Cotswolds Bike Ride - British Heart Foundation - 13th May 2018

[MEB204]

Event title: British Heart Foundation Cotswolds Bike Ride
Event date/s: 13th May 2018
Event location: Cheltenham Racecourse - 30 mile and 50 mile route options
Event organiser: British Heart Foundation
Your relationship: Event Manager
Cost of entry: Early Birds: £15 until 31st Jan 2018, £20 afterwards.
Minimum sponsorship: £100 suggested
Beneficiary: British Heart Foundation
Event link: www.bhf.org.uk/cotswoldsbikeride

Our 30 mile bike ride around the Cotswold's countryside is a perfect family ride. Or if you are looking for something hillier and tougher take on our 50 mile route. Both rides are circular starting and finishing in Cheltenham and have numerous places to stop along the way for rest and refreshments.

Sign up before 31 January 2018 and take advantage of our exclusive early bird offer.

Coronary heart disease is the UK's single biggest killer. By funding cutting edge research, we are determined to put a stop to the damage heart disease causes. But we can't do so without your support. Your registration fee goes towards the cost of organising the event, but it's the money you raise that powers our life saving research. We're therefore asking all riders taking part in this year's event to raise a minimum of £100 in support of our work.

Your entry includes:

• Fully signed and marshalled route
• Complimentary water and refreshments
• Free massage when you finish
• Downloadable route map
• Downloadable route GPX file
• Access to a range of training and fundraising resources to help you reach your goals
• Medical support
• Mechanical support
• Medal for all finishers

If you would like more information on any of our events, get in touch Monday - Friday 09:00 - 17:00:

Tel: 0300 330 3322
Email: events@bhf.org.uk

 

[mjr]

Please note http://www.bhf.org.uk/eventsterms - I don't think that's linked anywhere on the event information page. It might be in the sign-up but it would be rather annoying to rather annoying to sign up and only then discover that you do not satisfy the conditions.

 

[Eribiste]

I'm signed up for this, having had a go on last year's event. Recommended!

 

[Ming the Merciless]

Shame about helmet rule

 

[jefmcg]

Shame about helmet rule

It's interesting that the BHF - that really understands the effects of inactivity - should insist on helmets. Because even if you assume that helmets would prevent every fatality, it's still safer to cycle without a helmet than to be inactive.

 

[Fab Foodie]

[QUOTE 5118771, member: 43827"]I think they do it to cover their own backsides in case there is a serious injury on the ride. No matter what the pros and cons of helmet wearing really are they are worried they will get negative coverage from the press if the injured person was not wearing a helmet.[/QUOTE]
Even though people die on thses events where a helmet was of bugger-all value?

 

[mjr]

[QUOTE 5118771, member: 43827"]I think they do it to cover their own backsides in case there is a serious injury on the ride. No matter what the pros and cons of helmet wearing really are they are worried they will get negative coverage from the press if the injured person was not wearing a helmet.[/QUOTE]
Actually I asked them directly and it seems to boil down to following British Cycling's guidance.

 

[Ming the Merciless]

Actually I asked them directly and it seems to boil down to following British Cycling's guidance.

Hmm but they don't state it as guidance they state it as a must

 

[mjr]

Hmm but they don't state it as guidance they state it as a must

BC's guidance is only a must if you want BC's insurance. I suspect BHF arrange their own insurance, so are choosing to follow BC's guidance - but that's only my suspicion. I like the BHF in many ways, so I'm reluctant to keep making them spend what's probably donated time keeping on mostly dodging my questions on this subject.

As long as BC keep their divisive (IMO) sportive guidelines, this is probably a losing battle, as charities dominated by helmet-forcers can point to the sports-inspired BC rather than CUK's more liberal advice. If you would like to discuss this aspect of BC's guidelines further, I suggest reading https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/challenging-event-crash-helmet-rules.185192/ and then replying in https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/the-cyclechat-helmet-debate-thread.187059/unread

 

[Ming the Merciless]

In the terms and conditions BHF do not provide insurance

 

[jefmcg]

British Cycling recommends wearing a correctly fitted helmet while cycling however we also support the right of each individual to choose whether or not to accept this recommendation and recognise the limit to the protection that helmets provide.

 

[jefmcg]

In the terms and conditions BHF do not provide insurance

This isn't about providing insurance, but their public liability insurance.

 

[mjr]

British Cycling recommends wearing a correctly fitted helmet while cycling however we also support the right of each individual to choose whether or not to accept this recommendation and recognise the limit to the protection that helmets provide.

And I raised the difference between that "policy" and their event "guidelines" in the discussion mentioned in https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/challenging-event-crash-helmet-rules.185192/

The policy is worthless because it's not implemented even across BC.

 

[Fab Foodie]

My take on this is.... don’t enter, give the entry money directly to the BHF and do what you want helmet-wise.

 

[mjr]

[QUOTE 5119141, member: 43827"]There's an even more logical take. If you don't mind wearing a helmet go on the ride. If you do mind don't go.[/QUOTE]
Indeed, you're both right and I now avoid helmet-requiring rides because most organisers' approach to safety pretty much ends with helmet-forcing and they make no effort to discourage/punish reckless cycling that endangers others, but whether you go or not is somewhat independent of whether you try to help nudge the mostly-lovely BHF into not hurting public health in this way.

My original reply was because the various terms (not only the big H) didn't seem to be obvious on the info page or entry form and could exclude people in other ways too.