Del Corral’s victory stands
Victor Del Corral’s win at Ironman Florida was in serious jeopardy for the 72 hours following the event. It was discovered through photographic evidence that the helmet he wore was not CPSC-certified. While the rules under which the event was contested do not explicitly say the helmet must bear a CPSC sticker, the “sticker” standard for legality has widely been used by USAT officials in the past. Here is the letter sent by WTC’s head of officials Jimmy Riccitello explaining the decision:
"In response to reports that Victor Del Corral used a helmet that did not comply with USAT Rule 5.9(a)/5.9A(a) during IRONMAN Florida, IRONMAN confirms that Mr. Del Corral did in fact use a non-compliant helmet and that he will not be disqualified.
"Although several non-compliant helmets were discovered prior to race morning and disallowed, Victor Del Corral's helmet was not discovered or brought to the attention of race officials until several hours after the race. Further, no official protest was filed within the specified period of time according to IRONMAN and USAT Competitive Rules. IRONMAN and USAT rules do not allow a disqualification under such a circumstance.
"IRONMAN recognizes the complexity of differing helmet rules in different countries and appreciates the challenges this causes for non-US athletes participating in IRONMAN races in the United States. IRONMAN is engaged in productive dialogue with USAT regarding this rule with hopes that USAT will allow foreign athletes to wear helmets approved by their national triathlon federation in IRONMAN races in the United States."
Del Corral’s helmet was the same Ekoi helmet used by the winner in the Hawaiian Ironman last month. This helmet was legal in Kona but not in Florida because WTC, producers of Ironman Florida, received an explicit exemption from the CPSC-only rule for both of its world championships, the 70.3 event in Las Vegas and the Go Pro Ironman World Championships in Hawaii.
The existing helmet rule has been a source of contention for years, primarily in Ironman races, because of the high number of athletes coming from foreign countries to race in these U.S.-based events. Of the 2,800 athletes racing in Panama City last weekend, at Ironman Florida, WTC estimates that near half were from foreign countries.
Part of USAT’s reason for allowing Del Corral’s win to stand was that the infraction wasn’t caught until after the race was completed. Some have criticized WTC officials for not checking for helmet compliance before the race. Were this to happen, it is estimated that as many several hundred foreign competitors would fall afoul of the rule, since it is legally not possible to buy a CPSC helmet in many countries for the same reason it is not possible to buy a non-CPSC helmet in the United States.
USA Triathlon recognizes the practical difficulty of this rule in events that draw a lot of non-U.S. competitors, and has convened a task force to look at the existing helmet rule and other rules that may be not only impractical but also out of step with rules in many or most other countries. USAT’s vice president Barry Siff is chairing the task force, and it also includes Jimmy Riccitello (WTC Head of Officials), Charlie Crawford (USAT Head of Officials), Joyce Donaldson (top ITU/USAT official in the U.S.), plus two elite athletes and two age group athletes.
Were the U.S. federation to come into conformity with many other national federations, any new rule might allow for “reciprocity” between national federations’ helmet standards. Here is a typical helmet rule from a typical national federation, in this case Triathlon Australia: “Bicycle helmets are compulsory and must be approved by a testing authority which is recognised by a national federation that is an affiliate of the International Triathlon Union (ITU) .”
This is, word-for-word, precisely the language in the ITU’s rulebook, and Australia allows for reciprocity even though its own national helmet standard is among the world’s most stringent. Triathlon Canada also simply defers to the ITU’s rulebook and so honors this same international reciprocity. The Deutsche Triathlon Union’s rule is similar, maybe even looser, and simply requires that the helmet must, roughly translated, “comply with the rules of an approved testing institute.”
This does technically allow a race to the bottom in standards, where any “testing authority” recognized by any ITU daughter national federation would be legal in a country using this helmet rule language.
The British Triathlon Federation is one NF that does not honor helmet standard reciprocity. It’s helmet rule reads:
“Approved cycling safety helmets of ANSI Z90.4, SNELL B90, EN 1078 or an equivalent national standard must be worn by competitors. NB A CE mark is NOT an approval mark.” NB is, one presumes, Nota Bene, latin for “note well,” shorthand for “pay attention.”
One assumes from this that a CPSC helmet would be legal for racing in the UK, as well as a helmet from Australia. But the widely used CE standard typically accepted in Continental Europe – this is the standard met by Del Corral’s Ekoi helmet – would not suffice for a race in the UK. However, I'm informed that the CE standard as now used is identical to EN 1078, so there is some confusion in the UK rule, at least to this writer.
USAT's Barry Siff said he’d like his rules task force, ideally, to be “in a position by the end of the year to make recommendations to the Board, which must approve any rules changes. That could be done as early as at our January meeting,” although it might delay or phase in any changes made to the rules, depending on the rule, similar to phase-ins attached previously to changes in rules for wetsuits and swim skins.
