Personally, I am not convinced of the value of back protectors - but I do have one, and wear it when I am on the open road.
If you had the choice of spending $200 (entry level cost of a back protector) on a back protector, or getting $200 more of boots, jackets, pants or gloves (such as armoured boots, armoured apparel or gloves or leather), than I would tell you to spend your $200 there first.
I feel spending $200 extra in those areas will probably result in an increase in protection that would make a greater difference than a back protector.
However if you already have good gear, and you want to spend even more money on gear, then sure, start looking at back protectors.
The racing fraternity is a little different. You would have to be a mad man to go racing at speeds up to and over 300km/h and not already have really good gear. And what's more, you would probably have spent 2 to 4 times more on that gear than a typical non-racing road rider. So once you have made that investment, investing a small extra faction in a back protector is not such a big deal.
So now back to ART. So there is a requirement to have a back protector. Personally I am saying that for group 1 I don't think it is going to make much difference. HOWEVER imagine if you were making that safety decision on behalf of everyone in group 1, and after repealing that requirement someone *did* back a back accident. There would be no way to tell if a back protector could have prevented it (for the reasons mentioned above), but it would play terribly on your mind. Also bear in mind if there was such an accident OSH would almost be certain to investigate. Would the AMCC be able to pass the test of "had it taken all reasonable steps to ensure the safety of participants". And removing such a requirement would certainly make it easy for an OSH official to say "no".
So for those reasons I think it will always be a permanent requirement to wear a back protector at ART days.
Bookmarks