Current industry practice uses volunteers to help run OCR events. Current OCR events are mostly unregulated and unsanctioned. Liability insurance is the biggest cost and plays a huge role in the lives of all OCR event sponsors. It's all about risk versus payout potential in the event of something going very wrong on the course. This post will focus on the specific aspect of three key areas that I believe will become tightly bound in the near future - volunteers (those actually at the obstacles), regulation/sanctioning of the sport, and insurance.
OCR started out wild and many would like it to stay forever wild. But in the eyes of regulators and insurers, wild means risk. Risk means cost. While high cost can keep some of the more wild and risky events out of the game, cost is nonetheless unavoidable for those who remain. While regulations and sanctioning bodies are surely on the horizon or in the works (think Olympic sport, enforced rules for failed obstacles, and personal equipment/clothing) they're not here yet. In the meantime, event organizers want to keep costs down by any means possible. That means that risk has to be managed and lowered in tangible ways, demonstrated through objective, empirical data.
Enough of the technical jargon. If you want to reduce the risk of injury or death on a given obstacle, I see the following requirements on the horizon:
First, recognize that a large portion of OCR participants are first-timers. They may be untrained both in fitness as well as on the peculiar mechanics and techniques of obstacles. In other words, they may be physically and mentally unprepared to do an obstacle. You can see how the risk factors rise, thereby increasing the likelihood for an injury. Fact number one: this situation is uncontrollable in OCR as it exists today. Anyone is allowed to race. Everyone signs the waiver whether they read it and understand the risks or not. In terms of risk management, this situation is what you call a "given".
Second, in a similar manner, OCR obstacle volunteers are also in many cases untrained in the mechanics and techniques of obstacles. I have written about this many times. However, unlike the race participants, I believe that the volunteer group can be effectively utilized in the reduction of risk on obstacles. I believe that implementation of the process I am about to describe can result in two very important steps of progress in OCR. First, through the reduction of risk, insurance costs can also go down. Second, the process could naturally lead to the kinds of course regulation that many participants, organizers, and sanctioners would find attractive. We all want the sport to grow. Implemented and enforced safety through risk reduction activities can help to ensure our sports' future.
Third and finally, understand that when an injury happens on the course, at least two things can result. First, we all come home with bumps, cuts, and bruises. But many come home in much worse shape. Broken bones, lacerations, concussions, and worse. All too often, these are not reported. They are left undocumented until the person goes to the doctor sometime later. The medical journals and other literature indeed show a sharp incline in OCR-related injuries. Funny things is, the insurance for the race does not pay for this stuff. That's all on the individual.
What really hits hard is the potential for catastrophic injuries on the course. The more risky an obstacle, the higher the cost. The insurance companies have studied the obstacles and determined the danger level of each. If you have a lot of barbed wire crawls, electric shocks, ice baths, and other high risk obstacles like this, your insurance costs will rise accordingly. Then there is the class of obstacles where technique is critical to success and remaining injury free. Remember, insurance is based on potential. Potential is partially based on historical data of actual injuries. There are other factors as well. But I want to focus mostly in the injuries due to poor technique.
Because that is how the volunteer gets tied in. Put a untrained racer on a difficult obstacle with an untrained volunteer and you have three ingredients of risk. As I said earlier, the untrained racer is a given. So is the difficult obstacle. But an untrained volunteer element can be controlled. And I think it should.
I reiterate this story for purposes of illustration. On one particular course where I volunteered, there were two log hurdle obstacles. I was on the second set, probably a mile or so from the first set. Two racers approached, one in obvious pain. The other was running full speed at the obstacle. I stopped him politely and asked him how he was going to accomplish the hurdle. I knew the warning signs here. A trained racer knows running up to the log hurdle is the wrong technique. I'll tell you why. The first guy, the one in pain, told me he ran up to the first hurdle a mile before, and ended up exactly as I knew he would - flat on his back. He was certain he broke a rib. He walked the rest of the course. But his buddy wanted to finish. I wanted him to finish too, just not injured like his partner. So I showed him the simple squat jump muscle up technique of the log hurdle. He got right over. His friend said, "I wish the volunteer had showed me that back there. Then I wouldn't have gotten hurt."
A trained, actively engaging volunteer can help reduce the potential for injury on obstacles. Reduce the potential, reduce the risk. Reduce the risk, reduce the cost. While that may mean one day that volunteers are paid course marshals, that cost could pale in comparison to that of insurance. If you want an Olympic sport, those marshals are trained, paid, regulators. They enforce the rules. But unlike the Olympics, OCR marshals could and should provide reasonable and actual assistance to racers who present potential risk for injury.
There's a lot left unsaid here, many avenues to explore. But I welcome your thoughts and responses. Do you agree/disagree? What direction do you see OCR taking in terms of risk reduction and cost? Have at it.
No comments:
Post a Comment