Knowing When Not to Race: The Psychology of Pulling Back
Images taken from @tahneeseagrave ‘s instagram account and @uci_mtb
For most of us, taking a day off when we’re tired is simple. The stakes are low - maybe a few unread emails, a slower project, you’ve been feeling a bit burnt out lately anyway…
But for a professional athlete, fatigue carries a very different weight. Every race, every training block, every start gate feels like it matters. The instinct is to push through, because winners don’t quit - right?
Tahnee Seagrave opted out of Mont-Sainte-Anne due to injury, and Loïc Bruni, shocked everyone with a DNS in the final run of the 2025 World Cup at Mont-Sainte-Anne.
If pro’s, at the highest level - with everything on the line - opt out, how should the average rider think about “when not to race”?
These examples highlight a profound kind of psychological maturity in sport, the ability to prioritize long-term health and performance over immediate results.
In this blog, we’ll explore the performance psychology behind such decisions and how coaches can cultivate this mindset in their athletes. We’ll dive into research on the cognitive load of high-pressure decisions, discuss the “culture of risk” in competitive sports, and outline coaching strategies to help riders know when pulling back is the best move forward.
Our goal at GSMBC is to promote human-centered, risk-aware, and performance-holistic coaching, so that knowing when not to race becomes a coachable skill - and a powerful tool for longevity and success in mountain biking.
Elite Examples: The Strength in DNS/DNF Decisions
Bruni’s DNS at Mont-Sainte-Anne may have cost him a title, but protected his health and family future, proof that restraint can take more courage than racing injured.
Seagrave voiced the same truth before her own DNS: the reward wasn’t worth the risk after weeks of pain and fatigue.
Elite riders like Loïc Bruni and Tahnée Seagrave show that stepping back can be an act of strength, not weakness.
For coaches, these moments are teaching tools examples of smart, strategic decision-making that turn vulnerability into long-term performance.
Why is deciding not to race so psychologically challenging?
The answer lies in the heavy cognitive and emotional load athletes carry in competition. On race day, adrenaline and focus are at their peak; years of preparation hang in the balance. In that state, stepping away feels almost impossible - it goes against every competitive instinct.
Sport psychologists note that competitive athletes operate within a “culture of risk” that normalizes playing hurt and glorifies pushing through pain[4]. In elite sport especially, riders learn to tolerate discomfort and tune out physical or mental warning signs. Grit and pain tolerance are celebrated traits - but they can become a double-edged sword. Athletes, even juniors, sometimes neglect long-term health for short-term success[5][6]. They push on to avoid letting down coaches or sponsors, illustrating how social and competitive pressures cloud decision-making[7].
From a cognitive standpoint, high stress and time pressure can impair how we make choices. Under intense mental load, people rely more on snap judgments and emotions - they take bigger risks or go with their gut instead of carefully analyzing the situation[8]. It’s easy to see how, in the heat of competition, an athlete might impulsively choose “race now, worry later.”
Studies of injury decisions confirm this bias.
In one scenario experiment, only a minority of athletes made fully informed, risk-aware choices about whether to play while injured. Most chose the risky option, attempting to compete hurt, convincing themselves it was worth the gamble when the perceived consequences of sitting out were high[9].
Those who did decide to withdraw tended to use a more cautious mindset, essentially a “maximin” approach: focus on avoiding the worst-case scenario.
Tellingly, these athletes were much more likely to withdraw when they felt less external pressure to play[10][11]. In other words, if they knew their coach and team would support their decision, they could take that prudent step.
This finding highlights a key insight: psychological safety and support from others can tip the scales toward a smarter, health-first decision. An athlete who trusts that their coach “has their back” is freer to say, “Today’s not the day - I shouldn’t race,” without fear of backlash.
The Weight of a DNS
The decision to DNS or DNF carries a heavy emotional weight. Athletes often grapple with feelings of letting others down, “wasting” their training, or appearing mentally weak if they withdraw.
Overriding those fears requires considerable emotional intelligence and confidence. In fact, being able to regulate one’s emotions and see the bigger picture is a hallmark of experienced, elite competitors.
Psychologists talk about self-regulation, the ability to manage thoughts and feelings under pressure. In a racing context, strong self-regulation might mean distinguishing between ordinary pre-race nerves versus a deeper intuition that something is truly off (be it an injury, extreme fatigue, or unsafe conditions). An athlete with keen self-awareness can internalize: “Continuing today would do more harm than good.”
This level of insight often comes with experience (sometimes after learning the hard way), but coaches can help young riders develop it intentionally.
Counterintuitively, treating oneself with compassion in these moments rather than harsh self-criticism, can improve resilience and performance.
Research on female athletes found that those with higher self-compassion also reported higher perceived sport performance[12].
In practice, that means an athlete who forgives themselves for a DNS/DNF (“I’m not weak for doing this; I’m wise”) will likely bounce back faster and stronger. Far from making athletes soft, a bit of self-compassion reduces destructive negativity and keeps motivation healthy[12].
Coaches can model this mindset: if an athlete withdraws for good reason, frame it as a smart decision, not a failure.
Loss Aversion
It’s worth examining this dilemma through the lens of prospect theory and loss aversion. Athletes are intensely loss-averse; they hate giving up an opportunity.
Prospect theory tells us people often take irrational risks to avoid a sure loss. Overcoming that instinct, as Bruni did when he recognized that racing could lead to an even worse outcome, is a profound act of cognitive reframing. Essentially, he accepted a smaller, certain loss (DNS and losing the title) to avoid a potentially far greater loss (a catastrophic injury or long-term impairment). That kind of calculated restraint is as much a mental skill as a physical one.
A Holistic Coaching Mindset
Ultimately, teaching athletes when not to race comes down to fostering a holistic performance mindset – one that values the athlete as a whole person, not just as a point-scoring machine.
True toughness isn’t just about charging headlong through pain or adversity; sometimes it’s having the courage to do what’s right for your long-term goals, even if that means making the hard call to sit out.
When coaches and athletes build a relationship founded on trust, open communication, and mutual respect, DNS/DNF decisions become simply another aspect of smart race strategy and athlete health management.
The next time you or your athlete faces that crucible moment – to race or not to race – remember that choosing the wiser path is its own form of winning. As the stories of Bruni and Seagrave show, sometimes the bravest thing an athlete can do is step back, regroup, and live to fight (and win) another day.
Actionable Takeaways for Coaches and Athletes
Set Clear Boundaries: Define injury, fatigue, and safety “no-go” criteria before race day so decisions are objective, not emotional.
Practice It: Normalize DNS/DNF choices in training through scenarios and debriefs, teach that stopping can be smart, not shameful.
Build Trust: Make well-being non-negotiable. Athletes should feel safe to speak up without fear of judgment or lost opportunity.
Train Awareness: Use mindfulness, check-ins, and reflection to help athletes recognize red flags early.
Play the Long Game: Reinforce that short-term restraint protects long-term performance; celebrate smart recovery decisions like you would a win.
Want to learn more?
Sign up for a free GSMBC Membership and get access to our Reference Guide - your in depth resource for modern MTB coaching frameworks, lesson planning tools, and the science behind athlete decision-making.
Join for FREE at gsmbc.pro/member-benefits
Interested in going deeper on this specific article?
Here are the studies and pages we referenced.
[1] Vital MTB – Mont-Sainte-Anne DH Results & Championship Titles.
https://www.vitalmtb.com/news/news/results-championship-titles-elite-world-cup-downhill-mont-sainte-anne
[2][3] Canadian Cycling Magazine – Loïc Bruni on Mont-Sainte-Anne DNS & Losing the Series.
https://cyclingmagazine.ca/mtb/loic-bruni-updates-on-mont-sainte-anne-dns-and-losing-the-series/
[4][5][6][7][9][10][11] Mayer et al. (2020). Return-to-Play Decision Making in Team Sports Athletes. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 1020. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01020
[8] Peng et al. (2024). Impulsivity, Reward Sensitivity, and Moral Decision-Making Under Time Pressure. BMC Psychology.
https://bmcpsychology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40359-024-01773-y
[12] Killham et al. (2018). Women Athletes’ Self-Compassion, Self-Criticism, and Performance. Sport, Exercise, & Performance Psychology, 7(3), 297–307. https://self-compassion.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Killham2018.pdf
[13][21] Bodkin S. (2024). Athletes Might Pay With Quick Return to Play. University of Utah Health – College of Health. https://health.utah.edu/news/2024/04/athletes-might-pay-with-quick-return-play
[15][16][17] Peng et al. (2023). Continuing or Withdrawing From Endurance Sport Events Under Environmental Uncertainty. Sport Management Review, 26(5), 698–719. https://e-space.mmu.ac.uk/631564/8/Continuing%20or%20withdrawing%20from%20endurance%20sport%20events%20under%20environmental%20uncertainty%20athletes%20decision%20making.pdf
[18] Conroy & Coatsworth (2015). Autonomy-Supportive Coaching and Youth Sport Identity. Psychology of Sport & Exercise, PMC4410092. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4410092/
