorcycles in PP). I'd vote for compromise - I'd prefer NOT to see motorcycles out of the race, so either make the track nominally safe for the given performance level or put suspension or power limits (or both) on the bikes. IMO that at least... IS simple.
 
#35 · (Edited)
Agreed. I have to go above my level to improve. Now if I got too far over my level ill crash, but ill learn a helluva lot from it. Edit: Disclaimer: I DO NOT race.
 
#36 ·
yES .I agree.that is good solution
IMO, Ducati cancelled PP race not because of a death but financial problems.As they changed Paris-Dakar race to Saudi Arabian this year, what you think the reason is, MONEY.Because of s....t arabian money can buy everything.
So, IMO, the really reason is not a death but MONEY..
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top