Luge athlete killed in Whistler during training

[flames_fan_down_under]

Also live press conference on right now. Apparently you can watch online. www.ctvolympics.ca

[Bertuzzied]

Holy crap. how tragic.

I have a feeling these games are going to be a disaster. Not that i want them to be.

[Kybosh]

Originally Posted by flames_fan_down_under

Watching that video was pretty gruesome.

They could raise the height of the barrier where Nodar, RIP, flew over, that might mitigate the seriousness of other accidents.

I feel like this would be one of the only safety measures that would help. The banking corners may need to be higher. Bringing someone to an abrupt stop, with or without padding, is probably more detrimental than a slower deceleration.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Coys1882

How much control do these guys have over their luges/bobsleds speedwise? If they have the ability to slow it down or speed it up - is it possible this guy was over aggressive on what is a very fast and dangerous track?

Auto racing has deaths all the time and a lot of them occur on ovals - are the designers of those tracks liable?

If the designers of those tracks are negligent in their design, then yes they are liable.

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by zamler

Either way, the fact that absolutely NO safely features were in place to prevent an off track incident like this is inexcusable. Having solid, unprotected pillars right next to the track is beyond stupid.

There clearly is safety features installed - the 4 feet high (mostly completely vertical) walls that are part of the track. It should be obvious that no one in the luge community (the only people that really know what they are talking about here) believed that a luger could possibly fly over that wall.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by HOOT

Actually it's not an attempt to shift blame. It is about talking about the risk involved with the sport. What's pathetic is people wanting to sue for every thing that happens in this world, without accounting in the risks involved with it.

Wow some people are taking what I'm saying too seriously. I'm not saying the luger is to blame, I'm not saying VANOC doesn't have some blame, what I'm saying is that when you play any sport there is a risk involved. It isn't like this is breaking news that the track is dangerous.

You can miss the games, or you can take your chances. I agree if I was an athlete I would be going down that track regardless because this is what I worked for but it doesn't mean I should blame everyone else if I get hurt or die from it.

I'm just glad most athletes understand that there are risks involved with a sport and you can't go suing people just because something bad happens. Something bad happens everyday!

That's such garbage. There's a difference between risk and unreasonable risk. Everything has some sort of risk involved, and yes bad things can happen every day, but when things that can be prevented occur someone should be held accountable.

[dj_patm]

This conference is useless.

What are they taking questions for?

[HOOT]

Originally Posted by pylon

Tough to compare. These things have no brakes or throttle to slow you down, just gravity. It is as simple as getting down the track full speed. Basically the winner is the person that navigates corners the cleanest. Thousandths of seconds could separate 1st from 4th. So the athlete can't be to blame for this as much as the design of the track as the "expectation" is full tilt start to finish. There should not be a giant steel beam or 10 there to catch you if you make an error. Its is simply a bad design.

They actually can slow down by the way they move their body and with the gloves and boots they wear from what I have heard. So if a luger can go slower and safer than they can. There are plenty of sports where going 100% can 'wreak' you or stop you from finishing first. This is where athletes need to find the happy medium if they are in a dangerous situation. Going 100% gives you the best chance to win, but also increases your chances of not finish at all or very high on the standings.

Again no one in recent history has come out of the track during luge so there was no reason to expect someone to do so now. Just like someone mentioned this is similar to car racing where now after some deaths they are improving areas that can cause them.

[Kybosh]

Every Olympics has controversies. It's a shame that this one happened before the games even began and resulted in the snuffing out of a young life. I'm honestly still in shock.

[HOOT]

Originally Posted by valo403

That's such garbage. There's a difference between risk and unreasonable risk. Everything has some sort of risk involved, and yes bad things can happen every day, but when things that can be prevented occur someone should be held accountable.

But if it has never happened before how do you know to stop it? It's like someone said before about Nascar where we all knew/know that going into a wall at 200MPH is dangerous but it took them until when? 90's to finally do something about it.

You can't predict everything and if this type of accident has never happened before how do you assume they should prepare for it? Crystal ball?

[dj_patm]

http://www.ctvolympics.ca/news-centr...2.html?cid=rss

This story originally appeared in The Globe and Mail on Saturday, February 6, 2010.

[worth]

Is anyone here naive enough to think that the track is not put through simulation after simulation to see how the track works and the physics of having a human going down it at 140+ km/h?

Honestly, if the designers had though it was going to be a problem, I'm sure they would have brought it up. It's very easy to point fingers after something has happened. Is it negligent? Only if they didn't do their due diligence in ensuring the safety of the athletes. Sometimes stuff happens. Sometimes unexpected stuff happens, but I think it's very difficult at this moment to start saying people were negligent. There will be an investigation and it will be decided if there was negligence. I will side with the freak accident argument until a proper investigation can be undertaken.

What do they do until then? I'm glad I don't have to make that decision.

[zamler]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

It should be obvious that no one in the luge community (the only people that really know what they are talking about here) believed that a luger could possibly fly over that wall.

It has nothing to do with "believing" what could possibly happen. It did happen, which means from an engineering perspective, the design failed.

That is the whole point of safely as part of any design. You don't design it to fail, but put in measures in case it does. And you always over engineer, just in case you were wrong. I find this death completely inexcusable.

[nik-]

Was anyone else a little sickened by the whole "switch to IOC pres, he takes of glasses Kronkite style, wipes his eyes" thing in that press conference there?

I might just be overly cynical, but that just seemed really contrived to me.

[Coys1882]

Originally Posted by pylon

Tough to compare.

You're right, it is tough to compare but I couldn't think of another sport to compare it too. Like I said I know nothing of the sport other than I think it's something I don't mind watching every four years and get grumpy when I hear the people who compete in it complain they don't get enough funding.

I wonder if over the last several years if these tracks have been slowly pushing the envelope for speed and safety and this track has finally crossed the line? Or is this like going from the kiddie roller coaster at Calaway Park to the real deal at six flags. I don't know - silly to lay blame at the feet of the designers so soon I think.

[pylon]

Originally Posted by HOOT

They actually can slow down by the way they move their body and with the gloves and boots they wear from what I have heard. So if a luger can go slower and safer than they can. There are plenty of sports where going 100% can 'wreak' you or stop you from finishing first. This is where athletes need to find the happy medium if they are in a dangerous situation. Going 100% gives you the best chance to win, but also increases your chances of not finish at all or very high on the standings.

Again no one in recent history has come out of the track during luge so there was no reason to expect someone to do so now. Just like someone mentioned this is similar to car racing where now after some deaths they are improving areas that can cause them.

Even if he was able to slow down 10%, hitting a steel girder at 126kph as opposed to 140 kph will probably have the same net result. Also, of course these athletes are going to go 100%, they don't show up to get a green participant ribbon. They get one shot every 4 years for gold, and you can't blame them for going all out. You have to provide them with a safe facility knowing this is their intent.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by HOOT

They actually can slow down by the way they move their body and with the gloves and boots they wear from what I have heard. So if a luger can go slower and safer than they can. There are plenty of sports where going 100% can 'wreak' you or stop you from finishing first. This is where athletes need to find the happy medium if they are in a dangerous situation. Going 100% gives you the best chance to win, but also increases your chances of not finish at all or very high on the standings.

Again no one in recent history has come out of the track during luge so there was no reason to expect someone to do so now. Just like someone mentioned this is similar to car racing where now after some deaths they are improving areas that can cause them.

Not sure what you'd define as recent, but one of the 2 other deaths at an olympics was the result of a luger flying off the track in 1964.

I'm sure nobody thought 'well somebody might fly over here, but screw it we'll take a chance' but that doesn't mean that someone shouldn't have looked at the track and noticed an issue.

And the track should be designed so that athletes pushing 100% can navigate it safely. Forcing athletes to brake in order to prevent a crash, or a loss of time, is one thing. Expecting athletes to brake so they don't die is completely different.

[zamler]

Originally Posted by worth

Is anyone here naive enough to think that the track is not put through simulation after simulation to see how the track works and the physics of having a human going down it at 140+ km/h?

Honestly, if the designers had though it was going to be a problem, I'm sure they would have brought it up. It's very easy to point fingers after something has happened. Is it negligent? Only if they didn't do their due diligence in ensuring the safety of the athletes. Sometimes stuff happens. Sometimes unexpected stuff happens, but I think it's very difficult at this moment to start saying people were negligent. There will be an investigation and it will be decided if there was negligence. I will side with the freak accident argument until a proper investigation can be undertaken.

What do they do until then? I'm glad I don't have to make that decision.

Someone flying off a high speed track is hardly "unexpected". It is not common, but it does happen.

[flames_fan_down_under]

Anyone able to summarize what has been said at the press conference?

[Regorium]

Originally Posted by worth

Is anyone here naive enough to think that the track is not put through simulation after simulation to see how the track works and the physics of having a human going down it at 140+ km/h?

Honestly, if the designers had though it was going to be a problem, I'm sure they would have brought it up. It's very easy to point fingers after something has happened. Is it negligent? Only if they didn't do their due diligence in ensuring the safety of the athletes. Sometimes stuff happens. Sometimes unexpected stuff happens, but I think it's very difficult at this moment to start saying people were negligent. There will be an investigation and it will be decided if there was negligence. I will side with the freak accident argument until a proper investigation can be undertaken.

What do they do until then? I'm glad I don't have to make that decision.

Right, I think we need to give them time for a proper investigation.

However, I truly feel that there is some negligence here. There's been too many crashes from world class athletes, and subsequent musings about the track. Thus, until then, I am siding with the negligence aspect, perhaps from design (model did not properly assign risk), construction (curve made slightly too tight throwing off models), or management (like Fotze said "lower walls 6 inches to help with sightlines").