Rider behaviour, unsafe routes, or higher competition – why are the Classics so dangerous right now?

The Spring Classics have always been one of the most dangerous parts of the season – that's some of what makes these races in Northern Europe so iconic and alluring – but a number of high-profile crashes in the recent weeks and months have brought safety to the forefront of conversation, though opinions on the causes and solutions are mixed. 

Just this week, several pile-ups at the men's Brugge-De Panne put a real stain on the race, with the road furniture in the final clearly not suited for a big bunch sprint. On Friday at E3 Saxo Classic, a race that is trying to be the safest race in Belgium, a big crash early on, in a seemingly innocuous spot, saw several riders injured and the whole race outcome impacted.

It's hard to quantify if racing is statistically more dangerous right now, but the rate of incidence of big pile-ups, not just small crashes, seems higher, and the provably higher speeds mean the impacts are often worse. Even without looking at empirical data, the riders and teams certainly do feel that racing is tenser and crashes scarier now.

But the question is: why? In some cases, like in De Panne, courses are to blame. But at E3, the site of the crash was as 'normal' as a main road can be in Belgium, and the race was barely 20km in. There are a lot of suggestions to explain why crashes are happening more at the moment, and a lot of disagreement over those suggestions, too.

Jayco AlUla's Max Walscheid raced Brugge-De Panne on Wednesday, is one of the more experienced riders in the peloton, and has worked closely with the CPA on safety in the past. For him, the thing to look at is rider behaviour.

"In the end it's the riders who crash, so it's, in my opinion, our responsibility to ride more safely and be respectful to each other," Walscheid told Cyclingnews ahead of E3. 

"But of course there's also the circumstances of the final parcours which is playing a part. I think especially in a race like De Panne you should do the maximum to have a final as safe as possible, because all the sprinters are there, and that was also not really given.

"Like I said though, I think the first responsibility is on us, the riders, because there is almost no course which is not safe if you touch your brakes, but obviously nobody wants to touch his brakes, including me."

Subscribe to Cyclingnews for unlimited access to our 2025 Spring Classics coverage. Don't miss any of the breaking news, reports, and analysis from all the Cobbled Classics from Opening Weekend to Paris-Roubaix. Find out more

Rider behaviour does not exist, in a vacuum, though. Alex Kirsch of Lidl-Trek, who was involved in the serious crash at Dwars door Vlaanderen last year, pointed out that increased pressure on teams and riders means that more events are being raced harder than ever. 

"A race like De Panne when it was still a .1 race or HC, whatever you call it, you just say you use your brakes," Kirsch explained to CN on Friday.

"But now it's a WorldTour race, it gives you the same points as [E3] and on Wednesday, so it's critical in a relegation battle. Then you can't go through railways with 600 metres to go, or this road with five to four kilometres to go with the ditch on the left and right side, it's not reasonable, you would say."

Disagreeing with Walscheid, Kirsch didn't see a problem with respect – though naturally, the big Classics teams racing at the front may have a different experience of this, and Cyclingnews understands anecdotally that the battle further down the bunch has sometimes turned into flat-out aggression in recent races.

"I think to be honest the problem is not respecting each other, I think there's mutual respect," Kirsch said. "Maybe from young riders not yet, but that has always been like this, and you need a couple of years to understand that we are actually working colleagues."

Instead, Kirsch pointed to the increased level in the peloton as something that is exacerbating risk. Not just that the peloton is going faster every year, but the bunch takes much longer to thin out. 

"The biggest difference is just that the level got stronger in a wider range, so you have more people in critical moments when in the past just more people were dropped," he said. 

"Because of the level of the riders and better training strategies, better nutrition strategies, finals can last very long. 

In races like the Flemish Classics, this is a real problem – some of the key cobbled climbs, or routes designed 80 years ago, are just not meant to be raced by a full peloton of 150 riders going at nearly 50 kilometres per hour.

"For instance when the crash happened in Waregem last year, this was so far from the finish that in the past – well, it was always the same dangerous road, but the positioning wasn't that important," Kirsch continued.

"Whereas now you know the final will start at exactly that point so positioning is crucial, and I think being more mindful about how cycling tactics change and then choosing the roads accordingly has a much better impact than talking about respect or anything."

What practical changes can be made to improve safety?

Even if the reasons are muddy or complex, it is clear that something needs to be done about safety, and soon.

"I think if we don't see a different final next year in De Panne then it's probably the last chance because now we have quite a big debate about safety in cycling, and now is the moment to change it," Walscheid said. "I think if we don't change now, and try to get all the circumstances as good as possible, then it will probably never happen."

Course design, and matching the route to the current level of the peloton as Kirsch said, is one thing, 

"I think we should also be open for debate around new gear like airbags or something, because in that regard cycling is changing pretty slow, if you also remember the debate about helmets in cycling took quite a while. I think we could speed that up a little bit," Walscheid said. 

"I try to do my part in that, like I connected the CPA president Adam Hansen with a producer of those airbag backpacks, to give it a test, and I think we should be open to that kind of stuff. Whether we do it in the end or not, we should just be open to [the idea]."

Another recent suggestion, which is set to be trialled this year, is gear ratio limitations, essentially to limit the power and therefore speed that riders can put through the pedals. It's a suggestion that Wout van Aert has backed, but the riders we spoke to were less sure.

"Of course, with bigger gears you can eventually go faster, but also if you stick to 54-11 which is probably now the minimum standard, I don't know if that's really safe if you're spinning out, if your legs have more power than your gear enables," Walscheid said.

"I don't think it's at all meaningful to discuss gear restrictions or stuff like that," Kirsch concurred. "Because in the end it's a sport and we should just be more thoughtful on choosing routes."

Higher speed is perhaps unavoidable in the modern, advanced peloton, but it's therefore down to organisers to avoid courses that would push the speed over unreasonable limits. 

"I think first we should avoid finals with a slight downhill or something like this," the German continued. "For example, in Saudi Tour we were sprinting above eighty kilometres per hour, I don't know if that's really necessary."

The fact that downhill finishes, sprints littered with road furniture, or unprotected descents, are still featuring in races in 2025 is concerning, but the conversation and the push for better, safer races is not going anywhere. 

E3 on Friday proved that the issue of crashes is not going anywhere, and the discussions of what can be better will surely rumble on through Gent-Wevelgem, Flanders and Roubaix, and in the years to come, as riders, teams and races try to reconcile with what is an ever-faster, riskier, sport.