TT bikes are dumb
ronaldo_jeremiah
kind of race or stage.
thanks,
-RJ
Scott
Yeah, perhaps the UCI could broaden the rules for the 'athlete's hour'
to apply to road racing, too. Everybody could ride replica Molteni
Colnagos.
That'd be fun.
S.
Tom Kunich
news:1152388921.9...@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Careful, they don't understand sarcasm here.
ronaldo_jeremiah
Sarcastic or not, he's actually right. It'd be a better sport if
everyone rode similar equipment, and if everyone was prevented from
riding ridiculous special bikes in TTs. TT bikes are dumb.
-RJ
Carl Sundquist
"ronaldo_jeremiah" <ronaldo_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1152397720.4...@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
>
> Sarcastic or not, he's actually right. It'd be a better sport if
> everyone rode similar equipment, and if everyone was prevented from
> riding ridiculous special bikes in TTs. TT bikes are dumb.
>
Aside from aero bars, what else would be changed?
is...@earthlink.net
I for one miss the neato looking carbon monocoque machines. I thought
the Hotta that Chris Boardman rode in prologues was a cool looking
ride. I would suggest that any type of human powered wheeled machine be
legal for the prologue. Teams that are interested in innovation can
spring the big bucks for futuristic bikes and the results in such a
short TT won't be all that different from the usual times. The race
isn't won or lost in a prologue (unless you crash out of course).
Andy
Simon Brooke
ronaldo_jeremiah ('ronaldo_...@yahoo.com') wrote:
>
> Tom Kunich wrote:
>> "Scott" <hendric...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:1152388921.9...@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>> >
>> > ronaldo_jeremiah wrote:
>> >> Dangerous, too. Road-race legal equipment should be required for
>> >> every kind of race or stage.
>> >>
>> > Yeah, perhaps the UCI could broaden the rules for the 'athlete's
>> > hour'
>> > to apply to road racing, too. Everybody could ride replica Molteni
>> > Colnagos.
>>
>> Careful, they don't understand sarcasm here.
>
> Sarcastic or not, he's actually right. It'd be a better sport if
> everyone rode similar equipment, and if everyone was prevented from
> riding ridiculous special bikes in TTs. TT bikes are dumb.
That's how we got the bikes we've got. Ooooh, there's an innovation.
Ooooh, it makes people faster. Can't have that. Ban it. That's been the
UCI's modus operandi for a hundred years, they're not going to change
now.
What the /hell/ was that stupidity with Landis' aerobars? Was his
position less safe? How had they established that? If they weren't less
safe, what was the point of banning them? I can understand banning
aerobars for mass start racing, they /are/ more dangerous in the
peloton. But in ITT?
Oh, we have rules. Oh, the rules have to be followed. Ours not to reason
why. Must follow rules. Must follow rules. Must follow...
It ain't the bikes that are dumb.
--
si...@jasmine.org.uk (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
;; Want to know what SCO stands for?
;; http://ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/?id=20030605
Tom Kunich
news:1152397720.4...@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
>
Of course they're silly and they shouldn't have been allowed in the first
place. The problem is that once they allowed Moser to set a record, every
promoter wanted aero TT bikes since they would set new records and new
headlines.
Tom Kunich
news:GtWrg.331256$5Z.177601@dukeread02...
No disks or wheels with less than 18 spokes. No aero bars. Only the frames
used on the regular road bikes. I know that modern bikes are so close to the
TT frames that there's little difference but we're trying to limit the
variances from what you and I can buy and what they're racing. Presently it
is just to silly.
hiza...@yahoo.com
of excitement and imagination for the public and the sport. I was
really disappointed the UCI decided to impose min weight limitations
and restrictions on bike designs.
Michael Press
<1152477652.4...@35g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
hiza...@yahoo.com wrote:
> The aero TT bikes are good for the sport. They help to insipire a sense
> of excitement and imagination for the public and the sport. I was
> really disappointed the UCI decided to impose min weight limitations
> and restrictions on bike designs.
The UCI needs to be seen to be doing something to prevent
a frame breaking in the middle of a bunch. An unlimited
weight classification would leave carnage on the highway.
--
Michael Press
ronaldo_jeremiah
hiza...@yahoo.com wrote:
> The aero TT bikes are good for the sport. <snip>
Dumbass -
Wrong. They are bad for the sport. They make the sport unnecesarily
more expensive, and somewhat more complicated, while accomplishing
nothing at all.
You know which sport has the equipment problem figured out? Golf. If
I understand correctly, in golf a manufacturer submits his new
equipment to the organizing body first. They decide if it will be
legal or not, and if they say that it is, it's approved for everyone's
use. Everyone knows what they are allowed to use ahead of time, as it
should be.
If the UCI had any brains at all, that is what they would do. It would
do at least the following seven things for them:
-Make the sport marginally safer, as the modern TT position is less
safe than riding a bike while connected at the feet, ass, and hands
-Eliminate problems caused by unanticipated tech advances
-Reduce the importance of equipment in the sport
-Reduce costs to current racers and teams
-Lower barriers (real or perceived) to entering the sport
-Increase an image of fairness and athleticism for fans
-Potentially make a *boatload* of money for the UCI by giving them the
authority to license equipment - I honestly can't believe they haven't
realized this.
-RJ
Simon Brooke
ronaldo_jeremiah ('ronaldo_...@yahoo.com') wrote:
> If the UCI had any brains at all, that is what they would do. It would
> do at least the following seven things for them:
>
> -Make the sport marginally safer, as the modern TT position is less
> safe than riding a bike while connected at the feet, ass, and hands
> -Eliminate problems caused by unanticipated tech advances
> -Reduce the importance of equipment in the sport
> -Reduce costs to current racers and teams
> -Lower barriers (real or perceived) to entering the sport
> -Increase an image of fairness and athleticism for fans
> -Potentially make a *boatload* of money for the UCI by giving them the
> authority to license equipment - I honestly can't believe they haven't
> realized this.
Tell you what, here's the bike that Kirkpatrick Macmillan built just up
the road from here back in 1839:
http://www.cycle-info.bpaj.or.jp/english/learn/img/r3.jpg
Let's have all the teams ride replicas of that next year. No? At what
date would you like to arrest history, then?
--
si...@jasmine.org.uk (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
There's nae Gods, an there's precious few heroes
but there's plenty on the dole in th Land o th Leal;
And it's time now, tae sweep the future clear o
th lies o a past that we know wis never real.
Simon Brooke
Not in ITT, it wouldn't. ITT is a discipline in which it is reasonably
safe to be highly experimental with design and construction.
--
si...@jasmine.org.uk (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
' ' <------- this blank intentionally spaced left
ronaldo_jeremiah
> Tell you what, here's the bike that Kirkpatrick Macmillan built just up
> the road from here back in 1839:
> http://www.cycle-info.bpaj.or.jp/english/learn/img/r3.jpg
> Let's have all the teams ride replicas of that next year. No? At what
> date would you like to arrest history, then?
Dumbass -
Don't be absurd. That bike would never pass UCI inspection.
thanks,
-RJ
ronaldo_jeremiah
Tommy -
It's interesting and fun to see we agree on something, at least
broadly.
-RJ
Carl Sundquist
"Tom Kunich" <tku...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:KOdsg.2371$vO....@newsread4.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>>
>> Aside from aero bars, what else would be changed?
>
> No disks or wheels with less than 18 spokes. No aero bars. Only the frames
> used on the regular road bikes. I know that modern bikes are so close to
> the TT frames that there's little difference but we're trying to limit the
> variances from what you and I can buy and what they're racing. Presently
> it is just to silly.
>
The the UCI needs to revise the rules regarding road racing bicycles, too:
http://www.uci.ch/imgArchive/Rules/1gene-E.pdf
1.3.018 For massed start competitions in the disciplines road and
cyclo-cross, only wheel designs granted prior approval by the UCI may be
used. Wheels shall have at least 12 spokes; spokes can be round, flattened
or oval, as far as no dimension of their sections exceeds 10 mm. In order to
be granted approval wheels must have passed a rupture test as prescribed by
the UCI in a laboratory approved by the UCI. The test results must show that
the rupture characteristics obtained are compatible with those resulting
from an impact sustained during normal use of the wheel. The following
criteria must be fulfilled:
. On impact, no element of the wheel may become detached and be expelled
outwards.
. The rupture must not present any shattered or broken off elements, or any
sharp or serrated surfaces that could harm the user, other riders and/or
third parties.
. The rupture characteristics must not cause the hub to become separated
from the rim in such a way that the wheel becomes detached from the forks.
Without prejudice to the tests imposed by the laws, regulations or customs,
standard (traditional) wheels are exempted from the rupture test referred to
above. A traditional wheel is deemed to be a wheel with at least 16 metal
spokes; the spokes may be round, flat or oval, provided that no dimension of
their cross sections exceeds 2.4 mm; the section of the rim must not exceed
2.5 cm on each side.
Carl's note: There is no specific mention of disk wheels. AFAIK disk wheels
can be ridden in mass start races. The down sides are that they supposedly
trasmit more road shock, are heavier, and risk the user being pummelled by
the peloton for the noise generated by them.
1.3.020 c) Configuration
For road competitions other than time trials and for cyclo-cross
competitions, the frame of the bicycle shall be of a traditional pattern,
i.e. built around a main triangle. It shall be constructed of straight or
tapered tubular elements (which may be round, oval, flattened, teardrop
shaped or otherwise in cross-section) such that the form of each element
encloses a straight line. The elements of the frame shall be laid out such
that the joining points shall follow the following pattern: the top tube (1)
connects the top of the head tube (2) to the top of the seat tube (4); the
seat tube (from which the seat post shall extend) shall connect to the
bottom bracket shell; the down tube (3) shall connect the bottom bracket
shell to the bottom of the head tube. The rear triangles shall be formed by
the chain stays (6), the seat stays (5) and the seat tube (4) with the seat
stays anchored to the seat tube at points falling within the limits laid
down for the slope of the top tube. The maximum height of the elements shall
be 8 cm and the minimum width 2.5 cm. The minimum width shall be reduced to
1 cm for the chain stays (6) and the seat stays (5). The minimum thickness
of the elements of the front fork shall be 1 cm; these may be straight or
curved (7). The top tube may slope, provided that this element fits within a
horizontal template defined by a maximum height of 16 cm and a minimum
thickness of 2.5 cm.
1.3.021 For road time trials and for track competitions, the elements of the
bicycle frame may be tubular or solid, assembled or cast in a single piece
in any form (including arches, cradles, beams or any other). These elements,
including the bottom bracket shell, shall fit within a template of the
«triangular form» defined in article 1.3.020.
Ryan Cousineau
Simon Brooke <si...@jasmine.org.uk> wrote:
It's not a safety rule, it's an evolved set of restrictions on
aerodynamic improvements, and it's kinda silly.
Skipping quickly from Mochet to Obree, what happened was that Grame set
an hour record on a freak-show bike in an impossible body position. At
about the same time, the rules on TT bikes are fairly loose: they
roughly say that the seat has to be somewhere high above the cranks, and
the bars have to be somewhere out front. The rules basically just banned
recumbents and left frame design alone.
Thanks to some cross-breeding with triathlon bikes, we got the weirdest
set of TT bikes imagineable: bikes with no seat tubes, bikes with no
seat setback, Trek Y-Foils, funny bikes, endless wacky track pursuit
bikes like the Lotus and that green Cervelo, etc.
All very interesting, and all freaking the UCI way out. They banned two
Obree positions in a row ("tuck" and "Superman", the latter also used by
Boardman), then they clamped down on TT bikes, basically mandating that
all bikes look like a normal double-diamond.
> Oh, we have rules. Oh, the rules have to be followed. Ours not to reason
> why. Must follow rules. Must follow rules. Must follow...
>
> It ain't the bikes that are dumb.
Hey, with the ProTour and the Grand Tours on the verge of divorce, I
think this is the big chance:
I am amenable to the idea that the prologue should be run under libre
HPV rules: basically use the very lenient IHPVA TT rules (the HPV has to
fit in a box about 2m by 1m; human power only), and let 'em rip. Also, I
think requiring 190 bike racers to buy HPVs would triple the global
faired HPV market overnight.
And I don't mean the people who would buy one 'cause it was on TV,
--
Ryan Cousineau rcou...@sfu.ca http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos
hiza...@yahoo.com
testing of the frames and parts. This would help both consumers and
riders.
RonSonic
Thanks, you had me worried about you for a minute there.
Ron
Jack Maars
> Dangerous, too. Road-race legal equipment should be required for every
> kind of race or stage.
>
> thanks,
>
My thoughts as well.
Tri bars should have been banned immediately after Greg
pioneered their use in '89, god he did look good though
in that aero Giro helmet.
Nothing looks cooler that ripping a TT wearing a cotton
cap backwards and reefing on cowhorns.
If Hinault wasn't such an asswipe I would use him as
a good example.
Howard Kveck
"ronaldo_jeremiah" <ronaldo_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> hiza...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > The aero TT bikes are good for the sport. <snip>
>
> Dumbass -
>
> Wrong. They are bad for the sport. They make the sport unnecesarily
> more expensive, and somewhat more complicated, while accomplishing
> nothing at all.
I have seen where in traveling events for the women, they require TTs be done on
regular road bikes. it seems to work fine for them, why not the guys too?
--
tanx,
Howard
Never take a tenant with a monkey.
remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?
Carl Sundquist
"Ryan Cousineau" <rcou...@sfu.ca> wrote in message
news:rcousine-25743E...@news.telus.net...
>
> Skipping quickly from Mochet to Obree, what happened was that Grame set
> an hour record on a freak-show bike in an impossible body position.
What makes you think it was an impossible body position?
After Obree set the hour and won worlds in '93, Moser came back to try to
reclaim the hour, using a bike virtually identical (I think built with the
assistance and permission of Obree. No washing maching parts, though.) to
Obree's. He managed to break his old record, but was not superior to Obree.
Through a friend, Moser lent me the bike and I used it for a pursuit at an
EDS Cup in Ft Lauderdale the day after I received it in March or April,
1994. It was remarkably easy to ride, but between attempting the huge gear
style of Obree and the boat anchor weight of the Ambrosio rear disk, I only
rode to 2nd place in the event (4:47). I took it with me when we went to
Europe several weeks later, returning it to Moser's factory because at that
point the style had been ruled illegal, since the handlebar had a chest pad
(which had an effect similar to a steering damper). The ruling was that
there should only be three (five) points of contact for the rider on a
bicycle: hands, butt, and feet. Moser's factory had built up a similar
prototype but with a modified steering apparatus that did not contact the
chest. Instead, the rider was supposed to rest his upper pecs/inside
shoulders atop his hands, thus complying with the wording of the rules. I
used the bike in the training sessions of the world cup in Bassano del
Grappa, about 2 hours away from Moser's factory and hometown of Trentino.
Like the previous bike, it was easy to ride. It caused a stir, and because
it violated the spirit of the rule even if it satisfied the literal wording,
I did not try to use it in the event.
Ryan Cousineau
"Carl Sundquist" <car...@cox.net> wrote:
Figures: I spout off about Obree, and it turns out Carl has ridden the
darned thing.
What I mean by impossible body position was that much has been made of
how hard Obree had to train to get himself to be able to do an hour
record. Five minutes is one thing: how comfortable (and this is not a
rhetorical question) would it have been for an hour? About the same as a
conventional aerobar setup, or a Superman setup?
Regardless, the whole thing the UCI got its knickers in a twist about
was change. Ultimately they got their way back to the spirit that "it's
not about the bike" by creating the Athlete's Hour.
And why not? the Best Hour Performance fits uncomfortably between the
Athlete's Hour and the HPV Hour no matter how you slice it (though it
gives me a moment's pause to note that HPV hour records don't seem to
get set on even the longest velodromes; they use car testing oval tracks
because HPVs probably don't handle well enough to ride even the largest
wood velodromes).
Ahem. Thanks for the fascinating history lesson though. This is the sort
of thing I love about rbr. Indeed, if the newsgroup consisted of nothing
but Les Earnest, Carl, and Benjo each telling one good tale a month, I'd
be happy.
The dumbass flame wars, getting stalked by Donald and Howard, tapping,
scrotal patches, bringing up Heather's son, and Chung Charts are just
gravy.
Oh, BTW, Chung sent me some neat ones that he's been having trouble
posting. I'll see what I can do...
Howard Kveck
Ryan Cousineau <rcou...@sfu.ca> wrote:
> Ahem. Thanks for the fascinating history lesson though. This is the sort
> of thing I love about rbr. Indeed, if the newsgroup consisted of nothing
> but Les Earnest, Carl, and Benjo each telling one good tale a month, I'd
> be happy.
Very true.
> The dumbass flame wars, getting stalked by Donald and Howard, tapping,
> scrotal patches, bringing up Heather's son, and Chung Charts are just
> gravy.
That's now "stocking," you know.
Donald Munro
>> The dumbass flame wars, getting stalked by Donald and Howard, tapping,
>> scrotal patches, bringing up Heather's son, and Chung Charts are just
>> gravy.
Howard Kveck wrote:
> That's now "stocking," you know.
If I'm an official stocker why am I not getting my belgian chocolate slab
salary from the empress ?
ronaldo_jeremiah
Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> Figures: I spout off about Obree, and it turns out Carl has ridden the
> darned thing.
>
No kidding, how freaking unexpected and cool is that?
What a double it'd be if we could now get Mark-Paul Gosselaar in here
to describe his personal experience with The Cabinet (TM). Or
Tiffany...
-RJ
Dan Connelly
> In article <1152481999....@s13g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> "ronaldo_jeremiah" <ronaldo_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> hiza...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>> The aero TT bikes are good for the sport. <snip>
>> Dumbass -
>>
>> Wrong. They are bad for the sport. They make the sport unnecesarily
>> more expensive, and somewhat more complicated, while accomplishing
>> nothing at all.
>
> I have seen where in traveling events for the women, they require TTs be done on
> regular road bikes. it seems to work fine for them, why not the guys too?
>
In addition to applying the same equipment rules to time trial stages, require
essentially the same bike be used on all stages.
The curiously irrational thing about the big tours is they are
endurance events for the riders, relay events for the bikes.
In line with the philosophy of riders coupled with their machines,
with the exception of obvious replaceables like tires, cogs, chains,
lube, etc, the machines should be selected for the duration.
Dan
Dan Connelly
> My thoughts as well.
>
> Tri bars should have been banned immediately after Greg
> pioneered their use in '89, god he did look good though
> in that aero Giro helmet.
>
> Nothing looks cooler that ripping a TT wearing a cotton
> cap backwards and reefing on cowhorns.
>
> If Hinault wasn't such an asswipe I would use him as
> a good example.
>
>
Cute.
The problem is the different stages of the tours have different
equipment rules. This makes no rational sense. Use the same equipment
rules for each stage. It's simpler that way, more coherent.
Dan
RonSonic
wrote:
How about no bike rules at all, just you've got to run the same wheels, bike and
bars on every stage. Oh and there are two 80 - 100 mile point to point
cyclocross stages. Replacing a broke bike (anything other than a flat) incurs a
20 minute penalty.
No weights, measurements or nothing. Just has to be a bike that'll last and
versatile enough for some off-road stuff.
Ron
Dan Connelly
> How about no bike rules at all, just you've got to run the same wheels, bike and
> bars on every stage. Oh and there are two 80 - 100 mile point to point
> cyclocross stages. Replacing a broke bike (anything other than a flat) incurs a
> 20 minute penalty.
>
> No weights, measurements or nothing. Just has to be a bike that'll last and
> versatile enough for some off-road stuff.
>
> Ron
Well, you still need rules to prevent your bike being a danger to other
riders, but I generally agree with you: reliability issues will be taken care
of automatically with this approach, and most riders, copying what
the pros use, would end up with more reliable bikes as a result.
Dan
Tom Kunich
>
> Tommy -
>
> It's interesting and fun to see we agree on something, at least
> broadly.
Apparently we agree that only someone really gay would address me in that
manner.
Carl Sundquist
> What I mean by impossible body position was that much has been made of
> how hard Obree had to train to get himself to be able to do an hour
> record. Five minutes is one thing: how comfortable (and this is not a
> rhetorical question) would it have been for an hour? About the same as a
> conventional aerobar setup, or a Superman setup?
That's a good question. I never rode the bike for an extended period of
time, such as an hour.
For the position of both bikes (as you are sitting at your computer), make
loose fists (simulating holding a handlebar), put your arms to your sides,
bend your elbows so that your forearms fold up to your biceps and your hands
are resting in the litle pocket between your shoulders and pecs. (Kind of
like the arms tucked in position of the chicken dance.) Now lean forward on
your desk, resting the meaty side part of your hands on the desk. This was
pretty much the "prototype" position. Add a folded hand towel under your
chest as a form of dense padding and that's approximately what the Moser
bike was like. There isn't any muscle tension to fatigue from, but your
elbows may get sore from the tendons being stretched for a prolonged period
of time.
The handlebars were set up high. Much higher than a conventional bar setup.
When you started, it was like trying to start using high rise handlebars,
like an old Schwinn Stingray (chopper style). No leverage to use your lower
back against because you were standing virtually upright. I think I have
some old photos. I'll scan them and send them to you.
>
> Regardless, the whole thing the UCI got its knickers in a twist about
> was change. Ultimately they got their way back to the spirit that "it's
> not about the bike" by creating the Athlete's Hour.
>
> And why not? the Best Hour Performance fits uncomfortably between the
> Athlete's Hour and the HPV Hour no matter how you slice it (though it
> gives me a moment's pause to note that HPV hour records don't seem to
> get set on even the longest velodromes; they use car testing oval tracks
> because HPVs probably don't handle well enough to ride even the largest
> wood velodromes).
The HPVs handle well enough with practice (I rode them too), but at 50 mph
on a 333m track, you're doing laps in approx 15 seconds for a total of 240
laps. On a 250 track (50 mph on a 250 track would be pretty hairball on a
HPV with those skinny tires) it would be 11.25 seconds/ lap for 320 laps.
That's entering another turn every 5.5 seconds for an hour. Your sense of
orientation (not balance) would be numbed very, very quickly, especially in
the limited range of vision that most fully faired HPVs provide. Bigger
courses wouldn't do that.
Ryan Cousineau
"ronaldo_jeremiah" <ronaldo_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
The only reason I haven't written him a fan-letter so far is that the
photos of both have largely satisfied my curiosity, and I can't think of
any way of writing it that doesn't come off as insanely homosexual.
And I suspect Zak-Paul already gets enough of that sort of fan-mail.
That said, I have a tiny dream that since his last TV series just
wrapped (Commander In Chief), maybe he has enough slack time that he's
lurking around here.
I seriously doubt it though. At this point in its life Usenet is a
degenerate cesspool of people too grumpy to move on to the web-board du
jour, or people too picky about user interfaces to use anything as icky
as the average web-board. Hm...a Usenet re-feeder for standard bulletin
boards. That I could get behind.
Still use mutt daily,
riggo...@hotmail.com
> Dangerous, too. Road-race legal equipment should be required for every
> kind of race or stage.
>
> thanks,
>
Don't know that much about 'em as I've never ridden one (nor ever
wanted to). But, dangerous or not, I've sometimes wondered if these
sorts of bikes are *always* the best choice for *every* rider in the
long, flat TTs. Remember Michael Rasmussen's hellish ride in the final
TT of last year's TdF? Would he have been better off just sticking
with a standard road bike? I seem to recall Merckx, Gimondi, Ritter,
and others from that generation cranking out some very impressive times
using what was basically their standard road racing machines. What
good does all of that aerodynamics do if you are constantly having to
pull yourself up off the tarmac or out of some ditch? Many riders
undoubtedly benefit from the super-aero stuff but that may be due to
the fact that their bodies are highly adaptable to that position. (Some
of the best ones give the illusion of making it look soooo easy).
Would less the adaptable riders be better off riding TTs on bikes that
they felt more comfortable on and/or had better control of? Could they
even get away with this given sponsorship/marketing concerns?
amit
Carl Sundquist wrote:
> > What I mean by impossible body position was that much has been made of
> > how hard Obree had to train to get himself to be able to do an hour
> > record. Five minutes is one thing: how comfortable (and this is not a
> > rhetorical question) would it have been for an hour? About the same as a
> > conventional aerobar setup, or a Superman setup?
>
> That's a good question. I never rode the bike for an extended period of
> time, such as an hour.
dumbass,
i think obree tried to use his design in a road TT (GP eddy merckx
maybe ?) and crashed like three times, while boardman (as an amateur ?)
won the race.
Kurgan Gringioni
Dumbasses -
Both of your suggestions make sense with regards to the average Freds,
such as ourselves, but the Tour de France isn't interested in adopting
rules that will benefit Freds.
They make their decisions based upon what they feel will generate the
most interest. They try to balance the interest people have in
technology vs. the sporting interest of holding a reasonably fair
competition (not giving teams w/ more money too much of an advantage).
The reason for that is, of course, the reason anything is done in the
professional ranks. Interest = $$$$$ and $$$$$$ is the effect of the
highest order.
Money talks, bullshit walks.
thanks,
K. Gringioni.
Ewoud Dronkert
> Hm...a Usenet re-feeder for standard bulletin
> boards. That I could get behind.
WHAT?! You actually endorse cyclingmoronsdotcom? Argh.
E.
-grumpy
--
E. Dronkert
Ryan Cousineau
riggo...@hotmail.com wrote:
As long as Chicken keeps winning spotted jerseys, he'd probably be
allowed to ride an adult tricycle in TTs if he felt it necessary.
The problem is that TT bikes are not that weird. The handlebars, odd as
they look, are pretty much a set of bullhorn bars plus the aero setup,
position-wise. The bullhorns should make the bike reasonably
controllable, though these guys are in a different seating position than
their standard road bikes.
Rasmussen had a pretty terrible day during that TT, but it was an
extraordinary ride even by the standards of TT-non-specialists.
The only ITT-related dumps I can recall are Jan's double dumps in 2004's
(?) wet final TT, Chicken's wild ride, and Julich's notorious pair of TT
exits. Maybe we can get some other memorable ones out of the brains of
rbr?
Of those, all were by riders who had a reason to be pressing, though I
think Julich is verging on creating a trend of bad riding. Jan was
riding in bad weather, too.
I think that most of the time riders get in trouble when they needto
rideat or above their limits. Maybe Ramussen should have ridden another
bike, but if he had just ridden within his limits on the road, the TT
bike would probably have been faster.
Ewoud Dronkert
>allowed to ride an adult tricycle in TTs if he felt it necessary.
Tricycles are good for climbing too:
http://www.xs4all.nl/~ewoud/cycling/driewieler.jpg
--
E. Dronkert
amit
dumbass,
how would you know ? that's not a tricycle.
Ewoud Dronkert
>how would you know ? that's not a tricycle.
If quads can do it, so can tricycles.
--
E. Dronkert
Donald Munro
>> Hm...a Usenet re-feeder for standard bulletin
>> boards. That I could get behind.
Ewoud Dronkert wrote:
> WHAT?! You actually endorse cyclingmoronsdotcom? Argh.
Correction on research to make the ewoud genie appear:
1) Mention hampsten win over the gavia in the snow.
2) Endorse cyclingmoronsdotcom
Carl Sundquist
"amit" <am...@physics.utoronto.ca> wrote in message
news:1152590882.5...@35g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
> i think obree tried to use his design in a road TT (GP eddy merckx
> maybe ?) and crashed like three times, while boardman (as an amateur ?)
> won the race.
>
Do you know what the causes of the crashes were, or are you just trying to
tie this in with the Gringioni/Julich thread?
On the coast down lap after winning the pursuit in 1993, he almost ate it as
he rolled thru the fourth turn while he was sitting up. It's on the video
from the '93-'94 worlds.
Curtis L. Russell
wrote:
>As long as Chicken keeps winning spotted jerseys, he'd probably be
>allowed to ride an adult tricycle in TTs if he felt it necessary.
You say that like the average adult tricycle is easier to keep
upright. Only at low speeds or if he's riding a recumbent trike.
Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...
ronaldo_jeremiah
Tommy -
What is this obsession you have with homosexuality?
-RJ
aco...@earthlink.net
> What I mean by impossible body position was that much has been made of
> how hard Obree had to train to get himself to be able to do an hour
> record. Five minutes is one thing: how comfortable (and this is not a
> rhetorical question) would it have been for an hour? About the same as a
> conventional aerobar setup, or a Superman setup?
FWIW, I used the Superman position for the ITT at master road nationals
in Tallahassee the year that Carl smoked his 50:18. Prior to the race,
I'd only ridden in the position once or twice outdoors, and perhaps a
half-dozen times on the trainer. I wouldn't exactly call it comfortable
(due to the fact that it aggravated my left shoulder joint, which I
seem to have slightly damaged somewhere along the way), but it wasn't
all that bad, either.
Andy Coggan
amit....@gmail.com
Carl Sundquist wrote:
> "amit" <am...@physics.utoronto.ca> wrote in message
> news:1152590882.5...@35g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > i think obree tried to use his design in a road TT (GP eddy merckx
> > maybe ?) and crashed like three times, while boardman (as an amateur ?)
> > won the race.
> >
>
> Do you know what the causes of the crashes were, or are you just trying to
> tie this in with the Gringioni/Julich thread?
dumbass,
i don't, i just assumed it was because that bike was hard to control on
the road.
Ryan Cousineau
Donald Munro <fat-d...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Better yet, I was actually endorsing the idea that we should have a
system where I could read web boards (say, the canadiancyclist forums)
as if they were usenet groups in my newsreader (MT-Newswatcher, if
anyone cares).
Michael Press
<rcousine-A665E0...@news.telus.net>,
Ryan Cousineau <rcou...@sfu.ca> wrote:
> In article <44b360cb$0$30718$ec3e...@news.usenetmonster.com>,
> Donald Munro <fat-d...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> > >> Hm...a Usenet re-feeder for standard bulletin
> > >> boards. That I could get behind.
> >
> > Ewoud Dronkert wrote:
> > > WHAT?! You actually endorse cyclingmoronsdotcom? Argh.
> >
> > Correction on research to make the ewoud genie appear:
> > 1) Mention hampsten win over the gavia in the snow.
> > 2) Endorse cyclingmoronsdotcom
>
> Better yet, I was actually endorsing the idea that we should have a
> system where I could read web boards (say, the canadiancyclist forums)
> as if they were usenet groups in my newsreader (MT-Newswatcher, if
> anyone cares).
Robot posting to nntp would be a dangerous precedent. The
situation is bad enough with cell masses hammering the
keyboard as if it's wired directly to their pleasure center.
--
Michael Press
Ernst Noch
gmane (excellent btw.) and something analogous for a web board.
In fact, I have seen stuff like that out there, though it was quite arcane.
Donald Munro
> Robot posting to nntp would be a dangerous precedent.
We already seem to have some failed AI experiments posting to rbr.
Simon Brooke
Michael Press ('ja...@abc.net') wrote:
> In article
> <rcousine-A665E0...@news.telus.net>,
> Ryan Cousineau <rcou...@sfu.ca> wrote:
>
>> Better yet, I was actually endorsing the idea that we should have a
>> system where I could read web boards (say, the canadiancyclist forums)
>> as if they were usenet groups in my newsreader (MT-Newswatcher, if
>> anyone cares).
>
> Robot posting to nntp would be a dangerous precedent.
Robot posting to NNTP has been happening for twenty years to my certain
knowledge - I used to operate such a robot myself. The idea of taking
the content from (eugh) 'web boards' and feeding them to NNTP has some
merit. The things are unusable as they stand. But the downside would be
that you'd have to put up with the sort of morons who post to 'web
boards'. Yes, I know we have morons here, but they do at least tend to
be more mature and better educated morons.
--
si...@jasmine.org.uk (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
Do not sail on uphill water.
- Bill Lee
Michael Press
<44b4b958$0$30703$ec3e...@news.usenetmonster.com>,
Donald Munro <fat-d...@hotmail.com> wrote:
As I suggested in the remainder of my comments.
--
Michael Press
Tom Kunich
You queers always believe people are interested in you no matter how dumb
you write.
Jack Maars
> Dangerous, too. Road-race legal equipment should be required for every
> kind of race or stage.
>
These guys nowadays have their arm-rests positioned too narrow.
Come on, move them out further on the bars.
Just look at how Greg did it in 1989.
Speaking of which, while watching the tour this morning
I was lamenting the fact it's not 1989 anymore.
RonSonic
While riding this morning I was lamenting the fact it's not 1989 anymore.
Ron
Jack Maars
"RonSonic" <rons...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:p9gbb25qjgl67t4g1...@4ax.com...
Yea, but it looked like it might rain.