The original Woodstock (1969) was not rampant with deaths, fights etc as you suggest Soupy. Unlike Sturgis, which is fueled by booze and anything goes, Woodstock 69 was remarkably peaceful given the number of people and the deplorable conditions at the time.I think I heard or read somewhere, that the Sturgis Rally has attracted as many as 500,000 bikers to its events.
I watched a video, made by a local biker who lives (apparently) in that area, filmed in 2015, as he road from one end to the other, of that main street.
It was much longer in distance, than I had expected. The "sections" of middle of the road parking (as well as on the sides of course) were full, even three days before the event, when the video was shot.
That doesn't include of course, all the side roads.
In a crowd of that size, (like Woodstock, in 1969) where there were estimated numbers equally as large, there are bound to be lots of statistics related to deaths, illness, fights, etc..
Also, I should point out, that this Thread Topic was covered here, to some degree, already:
My Thoughts exactly ..I would be much more interested in a deaths per hundred thousand attendees than a simple total. If they have twice the normal attendance but only a 10% growth in deaths or accidents or injuries or any other category, I regard that as a decrease in casualty rates, not an increase.