In Bennett v. United States Cycling Federation (1987) 193 Cal.App.3d 1485, the plaintiff entered a bicycle race conducted by the defendants (United States Cycling Federation and others), who provided him with a release agreement he signed before the race. During the race, he was injured when he collided with a car which defendants had permitted onto the racetrack. ( Id. at pp. 1487-1488.) The court in Bennett noted the types of risks within the contemplation of the parties, which are waived. "There is little doubt that a subscriber of the bicycle release at issue here must be held to have waived any hazards relating to bicycle racing that are obvious or that might reasonably have been foreseen. As plaintiff points out, these hazards include 'collisions with other riders, negligently maintained equipment, bicycles which were unfit for racing but nevertheless passed by organizers, and bad road surfaces. . . .'" ( Bennett v. United States Cycling Federation, supra, 193 Cal.App.3d at p. 1490.) However, the court found that plaintiff's injury resulted from a less foreseeable risk and reversed defendants' summary judgment award. Plaintiff established that, prior to the race, the course was known to be and was in fact closed to cars. Therefore a triable issue existed as to whether a participant, when executing the release, should reasonably have anticipated the risk of moving vehicles on the course. The Court held that there are no specific rules governing the size or style of type or any other physical aspect of a release provision. The court held that the only limitations are that a release provision not be in such small type as to be unreadable, buried inconspicuously in undifferentiated text in a lengthy document, stated in language not reasonably comprehensible to a layman, or otherwise concealed or obscured. (Id. at pp. 1489-1490.) What is required is that the release be readable and not "so encumbered with other provisions as to be difficult to find." (Id. at p. 1489.)