Why do so many travel insurance products not cover competitions / racing?

MyRealNameToo

miklcct said:
but isn't amateur sport racing widespread enough that a significant proportion of travellers will do it on their trips, like an option for winter sports?

Can't find any stats to back it up but gut reaction says no. I can only think of two people that I have ever known to go away and compete in a race. I imagine if you were in a running club or such then the proportion would be higher. 

A little over 10% of the population consider themselves "runners", according to random stat of unknown quality about 20% of runners are in a running club which would already put you down to 2% of people and even if 100% went every year overseas to a race and all bought insurance then thats really below the threshold of aggregators interests and in reality its going to be much lower than 100% of people in a running club. 

By contract 2m each year go to do winter sports. Its also an obviously more dangerous activity which people therefore think about insurance 

Grumpy_chap

MyRealNameToo said:

A little over 10% of the population consider themselves "runners", according to random stat of unknown quality about 20% of runners are in a running club which would already put you down to 2% of people and even if 100% went every year overseas to a race and all bought insurance then thats really below the threshold of aggregators interests and in reality its going to be much lower than 100% of people in a running club. 

By contract 2m each year go to do winter sports. Its also an obviously more dangerous activity which people therefore think about insurance 

k12479 said:

Unlikely. Conclusive numbers are hard to come by but about 64% of adults supposedly do enough physical activity. Some of that's probably exaggerated, much of it will likely be walking, then things like running, going to the gym, etc. A fraction will be competitive sports. It follows that the majority of that would be local e.g. football leagues, then the better/more dedicated regional, then national. Those travelling abroad to compete will be a very small minority - the highest level, most dedicated or very niche sports.

I also have no data about how many people enter a running (or triathlon or cycling or similar) even abroad.  I would agree with the premise that it is a small proportion and a small number in absolute terms also.

In my mind, that kind of makes it even more surprising that standard insurance is not available to cover this manner of activity.
Using MNRT's figure (whether correct or not), 10% of the population consider themselves to be "runners" and combining with k12479's described pyramid:

• Most "runners" will just run as and when they feel like it.
• Some "runners" will take part in some local and informal organised activity, so ParkRun level.
• A smaller portion will take part in one-off chip-timed event, 5k, 10k, 10 mile, half-marathon, marathon.  Probably mostly local to home.
• A very small portion will take part in one-off ship-timed event of longer duration, ultra-marathon, endurance event (24-hour).  Probably local region to home.
• Of those taking part in the chip-timed events, a small number will get the bug and join a club.
• Most club runners will do some training and more events but still staying nearish to home.
• Some will then travel further for a big high-profile national event - London Marathon, Great North Run
• A very small proportion of those doing a national even will then decide to enter some equivalent event abroad.

Even among events like London Marathon, where the "mass participation" factor means a lot of entrants that are not fit enough and not trained enough, serious incidents are rare.

The very small minority that flow through the pyramid from casual "runner" to those that actually travel to enter an event abroad will be of far higher general fitness and less risk of general medical incident, better aware of the need to not run if not fit and well on the day.  There is the potential for even the fittest person to suffer an extreme cardiac event, but it must be very rare in runners that travel abroad to enter events.  The overall actuarial risk may possibly be no higher than any average person suffering medical incident.

Even compared to the 2m (given by MNRT) travelling to go to do winter sports, so that would be 3% of the population.  It is not unreasonable that the size of the event runner / cyclist / triathlete etc market is just as big.

k12479

I'd agree with everything, except perhaps these two bits.

Grumpy_chap said:

In my mind, that kind of makes it even more surprising that standard insurance is not available to cover this manner of activity. 

Firstly, non-competitive activities are not a free-for-all, plenty are excluded and others have constraints e.g. no off-piste skiing without an authorised guide. Defining constraints around competitive sports might be quite difficult. Secondly, and linked, little data probably exists to work from. Calculating skiing injuries per traveler to the Alps is probably pretty easy, resorts would likely have all that's needed already, conversely working out injury rate, severity and cost for e.g. triathlons in Spain, is probably much less certain.

Grumpy_chap said:

The very small minority that flow through the pyramid from casual "runner" to those that actually travel to enter an event abroad will be of far higher general fitness and less risk of general medical incident, better aware of the need to not run if not fit and well on the day.

Not sure I agree. The inexperienced are probably at higher risk of injury due to lower fitness and competence, the more experienced lower risk, beyond that I suspect risk starts to increase due to a) in competition people are pushing themselves so they're closer to the limit and higher energy (i.e. more potential damage) is in play and b) the more they're doing a sport the more opportunity for incidents.

MyRealNameToo

Grumpy_chap said:
The very small minority that flow through the pyramid from casual "runner" to those that actually travel to enter an event abroad will be of far higher general fitness and less risk of general medical incident, better aware of the need to not run if not fit and well on the day.  There is the potential for even the fittest person to suffer an extreme cardiac event, but it must be very rare in runners that travel abroad to enter events.  The overall actuarial risk may possibly be no higher than any average person suffering medical incident.

Even compared to the 2m (given by MNRT) travelling to go to do winter sports, so that would be 3% of the population.  It is not unreasonable that the size of the event runner / cyclist / triathlete etc market is just as big.

The London Marathon has 40 first aid points, 2 field hospitals and 1 field intensive care unit. 1,000 St Johns first aiders are deployed plus doctors, nurses. All local hospitals are on alert for the anticipate spike in attendees. Whilst deaths are thankfully low about 10% of participants have some contact with first aiders and about 0.2% of participants go to hospital. 

We pretty much live on the route and every year at least a couple of times we have to go fetch first aiders due to people collapsing or falling and we're before the half way mark. This year 3 were stretchered away. 

Whilst pro athletes may decide not to run in a minor competition if they are unwell I suspect those that have spent thousands to go to an event may see it more as a "once in a life time" opportunity and push more than they should. In fact the one guy I did know that used to go overseas to do extreme triathlon/ iron man died of a heart attack whilst out running (in the UK). Crazy fit, crazy endurance fanatic (30 mile cycle into work and back each day, 2 hrs in the gym, a stop for wild swimming on the way home in summer). Whilst hyper fit he'd had an accident a week or two before and thought was he;d gotten a DVT which when pushing himself too much dislodged and caused the heart attack. 

Death, from a holiday insurance perspective, is fairly cheap, its more moderate and survivable conditions that tends to cost much more. 0.2% going to hospital, even if most arent admitted, is notably higher rate than general holiday makers. 

Clearly insurers can get comfortable with it, specialist insurance exists, but it's likely not suitable for a quick quote and buy process without spiking premiums more than insurers think the average punter would want to pay.