bicycle-forum.net Promoting biking discussion.

Main Date: 23 Feb 2007 01:21:51 From: Kristian M Zoerhoff Subject: Warm weather bringing out the morons 1. Yesterday afternoon, I'm riding along, when I spot 5 teenagers walking along the other side of the road approaching me. "Hey, A**hole!" What the? I've no idea what prompted this. I should have ignored it, but was in a foul mood, so I pulled a Baka and confronted them, resulting in them backing down; no firearms, thankfully. 2. Today, riding down to my father-in-law's, I see a wrong-way rider coming at me, so I point across the road and shout "Other side." He shakes his head, and I repeat (yes, I hate wrong-way riding). He shakes it again, and forces me out into 45 mph traffic to go around him. He's got an iPod glued into both ears. OK, so maybe that just makes him a typical teenager, but it annoys me (too many iPod-addled joggers around here). Bring back the snow! -- __o Kristian Zoerhoff _'\(,_ kristian.zoerhoff@gmail.com (_)/ (_)   Date: 08 Mar 2007 20:06:37 From: kellysale Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons www.inflatable-game.com sell inflatable games   Date: 01 Mar 2007 02:49:00 From: fluffy bunny Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons In article <PkrDh.469$8x.445@newssvr14.news.prodigy.net >, Kristian M Zoerhoff <kristian.zoerhoff@gmail.com > wrote: > Bring back the snow! The snow came back ... based on my experience on the Fox River Trail today, it is my considered opinion that the only idiots on the trail were bicyclists, respondent included. It was a vast wasteland of low contrast, rutted, boot-embossed ice. Only those with Nokian studs made it the whole way; the rest shunted to the road, hammering down Rt. 25 in terror before the hurling caravan of coffee-spewing, GPS-enabled, Verizon customers. .max     Date: 01 Mar 2007 03:20:46 From: Kristian M Zoerhoff Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On 2007-03-01, fluffy bunny <betatron@earthlink.net > wrote: > In article <PkrDh.469$8x.445@newssvr14.news.prodigy.net>, > Kristian M Zoerhoff <kristian.zoerhoff@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Bring back the snow! > > The snow came back ... based on my experience on the Fox River Trail > today, it is my considered opinion that the only idiots on the trail > were bicyclists, respondent included. > > It was a vast wasteland of low contrast, rutted, boot-embossed ice. I had that last night, riding to the village board meeting. Luckily, it was only 100 yards over a bridge between otherwise disconnected roads, so it became a quick burst of cyclocross, rather than the Death ch to Stalingrad. Tonight's rain should remove most of that. > Only those with Nokian studs made it the whole way; the rest shunted to > the road, hammering down Rt. 25 in terror before the hurling caravan of > coffee-spewing, GPS-enabled, Verizon customers. Man, I'm glad I don't deal with that road on a daily basis. How is it that Randall can actually seem /good/ in comparison to 25? -- __o Kristian Zoerhoff _'\(,_ kristian.zoerhoff@gmail.com (_)/ (_)   Date: 28 Feb 2007 17:40:30 From: Tom Keats Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons In article <m27Fh.1457$LF6.882@newssvr11.news.prodigy.net >, Bill Baka <bbaka@comcast.net > writes: >> You really *should* write a book. >> >> I propose the working title of "Bill's Story". However, for the sake of >> accuracy I'd recommend it be published using the acronym form of the title. >> >> GG >> > I'd rather be out there doing what I do and having fun doing it. If I > ever wipe myself out so bad I can't ride then I might do some memoirs. > I really do feel sorry for some of the pathetic sissies who never do > anything exciting or ginally illegal. > I have a life and I have damn well lived it. > Can you say that? > Maybe the most exciting thing in your life is setting a new best speed > on your bike. PATHETIC! Bill, you are the wind -- wild & free. The blustering wind. When you write your book, I shall look forward to being regaled by your tales of clearing old minefields in Africa and SoutEast Asia, and how you can kill an ox with a single punch in the head, and your feasts of fugu and a bottle of that mezcal with a scorpion instead of an agave worm in it. Y'know the character: Bad Bob (portrayed by Stacy Keach) in The Life and Times of Judge Roy Bean? That's you. Or maybe that's Edgar Winter. Anyways, I hate excitement. It's bad for the digestion. You can pity me if you feel you've gotta, but I've got psyllium fibre going for me. This sissy is doin' okay. cheers, & you might be the next Hemmingway (or Farley Mowat,) Tom -- Nothing is safe from me. Above address is just a spam midden. I'm really at: tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca     Date: 01 Mar 2007 03:34:16 From: Bill Baka Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons Tom Keats wrote: > In article <m27Fh.1457$LF6.882@newssvr11.news.prodigy.net>, > Bill Baka <bbaka@comcast.net> writes: > >>> You really *should* write a book. >>> >>> I propose the working title of "Bill's Story". However, for the sake of >>> accuracy I'd recommend it be published using the acronym form of the title. >>> >>> GG >>> >> I'd rather be out there doing what I do and having fun doing it. If I >> ever wipe myself out so bad I can't ride then I might do some memoirs. >> I really do feel sorry for some of the pathetic sissies who never do >> anything exciting or ginally illegal. >> I have a life and I have damn well lived it. >> Can you say that? >> Maybe the most exciting thing in your life is setting a new best speed >> on your bike. PATHETIC! > > Bill, you are the wind -- wild & free. > > The blustering wind. > > When you write your book, I shall look forward to being > regaled by your tales of clearing old minefields in Africa > and SoutEast Asia, and how you can kill an ox with a single > punch in the head, and your feasts of fugu and a bottle of > that mezcal with a scorpion instead of an agave worm in it. > > Y'know the character: Bad Bob (portrayed by Stacy Keach) > in The Life and Times of Judge Roy Bean? That's you. > Or maybe that's Edgar Winter. > > Anyways, I hate excitement. It's bad for the digestion. > You can pity me if you feel you've gotta, but I've got > psyllium fibre going for me. This sissy is doin' okay. > > > cheers, & you might be the next Hemmingway (or Farley Mowat,) > Tom > All I can say is that I know I did it, and probably have an angel sitting on my shoulder (only God knows why). By all rights I really should not be alive except for some blind ass luck. One of my silly habits was catching rattlesnakes by the back of the head until my wife totally jumped my case. I always figured that I could drive to a hospital if I got nailed. Ever since being stung by about 200 pissed off bees when I was about 12 I kind of figured out that I am not allergic to most venoms, but my mother sure chewed me out after about an hour of plucking stingers out with a kitchen knife. Maybe I shouldn't have thrown that big rock at the bee tree. I didn't know they could fly faster than I could run. Does that count for a memoir? Nah, just another day in my not to sedentary life. Bill Baka   Date: 28 Feb 2007 00:59:43 From: Tom Keats Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons In article <QPRDh.2521$1X5.592@newsfe05.lga >, "GaryG" <sorrynoemail@NOSPAMX.com > writes: > "Tom Keats" <tkeats2005@hotmail.com> wrote in message >> I'd trade your HYOOGE Nissan Titan truck for those >> inconsiderates who drive wide cars like a LeBaron >> or Emperial, and tow a little, narrow utility trailer >> behind it -- with all sorts of garden tool handles and >> 2x4's hanging over its right side! And the driver safely >> gets his car past you, but you still have this threatening >> array of bristling pikes emanating from the trailer, zooming >> in right at your face. > > I'm still recovering from injuries sustained last Sunday, when a dumbass > towing a trailer clipped me with the rear wheels of his trailer. At the > time of the crash, I was taking the lane and riding 40 mph while approaching > a blind left-hand corner! Thankfully, nothing's broken...well, other than > my bike, my helmet, and all the clothing I was wearing (except for my > cycling cap, socks and shoes). > > Full description of the accident, plus links to some gross pictures of my > injuries are here: > > http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=270492 > > Be careful out there, everybody. The mavens, pundits, know-it-alls, et al out there never talk about looking out for trailers. Particularly ones hidden behind the cars that are towing them. But they're there. And oftentimes you can't see them until they're practically alongside you. Car-towed trailers introduce a whole new consideration into the mix. And you can't detect trailers by avoiding wearing iPod ear buds. Heck, with a wide car and a narrow trailer, you can't detect them at all, not even with mirrors. I guess all one can do is either to not presume all is well once an overtaking car seems ready to merge back in in front of you, or to have some sort of radar system with a handlebar-mounted display. Now there'll no doubt be a clamour for bike radar systems -- preferably ones that don't interfere with heart rate monitors or wireless cyclocomputers, or all the other crap that turns a bicycle into less of a bicycle and more of a nerd's techno-toy platform. Maybe a fringe benefit of bicycle radar would be that it could also microwave a couple of breakfast burritos[1] on the fly. But, alas, I have no inclination to embue or encumber myself with such technological, live-preserving devices as bicycle radar. I guess I, like the Neanderthals, am doomed to Darwinian extinction. Sooner or later. cheers, & a bike is not (IMO) a place to push buttons, Tom [1] I despise what is commonly keted as "burritos". Canned chili wrapped in a stupid, floppy flatbread that isn't even a real tortilla. Ptttttttui :-p Dunk it in a deep frier and call it a chimichanga. Pttttttui :-p Ya /need/ a cup of bad coffee[2], just to distract your tastebuds (and rinse out the obnoxious film.) [2] Some velvet morning when I'm straight, I'm going to open up your gate, And maybe tell you 'bout Arby's ... -- Nothing is safe from me. Above address is just a spam midden. I'm really at: tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca   Date: 27 Feb 2007 08:06:13 From: gds Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On Feb 26, 2:58 pm, "Roger Zoul" <rogerzo...@hotmail.com > wrote: BIG SNIP It seems like you just like to disagree. That's aOK. And yes differing opinions are also OK as are differing observations. But that does not mean that they all have the same intrinsic value. So, as a point of reference on observations and opinions. My observations and opinions are based on ~200,000 miles of riding over a 40+ year time frame. This riding has included riding in major metro areas (Chicago, New York, Washington DC), smaller cities (CT, AZ, WI), and rural areas (south, midwest, northeast, southwest). I have also ridden in Europe a bit. Riding has included overnight touring, many organized day rides such as centuries and club rides, some USCF races, and many solo miles. None of this means that my observations and resulting opinions are necessarily "correct," but I'll guess it puts me in a pretty high percentile of rididng experience. Just for reference can I ask what is your level of riding experience?   Date: 27 Feb 2007 00:52:07 From: Sir Ridesalot Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On Feb 26, 2:31 pm, "nash" <zwepytzkehil...@jetable.net > wrote: > I do not see why wearing an MP3 puts others at risk. Where is your proof? > Nascar drivers can speed all they want as far as I am concerned. They are > 200X more skilled than you or I. No risk there either. > Same as I would rather trust a semi driver who works everyday than an RV > driver or even a truck or car. Granted they may try consciously to scare me > off the road but they are still good at their job. > > Lastly, IMHO, for me anyway, when listening to music I ride slower to > compensate. I decided a while back I am not doing it to beat my average > time anymore. Too much hassle with cars that do not know how to handle > seeing a bike and what is a safe cross over distance for them crossing or > for me crossing. > I always got honked at when it was perfectly safe so I pay myself back > by listening to music instead, watching my mirror every 8 seconds not 10 > minutes as someone suggested. No one has been able to say that is unsafe > yet so if you have not done it I cannot hear you. : ) *EIGHT* seconds is a pretty long interval for checking your mirror especially if you are riding in city/town traffic. Are you riding in urban traffic? If so and you are riding at 15 mph and traffic is moving at 30 mph there is a speed differential of 15 mph or 22 feet per second for a total distance of 176 feet in 8 seconds. In other words the car that you looked at 8 seconds ago will have travelled 176 feet (52 yards or 1/2 a football field) further than you in those same 8 seconds. If you are only riding at 10 mph and the traffic is doing the same 30 mph the speed differential is 20 mph or 29 fps which means that the car you looked at 8 seconds ago will have travelled 232 feet (74 yards or 3/4 of a football field) further than you have in the same 8 seconds. I much prefer a helmet mounted mirror as I can adjust it so that a rear field of view is *ALWAYS* in my vision. During WW2 there was an adage quoted in the RAF, "It only takes 4 seconds to shoot down a Spitfire so look behing you every 3 seconds." I would glance at my mirror every 2 or 3 seconds if I was you. Cheers from Peter.     Date: 27 Feb 2007 17:28:38 From: nash Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons During WW2 there was an adage quoted in the RAF, "It only takes 4 seconds to shoot down a Spitfire so look behing you every 3 seconds." <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< I am a Spitfire well thank-you very much I am flattered. Do not worry about me. I have not had an accident since I was 10 years old and have ridden a bike since I was 8. I am not as paranoid as you are either Cheers     Date: 27 Feb 2007 17:25:08 From: nash Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons "Sir Ridesalot" <i_am_cycle_pathic@yahoo.ca > wrote in message news:1172566327.392763.183210@q2g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > On Feb 26, 2:31 pm, "nash" <zwepytzkehil...@jetable.net> wrote: >> I do not see why wearing an MP3 puts others at risk. Where is your >> proof? >> Nascar drivers can speed all they want as far as I am concerned. They >> are >> 200X more skilled than you or I. No risk there either. >> Same as I would rather trust a semi driver who works everyday than an RV >> driver or even a truck or car. Granted they may try consciously to scare >> me >> off the road but they are still good at their job. >> >> Lastly, IMHO, for me anyway, when listening to music I ride slower to >> compensate. I decided a while back I am not doing it to beat my average >> time anymore. Too much hassle with cars that do not know how to handle >> seeing a bike and what is a safe cross over distance for them crossing or >> for me crossing. >> I always got honked at when it was perfectly safe so I pay myself >> back >> by listening to music instead, watching my mirror every 8 seconds not 10 >> minutes as someone suggested. No one has been able to say that is unsafe >> yet so if you have not done it I cannot hear you. : ) > > *EIGHT* seconds is a pretty long interval for checking your mirror > especially if you are riding in city/town traffic. Are you riding in > urban traffic? If so and you are riding at 15 mph and traffic is > moving at 30 mph there is a speed differential of 15 mph or 22 feet > per second for a total distance of 176 feet in 8 seconds. In other > words the car that you looked at 8 seconds ago will have travelled 176 > feet (52 yards or 1/2 a football field) further than you in those same > 8 seconds. If you are only riding at 10 mph and the traffic is doing > the same 30 mph the speed differential is 20 mph or 29 fps which means > that the car you looked at 8 seconds ago will have travelled 232 feet > (74 yards or 3/4 of a football field) further than you have in the > same 8 seconds. I much prefer a helmet mounted mirror as I can adjust > it so that a rear field of view is *ALWAYS* in my vision. > > During WW2 there was an adage quoted in the RAF, "It only takes 4 > seconds to shoot down a Spitfire so look behing you every 3 seconds." > > I would glance at my mirror every 2 or 3 seconds if I was you. > > Cheers from Peter. > I cannot use the helmut mirror. Too shaky and too small. I see every car before it passes so that is good enough for me. I also stated it is probably more like 4 sec. Depends like you said on the traffic. If it is good enough for drivers it is good enough for me. I donot think that if you are not here watching me you can judge if I look in my mirror enough. You still have to look at the mirror to focus so it is not always in your brain vision as you suggest. I am not having a competition here I just know it is a safety point. I rarely am in heavy urban traffic. Fraser Hwy is more like well a highway. It has a paved shoulder where the bikes ride. 2 meters maybe wide. I mostly ride on bike trails with no traffic. on King George it is always busy and I see every car before it passes. But if they decided to get intimate just beside me or cutting me off one meter ahead of me the mirror would not warn me of it because it just happened too fast.     Date: 27 Feb 2007 09:26:04 From: Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On 27 Feb 2007 00:52:07 -0800, "Sir Ridesalot" <i_am_cycle_pathic@yahoo.ca > wrote: >On Feb 26, 2:31 pm, "nash" <zwepytzkehil...@jetable.net> wrote: >> I do not see why wearing an MP3 puts others at risk. Where is your proof? >> Nascar drivers can speed all they want as far as I am concerned. They are >> 200X more skilled than you or I. No risk there either. >> Same as I would rather trust a semi driver who works everyday than an RV >> driver or even a truck or car. Granted they may try consciously to scare me >> off the road but they are still good at their job. >> >> Lastly, IMHO, for me anyway, when listening to music I ride slower to >> compensate. I decided a while back I am not doing it to beat my average >> time anymore. Too much hassle with cars that do not know how to handle >> seeing a bike and what is a safe cross over distance for them crossing or >> for me crossing. >> I always got honked at when it was perfectly safe so I pay myself back >> by listening to music instead, watching my mirror every 8 seconds not 10 >> minutes as someone suggested. No one has been able to say that is unsafe >> yet so if you have not done it I cannot hear you. : ) > >*EIGHT* seconds is a pretty long interval for checking your mirror >especially if you are riding in city/town traffic. Are you riding in >urban traffic? If so and you are riding at 15 mph and traffic is >moving at 30 mph there is a speed differential of 15 mph or 22 feet >per second for a total distance of 176 feet in 8 seconds. In other >words the car that you looked at 8 seconds ago will have travelled 176 >feet (52 yards or 1/2 a football field) further than you in those same >8 seconds. If you are only riding at 10 mph and the traffic is doing >the same 30 mph the speed differential is 20 mph or 29 fps which means >that the car you looked at 8 seconds ago will have travelled 232 feet >(74 yards or 3/4 of a football field) further than you have in the >same 8 seconds. I much prefer a helmet mounted mirror as I can adjust >it so that a rear field of view is *ALWAYS* in my vision. > >During WW2 there was an adage quoted in the RAF, "It only takes 4 >seconds to shoot down a Spitfire so look behing you every 3 seconds." > >I would glance at my mirror every 2 or 3 seconds if I was you. > >Cheers from Peter. You're happy with him deliberately impairing his hearing?   Date: 26 Feb 2007 20:36:58 From: Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On Feb 25, 8:50 pm, Patrick Lamb <pdl678NOS...@comcast.net > wrote: > On Sun, 25 Feb 2007 15:24:56 -0700, k Hickey <m...@habcycles.com> > wrote: > > >I've never had a dog sneak up behind me without hearing it. Toenails > >(or even just pads) on the asphalt make plenty of noise (unless you've > >got Iron Maiden cranked up to earbleed volume on the Ipod, of course). > > Agreed, and further, I've heard more dogs coming up from behind than > I've noticed visually. I find that to be absolutely amazing, if not litererally incredible. Perhaps k and Pat haven't done enough riding in areas where loose dogs are common. Admittedly, now that I live in a more civilized state, dog chases are much less common. But when I lived in rural Georgia, it was a rare ride that didn't feature at least a few obnoxious, unrestrained, territorial dogs. In fact, there were times that it was a rare _mile_ that passed without a dog chase. And there were _plenty_ that surprised me by a silent attack. Dogs don't all wear collar tags, especially in rural trailer-trash areas. And dogs running on perpendicular paths on lawns, or on dirt roads, don't make any significant noise. Much more to the point, it doesn't take much of a headwind to generate enough wind noise to completely mask the noise of a passing car, let alone the sound of a dog's toenails. Hearing has some safety value, of course, but it's greatly overrated. That's why deaf people are not legally prohibited from cycling. - Frank Krygowski     Date: 27 Feb 2007 16:07:45 From: Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On 26 Feb 2007 20:36:58 -0800, frkrygow@gmail.com wrote: >Hearing has some safety value, of course, but it's greatly overrated. >That's why deaf people are not legally prohibited from cycling. > Neither are blind people, nor would people wearing goggles that restrict or eliminate their ability to see (YJMV). The absence of a legal restriction does not mean that a person performing the unrestricted act is not a fool.     Date: 27 Feb 2007 05:49:02 From: Mark Hickey Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons frkrygow@gmail.com wrote: >On Feb 25, 8:50 pm, Patrick Lamb <pdl678NOS...@comcast.net> wrote: >> On Sun, 25 Feb 2007 15:24:56 -0700, k Hickey <m...@habcycles.com> >> wrote: >> >> >I've never had a dog sneak up behind me without hearing it. Toenails >> >(or even just pads) on the asphalt make plenty of noise (unless you've >> >got Iron Maiden cranked up to earbleed volume on the Ipod, of course). >> >> Agreed, and further, I've heard more dogs coming up from behind than >> I've noticed visually. > >I find that to be absolutely amazing, if not litererally incredible. >Perhaps k and Pat haven't done enough riding in areas where loose >dogs are common. Perhaps my hearing is just better than you, but to me the sound of a dog running on asphalt is quite obvious over wind noise. I've had plenty of dogs chase me, btw. k Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.habcycles.com Home of the $795 ti frame       Date: 27 Feb 2007 20:57:15 From: Patrick Lamb Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 05:49:02 -0700, k Hickey <k@habcycles.com > wrote: >frkrygow@gmail.com wrote: >>On Feb 25, 8:50 pm, Patrick Lamb <pdl678NOS...@comcast.net> wrote: >>> On Sun, 25 Feb 2007 15:24:56 -0700, k Hickey <m...@habcycles.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>> >I've never had a dog sneak up behind me without hearing it. Toenails >>> >(or even just pads) on the asphalt make plenty of noise (unless you've >>> >got Iron Maiden cranked up to earbleed volume on the Ipod, of course). >>> >>> Agreed, and further, I've heard more dogs coming up from behind than >>> I've noticed visually. >> >>I find that to be absolutely amazing, if not litererally incredible. >>Perhaps k and Pat haven't done enough riding in areas where loose >>dogs are common. > >Perhaps my hearing is just better than you, but to me the sound of a >dog running on asphalt is quite obvious over wind noise. I've had >plenty of dogs chase me, btw. Next Frank will be telling me rural Georgia is sooo much worse than rural Alabama for dogs. Amazing, if not literally incredible! Pat Email address works as is.     Date: 27 Feb 2007 09:27:14 From: Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On 26 Feb 2007 20:36:58 -0800, frkrygow@gmail.com wrote: >Hearing has some safety value, of course, but it's greatly overrated. >That's why deaf people are not legally prohibited from cycling. > The problem is that some here are _under_rating hearing.       Date: 27 Feb 2007 05:35:55 From: Roger Zoul Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons jtaylor@NOSPAM.hfx.andara.com wrote: :: On 26 Feb 2007 20:36:58 -0800, frkrygow@gmail.com wrote: :: :: :: ::: Hearing has some safety value, of course, but it's greatly ::: overrated. That's why deaf people are not legally prohibited from ::: cycling. ::: :: :: :: The problem is that some here are _under_rating hearing. That's your opinion. I happen to use my hearing even when cycling.         Date: 27 Feb 2007 22:50:20 From: Aeek Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 05:35:55 -0500, "Roger Zoul" <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com > wrote: >jtaylor@NOSPAM.hfx.andara.com wrote: >:: >:: The problem is that some here are _under_rating hearing. > >That's your opinion. I happen to use my hearing even when cycling. On the downhills tonight I could hear the wind quite clearly, quite pleasant. I saw the cars, oncoming or in my 'tween the legs mirror, long before I could hear them. Not particuarly useful. On the uphills, I could hear the cars earlier but I was already riding on the edge of the tar. Not particuarly useful.   Date: 26 Feb 2007 17:37:12 From: marian.rosenberg@gmail.com Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On Feb 26, 8:29 pm, "Roger Zoul" <rogerzo...@hotmail.com > wrote: > ian.rosenb...@gmail.com wrote: > > :: On Feb 25, 12:29 am, k Hickey <m...@habcycles.com> wrote:::: jtay...@NOSPAM.hfx.andara.com wrote: > > :::: On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 22:39:26 -0600, fred <f...@fred.com> wrote: > ::: > :::::: (2) one cannot depend on hearing while cycling > ::: > ::::: I agree that you cannot depend on hearing while cycling. However: > ::: > :::: Piffle. > ::: > :::: Get your ears tested. > ::: > ::: My thoughts exactly. I constantly "depend on my hearing" when > ::: cycling. I listen for change in the sound of a car coming up behind > ::: me (indicating they might be planning a turn), and can reasonably > ::: tell when a car is likely to be passing close to me before it gets > ::: there. I also listen for the sound of a parked car starting or > ::: shifting into gear (or the sound of the front tires turning on the > ::: pavement). I listen for the clinking of dog tags or kids behind > ::: the parked cars. I even listen for the sound of another bike on my > ::: tail. > ::: > ::: You can't rely ONLY on your hearing, obviously - but it's ludicrous > ::: to think that there's no down side to eliminating one source of > ::: input about your surroundings without taking unnecessary risks. > :: > :: I had a crash about two months ago that might not have happened if I > :: hadn't been listening to music. > :: > :: It simply did not occur to me that anyone who was not significantly > :: slower than me and who had specifically been invited to draft me > :: would get on my rear wheel without asking me or would so diligently > :: follow me that he'd follow me as I slowed and pulled off to the side > :: of the road. I realized I was still going to fast to catch that > :: fruit stand and hit my brakes at which point he hit me. > :: > :: He'd been following me for about ten minutes without making any > :: effort to get my attention. > :: > :: If I hadn't been listening to music I _might_ have picked up the > :: minimal noises of his bicycle and breathing over the noises of my > :: bicycle and breathing. It still wouldn't have occurred to me that > :: someone would draft without asking first but I _might_ have heard > :: him. > :: > :: -M > > I wear a mirror when I wear an iPod. I never go 10 mintues without checking > it. > Also, you may or may not have heard him. He could have been there a much > shorter time before you decided to stop. His presence could have been > undetectable due to simple wind noise. True. Which is why I used the word 'might'. I think my bad form regarding not signaling that I was coming to a stop was more a cause than my earphones. Just because I didn't know he was there doesn't mean I shouldn't be reflexively making those signals. -M     Date: 05 Mar 2007 01:41:18 From: marian.rosenberg@gmail.com Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On 3, 10:51 pm, k Hickey <m...@habcycles.com > wrote: > frkry...@gmail.com wrote: > >Panic stops are a different animal. For them, it's all about using > >traction properly, not controlling heat buildup. You'll stop fastest > >if you use both brakes, but take advantage of the front wheel's > >greater traction, which is caused by your "weight transfer" to the > >front. The usual rule of thumb is to be three times as hard on the > >front brake, compared to the rear. > > >Of course, you don't want to go over the bars. Keep a good grip to > >prevent the front wheel from turning out from under you. Shifting > >your weight low and back helps a little. And if you feel the back > >lighten up (maybe evidenced by a skidding rear wheel) ease off the > >front brake as well as the back. > > >All this takes practice. Literally. > > Absolutely - if anyone really thinks (and I know you don't, ian) > that the rear brake provides the major stopping power, you owe it to > yourself and your dependents to go out and practice making fast stops. I got to admit to not really thinking about braking before this discussion. Just did it. Mimicry. Like twisting my foot to unclip when I was still using platform pedals because that's what the people around me were doing. I'm trying to remember who first told me "slow with rear, stop with front" and drawing a blank. -M     Date: 03 Mar 2007 09:56:04 From: Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons k Hickey wrote: > Something I tell people to help them get their head around the physics > involved - you can make the fastest possible stop with or without the > rear brake. That's right - if you apply the front brake in the manner > to stop as fast as possible, your rear brake won't matter one way or > the other since there will be virtually no weight on the rear wheel. In practice, a rider will certainly be able to stop shorter using both brakes; the immediate application of the rear brake slows the bike a little bit before the weight shift can lift it off the ground. Those who know how to throw their weight under hard braking will be able to make better/longer use of both brakes and will be able to stop shorter and more safely. > To give you an idea just how little the rear brake matters when your > weight is shifted forward as it would be during a panic stop properly > using the front brake... > > http://www.citypaper.com/news/story.asp?id=10344 > > ... in which an "unofficial record" for the longest rear-wheel skid of > 509 feet (over 160m) was set by a guy on a track bike. I believe that record has since been shattered. Crazy messengers with their crazy contests -- rewarding each other for not stopping or for not going anywhere. Robert       Date: 04 Mar 2007 07:00:21 From: Mark Hickey Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons r15757@aol.com wrote: >k Hickey wrote: > >> Something I tell people to help them get their head around the physics >> involved - you can make the fastest possible stop with or without the >> rear brake. That's right - if you apply the front brake in the manner >> to stop as fast as possible, your rear brake won't matter one way or >> the other since there will be virtually no weight on the rear wheel. > >In practice, a rider will certainly be able to stop shorter >using both brakes; the immediate application of the rear brake >slows the bike a little bit before the weight shift >can lift it off the ground. Those who know how to >throw their weight under hard braking will be >able to make better/longer use of both brakes and will >be able to stop shorter and more safely. You're right, I really didn't make it clear that I wasn't advocating front-only stopping in my attempt to describe the role of the front brake. By all means, I hope everyone DOES use both brakes when trying to stop fast (but hopefully by understanding the effect on rear braking during a PROPER panic stop, they'll be stopping shorter). >> To give you an idea just how little the rear brake matters when your >> weight is shifted forward as it would be during a panic stop properly >> using the front brake... >> >> http://www.citypaper.com/news/story.asp?id=10344 >> >> ... in which an "unofficial record" for the longest rear-wheel skid of >> 509 feet (over 160m) was set by a guy on a track bike. > >I believe that record has since been shattered. >Crazy messengers with their crazy contests -- >rewarding each other for not stopping or for not >going anywhere. Heh - I'd say it's a zen thing, but having known some messengers.... ;-) k Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.habcycles.com Home of the $795 ti frame         Date: 04 Mar 2007 17:40:27 From: nash Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons "k Hickey" <k@habcycles.com > wrote in message news:g2klu299jvcbannovqc5rf6jq8h3qq5r3m@4ax.com... > r15757@aol.com wrote: > >>k Hickey wrote: >> >>> Something I tell people to help them get their head around the physics >>> involved - you can make the fastest possible stop with or without the >>> rear brake. That's right - if you apply the front brake in the manner >>> to stop as fast as possible, your rear brake won't matter one way or >>> the other since there will be virtually no weight on the rear wheel. >> >>In practice, a rider will certainly be able to stop shorter >>using both brakes; the immediate application of the rear brake >>slows the bike a little bit before the weight shift >>can lift it off the ground. Those who know how to >>throw their weight under hard braking will be >>able to make better/longer use of both brakes and will >>be able to stop shorter and more safely. > > You're right, I really didn't make it clear that I wasn't advocating > front-only stopping in my attempt to describe the role of the front > brake. By all means, I hope everyone DOES use both brakes when trying > to stop fast (but hopefully by understanding the effect on rear > braking during a PROPER panic stop, they'll be stopping shorter). > >>> To give you an idea just how little the rear brake matters when your >>> weight is shifted forward as it would be during a panic stop properly >>> using the front brake... >>> >>> http://www.citypaper.com/news/story.asp?id=10344 >>> >>> ... in which an "unofficial record" for the longest rear-wheel skid of >>> 509 feet (over 160m) was set by a guy on a track bike. >> >>I believe that record has since been shattered. >>Crazy messengers with their crazy contests -- >>rewarding each other for not stopping or for not >>going anywhere. > > Heh - I'd say it's a zen thing, but having known some messengers.... > ;-) > > k Hickey > Habanero Cycles > http://www.habcycles.com > Home of the $795 ti frame Just like to add it depends too on the bike. Quality and newness of brake, , light bike, heavy bike. I would never do front brake only on my road bike especially at speed, anything above 10 mph. Unless I was practicing my stunts. :)           Date: 04 Mar 2007 13:54:05 From: Mark Hickey Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net > wrote: >"k Hickey" <k@habcycles.com> wrote >> You're right, I really didn't make it clear that I wasn't advocating >> front-only stopping in my attempt to describe the role of the front >> brake. By all means, I hope everyone DOES use both brakes when trying >> to stop fast (but hopefully by understanding the effect on rear >> braking during a PROPER panic stop, they'll be stopping shorter). >Just like to add it depends too on the bike. Quality and newness of brake, >, light bike, heavy bike. >I would never do front brake only on my road bike especially at speed, >anything above 10 mph. Unless I was practicing my stunts. :) Again, while I'm not advocating front-only panic stops, I would say that the way you apply the front brake in a true panic stop shouldn't differ between front-only and both-wheel braking. Like I said previously, a properly used front brake will make the rear brake inconsequential anyway (since there won't be any weight on the rear tire to provide any stopping power). I sincerely recommend to everyone reading this to do some practice stops. Staring at an SUV grill being driven your direction by a 17 year old girl with a cellphone stuck to her ear isn't the place you wanna try this for the first time. The physics work the same for all normal upright bikes - that is, you can apply enough brake with the front brake to unweight the rear wheel. Beyond that, you've reached "stunt/face plant" potential. But until you've gotten to that point, you're not stopping NEARLY as fast as you CAN. OTOH, on some recumbents and on tandems the possibility of an endo is virtually nil, so the rear brake DOES add to the stopping power in a true panic stop. k Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.habcycles.com Home of the $795 ti frame             Date: 05 Mar 2007 00:41:23 From: Bill Baka Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons k Hickey wrote: > The physics work the same for all normal upright bikes - that is, you > can apply enough brake with the front brake to unweight the rear > wheel. Beyond that, you've reached "stunt/face plant" potential. But > until you've gotten to that point, you're not stopping NEARLY as fast > as you CAN. I've tried practicing that on a motorcycle with front discs and it really, really takes practice just to get used to one bike. It also is not the most confidence inspiring thing you can do on a bike, motor or not. The few times I have gotten the rear to begin coming off the ground it wanted to come around, regardless of rear brakes and skidding. A bicycles brakes (normal ones) aren't all that consistent, especially from bike to bike, so practice would be in order. I have done the face plant many times in sand wash out situations and have no desire to try it on pavement. On a bicycle I pay attention, on a motorcycle I really pay attention. I once did an endo and had the motorcycle riding me and that amount of road rash was no fun. Experience is a good teacher of what you CAN'T do. Bill Baka > > k Hickey > Habanero Cycles > http://www.habcycles.com > Home of the $795 ti frame               Date: 05 Mar 2007 03:47:49 From: nash Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons Experience is a good teacher of what you CAN'T do. Bill Baka IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII and you are a good teacher of what we can't do. the motorcycle was riding you eh? lol                 Date: 05 Mar 2007 05:03:54 From: Bill Baka Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons nash wrote: > Experience is a good teacher of what you CAN'T do. > Bill Baka > IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII > > and you are a good teacher of what we can't do. > the motorcycle was riding you eh? lol > > Bicentennial, July 4, 1976. Me and my 'bad ass' biker friends were warming up for a run to Hollister to do a (probably poor) Hells Angels imitation and we all had way too much beer. I hit a 'speed bump' which was the cheap way of running a fire hydrant line across the street and hit the front brake while airborne at about 60 MPH (in a 25 zone). The bike and me tumbled a few times before it won the 'top' honors and slid on me. Since I was headed toward my buddies and their bikes (and 'old ladies') it got way interesting. I hit one bike and knocked a guy's girl off of it and two guys grabbed my bike to slow it down. When I finally stopped I was looking up at the gas tank of a Cao. They pulled the bike and me out from the car and I jumped up and said "I'm OK.", then noticed the blood running into my eyes from a major gash on the forehead. No broken bones but a near world record for road rash. After we got to the hospital I started feeling things and noticed I had no fingertips, among other parts that were bleeding, like my sit down stuff since the weight of the bike was on my hips and my Levi jeans gave out long before the road stopped sliding under me. Actually I came out better than the bike, since it was really mangled. Yup, That was one Hell of a fourth of July. Now you can laugh. Bill Baka End note: Two days later they all came by my apartment and gave me the keys to on of their BSA 650's. It's a matter of pride to get back on the beast even though I had so many bandages I looked like a riding mummy. One lap around the block and they were all cheering me on. Then came the inevitable beer and instant party at my place. Interesting times.     Date: 26 Feb 2007 22:13:46 From: Roger Zoul Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons ian.rosenberg@gmail.com wrote: :: On Feb 26, 8:29 pm, "Roger Zoul" <rogerzo...@hotmail.com > wrote: ::: ian.rosenb...@gmail.com wrote: ::: ::::: On Feb 25, 12:29 am, k Hickey <m...@habcycles.com > wrote:::: ::::: jtay...@NOSPAM.hfx.andara.com wrote: ::: ::::::: On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 22:39:26 -0600, fred <f...@fred.com > wrote: :::::: ::::::::: (2) one cannot depend on hearing while cycling :::::: :::::::: I agree that you cannot depend on hearing while cycling. :::::::: However: :::::: ::::::: Piffle. :::::: ::::::: Get your ears tested. :::::: :::::: My thoughts exactly. I constantly "depend on my hearing" when :::::: cycling. I listen for change in the sound of a car coming up :::::: behind me (indicating they might be planning a turn), and can :::::: reasonably tell when a car is likely to be passing close to me :::::: before it gets there. I also listen for the sound of a parked :::::: car starting or shifting into gear (or the sound of the front :::::: tires turning on the pavement). I listen for the clinking of :::::: dog tags or kids behind the parked cars. I even listen for the :::::: sound of another bike on my tail. :::::: :::::: You can't rely ONLY on your hearing, obviously - but it's :::::: ludicrous to think that there's no down side to eliminating one :::::: source of input about your surroundings without taking :::::: unnecessary risks. ::::: ::::: I had a crash about two months ago that might not have happened ::::: if I ::::: hadn't been listening to music. ::::: ::::: It simply did not occur to me that anyone who was not ::::: significantly ::::: slower than me and who had specifically been invited to draft me ::::: would get on my rear wheel without asking me or would so ::::: diligently ::::: follow me that he'd follow me as I slowed and pulled off to the ::::: side ::::: of the road. I realized I was still going to fast to catch that ::::: fruit stand and hit my brakes at which point he hit me. ::::: ::::: He'd been following me for about ten minutes without making any ::::: effort to get my attention. ::::: ::::: If I hadn't been listening to music I _might_ have picked up the ::::: minimal noises of his bicycle and breathing over the noises of my ::::: bicycle and breathing. It still wouldn't have occurred to me that ::::: someone would draft without asking first but I _might_ have heard ::::: him. ::::: ::::: -M ::: ::: I wear a mirror when I wear an iPod. I never go 10 mintues without ::: checking it. ::: Also, you may or may not have heard him. He could have been there ::: a much shorter time before you decided to stop. His presence could ::: have been undetectable due to simple wind noise. :: :: True. Which is why I used the word 'might'. I think my bad form :: regarding not signaling that I was coming to a stop was more a cause :: than my earphones. :: Interesting. I've never considered the need to give a hand signal that I'm going to stop on a bike. :: Just because I didn't know he was there doesn't mean I shouldn't be :: reflexively making those signals. :: :: -M       Date: 12 Mar 2007 11:05:26 From: Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On 11, 1:51 pm, "nash" <zwepytzkehil...@jetable.net > wrote: > > > You are disgustingly without manners. You obviously have read nothing I > wrote. I read the part that said your back brake was more effective than your front brake. If both brakes are working properly, that statement is flat wrong. FWIW, a friend and I did a version of k's test back in, oh, 1968 or so. I was on the first "ten speed" I'd ever ridden. He was on his coaster brake bike, which he'd just overhauled completely. He swore that it would stop as well as the caliper-brake bike. So we rode side by side up to about 20 mph and hit our brakes. His braking distance was at least twice what mine was. Just like Physics (and I) predicted. So that's the way it works in this universe, anyway. Your universe may vary. - Frank Krygowski       Date: 09 Mar 2007 08:27:49 From: DanKMTB@gmail.com Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On 9, 11:14 am, k Hickey <m...@habcycles.com > wrote: > Heh... sounds like fun though. I suspect two things will come out of > testing: > > 1) It's theoretically possible to stop quicker with a picture-perfect > slide and a low enough center of gravity (not to mention adding a > dragged foot and/or pedal into the mix). > 2) It'll be very difficult to properly achieve a good stopping > distance with this method, even with the advantage of forethought, > practice and planning. > 3) The odds of pulling it off in a TRUE emergency are pretty small > (IMHO of course). > > But please DO post the result of any testing - it could still be very > interesting. I'll absolutely post back with the results. As for pulling it off in a true emergency, we did somewhat often as kids. We all rode all day every day, into school and then from schools end until we went home. The way we rode back then invited emergency stops, and we had plenty. I've actually slid into a couple of cars using this method! My predictions: Fastest stop will be the MTB's, because I'm most comfortable on them and they're equipt with better front brakes. Second will be the road bike because a front brake is present, although of lesser quality than the MTB's brakes. Third will be the BMX, because I can't see making up the second or two it's going to take to get the bike down and dragging. I think that time will be better used applying front brakes (when they are there, of course). What I think will be hardest is getting a consistent speed at the brake point king line. I don't know if my cycloputer will work with a 20" wheel, I'll have to check when I get home. Dan       Date: 27 Feb 2007 09:22:56 From: Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 22:13:46 -0500, "Roger Zoul" <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com > wrote: > >Interesting. I've never considered the need to give a hand signal that I'm >going to stop on a bike. > In some situations it is essential that you do this - but one must be aware of such a situation developing; harder to do when your hearing is impaired.         Date: 05 Mar 2007 19:02:17 From: Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons nash wrote: > Think of what you are suppose to do when a car's wheels start skidding on > ice. You lose control and jamming the brakes just makes it worse. You are > suppose to let up on the brakes. That is what I get from what he said. > If you are about to hit a stationary on oncoming object by all means jam the > brakes. Look for an escape, learn how to dive and fall, whatever you can do > by all means. There is whole lotta room between 'jam the brakes' and a tender Sunday morning stop that doesn't even cause the rear tire to skid. Proper use of front brake in a panic stop makes rear tire skid virtually inevitable. Just an observation. Robert           Date: 06 Mar 2007 10:26:43 From: Dane Buson Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons r15757@aol.com wrote: > > There is whole lotta room between 'jam the brakes' > and a tender Sunday morning stop that doesn't > even cause the rear tire to skid. > > Proper use of front brake in a panic stop > makes rear tire skid virtually inevitable. > Just an observation. Correction: A really proper panic stop causes the rear wheel to lift up, making a rear tire skid impossible. ;-) -- Dane Buson - sigdane@unixbigots.org X windows. Power tools for power fools.         Date: 05 Mar 2007 18:13:10 From: Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons frkrygow@gmail.com wrote in part: > If you notice > a rear wheel skid, even with light braking on the rear wheel, it means > you're close to the maximum deceleration possible. Let off just a > tad. As k noted, if the rear wheel is still on the ground, you are not approaching the maximum deceleration possible. There is a lot of leeway there between the point when the rear starts to skid, the point when it comes off the ground, and the point of going over the bars. Telling people to let off the brakes when the rear starts to skid seems pretty zany. The goal is to stop the bike as short as you can, right? If the rear tire is still on the ground but isn't skidding, you're not doing it right -- not applying nearly enough force to the front brake, not affecting a very short stop either. There is no way to 'feather' the rear brake to avoid a skid during a solid, proper panic stop. Robert           Date: 06 Mar 2007 02:40:17 From: nash Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons Telling people to let off the brakes when the rear starts to skid seems pretty zany. The goal ////////////////////// Think of what you are suppose to do when a car's wheels start skidding on ice. You lose control and jamming the brakes just makes it worse. You are suppose to let up on the brakes. That is what I get from what he said. If you are about to hit a stationary on oncoming object by all means jam the brakes. Look for an escape, learn how to dive and fall, whatever you can do by all means.         Date: 05 Mar 2007 11:19:12 From: Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On 5, 12:48 am, jobst.bra...@stanfordalumni.org wrote: > Frank Krygowski writes: > >(IIRC, Jobst Brandt suspects that most > > brake-induced over-the-bars come not from going due straight over > > the bars, but from bracing oneself badly and causing the wheel to > > cock sideways.) > > I don't want a misquote like that come back to haunt me so here is > > what I wrote: > > http://www.sheldonbrown.com/brandt/over-the-bars.html Oops. My mistake. Apologies. - Frank Krygowski         Date: 04 Mar 2007 16:53:04 From: Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On 4, 12:40 pm, "nash" <zwepytzkehil...@jetable.net > wrote: > > I would never do front brake only on my road bike especially at speed, > anything above 10 mph. Unless I was practicing my stunts. :) It's not usually a problem! Many people are terrified of the front brake, but that's not realistic. For moderate braking, either brake will work. It's not at all uncommon for me to signal a turn with one hand while braking with the other, and that can mean using the front brake only. The dreaded over-the-bar happens only if you are doing very extreme braking, and/or you allow the front wheel to cock sideways under heavy deceleration. (IIRC, Jobst Brandt suspects that most brake-induced over-the-bars come not from going due straight over the bars, but from bracing onesself badly and causing the wheel to cock sideways.) Some people think that the application of the rear brake magically prevents those occurrences. It doesn't. In really hard braking, all it can possibly do is warn you that your rear wheel is getting light, so to speak, by its skidding. If you have a fear of the front brake, you need practice. Find a clear parking lot and experiment carefully, gradually increasing the braking force. Again, for a panic stop, try having three times the squeeze force on the front brake, compared to the rear. If you notice a rear wheel skid, even with light braking on the rear wheel, it means you're close to the maximum deceleration possible. Let off just a tad. And while you're at it, do some gentle front-only braking. You'll see it's no problem. Admittedly, it's possible to cycle for decades and never need this skill. But should you ever really need it, you'll be glad you practiced. - Frank Krygowski           Date: 05 Mar 2007 05:48:36 From: Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons Frank Krygowski writes: >> I would never do front brake only on my road bike especially at >> speed, anything above 10 mph. Unless I was practicing my stunts. > It's not usually a problem! > Many people are terrified of the front brake, but that's not > realistic. For moderate braking, either brake will work. It's not > at all uncommon for me to signal a turn with one hand while braking > with the other, and that can mean using the front brake only. > The dreaded over-the-bar happens only if you are doing very extreme > braking, and/or you allow the front wheel to cock sideways under > heavy deceleration. (IIRC, Jobst Brandt suspects that most > brake-induced over-the-bars come not from going due straight over > the bars, but from bracing oneself badly and causing the wheel to > cock sideways.) I don't want a misquote like that come back to haunt me so here is what I wrote: http://www.sheldonbrown.com/brandt/over-the-bars.html and a picture of both brakes being used: http://www.sheldonbrown.com/brandt/ > Some people think that the application of the rear brake magically > prevents those occurrences. It doesn't. In really hard braking, all > it can possibly do is warn you that your rear wheel is getting light, > so to speak, by its skidding. > If you have a fear of the front brake, you need practice. Find a > clear parking lot and experiment carefully, gradually increasing the > braking force. Again, for a panic stop, try having three times the > squeeze force on the front brake, compared to the rear. If you notice > a rear wheel skid, even with light braking on the rear wheel, it means > you're close to the maximum deceleration possible. Let off just a > tad. > And while you're at it, do some gentle front-only braking. You'll see > it's no problem. > Admittedly, it's possible to cycle for decades and never need this > skill. But should you ever really need it, you'll be glad you > practiced. I think you'll find that motorcycles and cars do most of their braking with front wheel(s), the front brakes being larger than rear ones. Jobst Brandt             Date: 05 Mar 2007 08:29:45 From: Curtis L. Russell Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On 05 2007 05:48:36 GMT, jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org wrote: >I think you'll find that motorcycles and cars do most of their braking >with front wheel(s), the front brakes being larger than rear ones. > >Jobst Brandt Some cars. Don't know anything about motorcycles. But even with the cars that have the same size brake set-ups, there is a reason that the front wheels are covered with brake dust and the rear wheels aren't. And the fronts get replaced way more often when they are equal sized. Curtis L. Russell Odenton, MD (USA) Just someone on two wheels...           Date: 05 Mar 2007 03:53:59 From: nash Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons <frkrygow@gmail.com > wrote in message news:1173055984.405492.292950@s48g2000cws.googlegroups.com... > On 4, 12:40 pm, "nash" <zwepytzkehil...@jetable.net> wrote: >> >> I would never do front brake only on my road bike especially at speed, >> anything above 10 mph. Unless I was practicing my stunts. :) > > It's not usually a problem! > > Many people are terrified of the front brake, but that's not > realistic. For moderate braking, either brake will work. It's not at > all uncommon for me to signal a turn with one hand while braking with > the other, and that can mean using the front brake only. > > The dreaded over-the-bar happens only if you are doing very extreme > braking, and/or you allow the front wheel to cock sideways under heavy > deceleration. (IIRC, Jobst Brandt suspects that most brake-induced > over-the-bars come not from going due straight over the bars, but from > bracing onesself badly and causing the wheel to cock sideways.) > > Some people think that the application of the rear brake magically > prevents those occurrences. It doesn't. In really hard braking, all > it can possibly do is warn you that your rear wheel is getting light, > so to speak, by its skidding. > > If you have a fear of the front brake, you need practice. Find a > clear parking lot and experiment carefully, gradually increasing the > braking force. Again, for a panic stop, try having three times the > squeeze force on the front brake, compared to the rear. If you notice > a rear wheel skid, even with light braking on the rear wheel, it means > you're close to the maximum deceleration possible. Let off just a > tad. > > And while you're at it, do some gentle front-only braking. You'll see > it's no problem. > > Admittedly, it's possible to cycle for decades and never need this > skill. But should you ever really need it, you'll be glad you > practiced. > > - Frank Krygowski It is not a fear of the front brake. When I think back, like I said it was at a light, I was probably coming out of my right spd at the same time and like you say would be poorly braced. This bike goes endo at lights rarely but it was going so slow it surprised me it would. I like to wear them out evenly and do not quick stop with the front unless I misjudged a cars speed or something. One constant and one feathering or pumping is another favorite. Ciau         Date: 27 Feb 2007 17:39:40 From: nash Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons In some situations it is essential that you do this - but one must be aware of such a situation developing; harder to do when your hearing is impaired. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< How is it that I am not situationally aware if very simply I can hear ambulances before the drivers. with ear buds and medium volume music. Not noise cancelling either as I keep having to say. Born deaf dumb and mute you can still ride a bike, communicate with the world, follow traffic rules. Science has nothing to do with real life. Anticipating where mistakes can happen has more to do with saving lives than hearing. But that would mean you would also have to be situationally aware in an experience dimension.           Date: 27 Feb 2007 18:08:45 From: Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 17:39:40 GMT, "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net > wrote: >Science has nothing to do with real life. Well, there's our answer, ladies and gentlemen. Back to astrology, reading pigeons' entrails, and examining the tea leaves at the bottom of the cup.             Date: 27 Feb 2007 22:56:20 From: nash Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons <jtaylor@NOSPAM.hfx.andara.com > wrote in message news:bss8u252rihrc9fcd5qfa12qvs9ul3u9bq@4ax.com... > On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 17:39:40 GMT, "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net> > wrote: > > >>Science has nothing to do with real life. > > Well, there's our answer, ladies and gentlemen. > > Back to astrology, reading pigeons' entrails, and examining the tea > leaves at the bottom of the cup. If everyone lived in a lab okay but no one does.       Date: 27 Feb 2007 03:42:59 From: Kristian M Zoerhoff Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On 2007-02-27, Roger Zoul <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com > wrote: > > Interesting. I've never considered the need to give a hand signal that I'm > going to stop on a bike. I only do it when stopping somewhere away from an intersection, where such a stop would be out of place (say. like when I hear the clattering of one of my blinkies skipping merrily across the pavement because the P-clip snapped last Friday). Since my general goal on the bike is to go, not stop, this is quite infrequent. On a crowded MUP, though, I would do so. Not that I'd assume anyone behind me would actually /understand/ the signal, of course, but at least I'd have tried. -- __o Kristian Zoerhoff _'\(,_ kristian.zoerhoff@gmail.com (_)/ (_)         Date: 27 Feb 2007 07:38:34 From: Roger Zoul Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons Kristian M Zoerhoff wrote: :: On 2007-02-27, Roger Zoul <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com > wrote: ::: ::: Interesting. I've never considered the need to give a hand signal ::: that I'm going to stop on a bike. :: :: I only do it when stopping somewhere away from an intersection, :: where such a stop would be out of place (say. like when I hear the :: clattering of one of my blinkies skipping merrily across the :: pavement because the P-clip snapped last Friday). Since my general :: goal on the bike is to go, not stop, this is quite infrequent. :: :: On a crowded MUP, though, I would do so. Not that I'd assume anyone :: behind me would actually /understand/ the signal, of course, but at :: least I'd :: have tried. That's a good point. I never ride on those as a rule...I was on one about two weeks ago...silver comet trail....however, we rode in the less used part, so the need never came up. But on the crowded parts, it would be very wise to give hand signals. I also saw some people walking on there wearing headphones as we were zooming by. Hmm.... :)         Date: 27 Feb 2007 09:24:50 From: Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 03:42:59 GMT, Kristian M Zoerhoff <kristian.zoerhoff@gmail.com > wrote: >On 2007-02-27, Roger Zoul <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> Interesting. I've never considered the need to give a hand signal that I'm >> going to stop on a bike. > >I only do it when stopping somewhere away from an intersection, where such a >stop would be out of place (say. like when I hear the clattering of one of >my blinkies skipping merrily across the pavement because the P-clip snapped >last Friday). Since my general goal on the bike is to go, not stop, this is >quite infrequent. > >On a crowded MUP, though, I would do so. Not that I'd assume anyone behind >me would actually /understand/ the signal, of course, but at least I'd >have tried. These signals are (usually, depending on the jurisdiction) taught and tested as part of the process for acquiring the permission to drive a motor-car. Is this not so where you ride?         Date: 26 Feb 2007 20:59:46 From: Bill Sornson Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons Kristian M Zoerhoff wrote: > On 2007-02-27, Roger Zoul <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> Interesting. I've never considered the need to give a hand signal >> that I'm going to stop on a bike. > I only do it when stopping somewhere away from an intersection, where > such a stop would be out of place (say. like when I hear the > clattering of one of my blinkies skipping merrily across the pavement > because the P-clip snapped last Friday). Since my general goal on the > bike is to go, not stop, this is quite infrequent. > > On a crowded MUP, though, I would do so. Not that I'd assume anyone > behind me would actually /understand/ the signal, of course, but at > least I'd > have tried. What's hard to understand about a flat palm faced backwards? It means, "I'm coming to a stop and you'll fall or crash if you don't slow down right now." Only useful with riders on one's wheel or close to it; it's really for /their/ benefit more than yours. (Also lets cars know, in case they're considering coming around.) Bill "signals" S.   Date: 26 Feb 2007 16:39:25 From: Chalo Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons Roger Zoul wrote: > > k Hickey wrote: > :: > :: You have my permission to ride "as deaf as you wanna be" > :: anywhere you like. Good luck with that, BTW. > > No one is asking your permission for anything, but you really ought to be > silence about things you have zero experience with. k has adequate experience riding a motorcycle to know what it's like to ride "deaf". Whether he's applied his observations to bicycling, I don't know. Chalo   Date: 26 Feb 2007 16:23:20 From: Chalo Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons GaryG wrote: > > nash wrote: > > > Some people here seem to forget to sound is additive....superposition > > works fine as long as your drums are not in saturation. > > > Exactly, and another thing I forgot about. I wear earbuds because I > > get an ear ache if I don't so they have double usefulness. > > > If you can hear traffic and music is where you should be. Do not > > assume everyone has the MP3 player cranked. that is predjudice. For what it's worth, traffic safety laws are all about prejudice. Not everybody screws up or even drives poorly when they drive drunk, for instance. And many people can see well enough and drive sensitively enough to get by without lighting. And who really needs a horn on their car? Safety laws, whether well or badly conceived, are intended to eliminate situations believed to promote accidents. > Did you say something? Sorry, I couldn't hear you. Could you please > repeat that? That reminds me of a situation I faced recently. I bought a small diesel school bus to move my household across the country recently. It worked great for that, but it topped out at around 65mph at the engine's governed maximum RPM. In driving across the western US, I spent a lot of time moving at 60-65mph-- at which speed the engine and wind noise are deafeningly loud inside the bus. I had to wear earplugs (illegal, I know) to avoid tinnitus. I would rather wear headphones, which would accomplish the same thing more comfortably while allowing me to listen to reasonably quiet music or talk to my wife on an intercom. But I don't want to get ticketed for doing it. If I understand correctly, it's also illegal to wear earplugs or headphones while riding a motorcycle-- even though I'd never consider riding long distances on a motorcycle without effective hearing protection. Lots of motorcyclists wear ear buds or even earphones built into their helmets so they can listen to music as they ride, and even more use plain earplugs for hearing protection or as an anti- fatigue measure. At the same time, there is no limit on how sound-insulative a car can be, and there's no specific limit on how loud your car stereo is allowed to be, and there's no prohibition or limitation on people driving with temporary or permanent hearing loss or even total deafness. I understand the intention behind banning the wearing of headphones or earplugs while driving, but I don't think the applicable laws sensitively address current issues relating to ear protection and the acoustic qualities of today's cars. During my lifetime (basically the epoch of ubiquitous automotive air conditioning and car stereos), emergency vehicles have gotten _much_ louder and their warning lights _much_ more conspicuous, so it's clear they are tackling the issue from another direction. Anti-earplug laws seem to me like they're ripe for a revision, but of course nobody has enough money riding on it to be able to pay legislators to make appropriate changes. Ah, the joys of free-ket government. Chalo   Date: 26 Feb 2007 09:13:27 From: gds Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On Feb 26, 9:39 am, "Roger Zoul" <rogerzo...@hotmail.com > wrote: SNIP > :: > :: Roger, please re read my post. I agreed that calling folks names > :: isn't a very strong form of argument. > > Of course, you directed it at me and not to others who had done so. I'm not sure what you mean. I argued agaisnt name calling and you lump me in with the name callers. Your point is ? > > :: > :: As to who is in the minority. I ride ~5,000 miles a year and have > :: done so for the last 40 years. During that time I have seen an > :: awfull lot of folks on the road. My observations over this long > :: period and many miles would put folks listening while riding at > :: under 10%. Anecdotal but that is an awful lot of anecdotes. > > Anedotoal yes and merely a guesstimate. And it not that I really disagree > with your guesstimate, but I'm pointing out that that's merely what it is. There seems to be a view held by some in this group that data can only be obtained via some scientific study. Observation also yields data. It is a different sort of data but it has value non the less. So," guesstimates" can be quite correct and it need not be a pejorative term. > > :: > :: I'm interested in the pros you se riding with msic. I've seen them > :: while warming up on their trainers but not out on the road. In races > :: they are listening- but it is to race directors not music. > :: But it may well be the case that you have witnessed pros riding along > :: listening to music. I don't see what that contributes to the > :: argument. If they are diminishing their awareness it doesn't make it > :: OK for others. > > Again, there you go. Strawman argument. Please quantify "diminished > awareness". Not a strawman at all. Are you arguing that while listenin to music that you have absolutely no dimuntion of ability to hear background or other noise? > > :: I've heard of NASCARdrivers getting speeding tickets; so, by your > :: argument it's OK for everyone to speed. > :: > > I've made no such argument. No, I was simply making ananalogy. > > :: This argument will be like the helmet threads. Folks will believe > :: what they want and neither data nor reason will have a big impact. > > Except that there is neither good date nor reason that I can see. People > keep mentioning decreased awareness yet this is a term that can't be > quantified for a human being. It therefore resides strictly in the > theoretical domain and can't be trusted in the real world. > > We're all free to believe what we wish to believe. However, people here are > making harsh comments about those who ride with buds with little else but a > flimsy belief to base their comments on. That's sad. Insulting people for their opinions is poor form. Disagreement is something else.     Date: 26 Feb 2007 16:58:18 From: Roger Zoul Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons gds wrote: :: On Feb 26, 9:39 am, "Roger Zoul" <rogerzo...@hotmail.com > wrote: :: :: :: SNIP ::::: ::::: Roger, please re read my post. I agreed that calling folks names ::::: isn't a very strong form of argument. ::: ::: Of course, you directed it at me and not to others who had done so. :: :: I'm not sure what you mean. I argued agaisnt name calling and you :: lump me in with the name callers. Your point is ? I didn't lump you with anyone...I said you directed your comment at me, not others. :: ::: ::::: ::::: As to who is in the minority. I ride ~5,000 miles a year and have ::::: done so for the last 40 years. During that time I have seen an ::::: awfull lot of folks on the road. My observations over this long ::::: period and many miles would put folks listening while riding at ::::: under 10%. Anecdotal but that is an awful lot of anecdotes. ::: ::: Anedotoal yes and merely a guesstimate. And it not that I really ::: disagree with your guesstimate, but I'm pointing out that that's ::: merely what it is. :: :: There seems to be a view held by some in this group that data can :: only be obtained via some scientific study. Observation also yields :: data. It is a different sort of data but it has value non the less. :: So," guesstimates" can be quite correct and it need not be a :: pejorative term. Well, then, my observations are valid too. :: :: ::: ::::: ::::: I'm interested in the pros you se riding with msic. I've seen them ::::: while warming up on their trainers but not out on the road. In ::::: races they are listening- but it is to race directors not music. ::::: But it may well be the case that you have witnessed pros riding ::::: along listening to music. I don't see what that contributes to the ::::: argument. If they are diminishing their awareness it doesn't make ::::: it OK for others. ::: ::: Again, there you go. Strawman argument. Please quantify "diminished ::: awareness". :: :: Not a strawman at all. Are you arguing that while listenin to music :: that you have absolutely no dimuntion of ability to hear background :: or other noise? No, that's not my argument at all. Your statement is too simplistic. I'm saying that I can play music and still effectively use hearing as a sense, but also since I can't depend on hearing as input, it's relative importance is low to begin with. The notion that any lessening of hearing as an input is dangerous is certainly nonsense. :: ::: ::::: I've heard of NASCARdrivers getting speeding tickets; so, by your ::::: argument it's OK for everyone to speed. ::::: ::: ::: I've made no such argument. :: :: No, I was simply making ananalogy. :: No, you're trying to put words in my mouth. I made no such argument. ::: ::::: This argument will be like the helmet threads. Folks will believe ::::: what they want and neither data nor reason will have a big impact. ::: ::: Except that there is neither good date nor reason that I can see. ::: People keep mentioning decreased awareness yet this is a term that ::: can't be quantified for a human being. It therefore resides ::: strictly in the theoretical domain and can't be trusted in the real ::: world. ::: ::: We're all free to believe what we wish to believe. However, people ::: here are making harsh comments about those who ride with buds with ::: little else but a flimsy belief to base their comments on. That's ::: sad. :: :: Insulting people for their opinions is poor form. Disagreement is :: something else. Fine. Disagree. I have no problem with that. I'm certainly not here to encourage anyone to do anything they don't feel completely comfortable doing. However, IMO, the arguments against (other than being against the law) are far from compelling.   Date: 26 Feb 2007 07:48:26 From: gds Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On Feb 23, 10:23 am, "Roger Zoul" <rogerzo...@hotmail.com > wrote: > > Well, read the subject line! > > Where is your proof that cyclist who ride with music are a minority? I've > seen professional cyclist doing it. Likewise, one could claim that lots of > activities that cyclist do have some negative contribution to safety. > > Those of you who consider people who cycle with music to be unsafe, idiots, > and morons have absolutely no understanding of those who are able to do so > in a safe manner. It seems to me that if you don't feel comfortable cycling > with music, then all you have to do is not do so, rather than ranting on > with your unfounded opinions and name calling. Roger, please re read my post. I agreed that calling folks names isn't a very strong form of argument. As to who is in the minority. I ride ~5,000 miles a year and have done so for the last 40 years. During that time I have seen an awfull lot of folks on the road. My observations over this long period and many miles would put folks listening while riding at under 10%. Anecdotal but that is an awful lot of anecdotes. I'm interested in the pros you se riding with msic. I've seen them while warming up on their trainers but not out on the road. In races they are listening- but it is to race directors not music. But it may well be the case that you have witnessed pros riding along listening to music. I don't see what that contributes to the argument. If they are diminishing their awareness it doesn't make it OK for others. I've heard of NASCARdrivers getting speeding tickets; so, by your argument it's OK for everyone to speed. This argument will be like the helmet threads. Folks will believe what they want and neither data nor reason will have a big impact.     Date: 26 Feb 2007 19:31:32 From: nash Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons I do not see why wearing an MP3 puts others at risk. Where is your proof? Nascar drivers can speed all they want as far as I am concerned. They are 200X more skilled than you or I. No risk there either. Same as I would rather trust a semi driver who works everyday than an RV driver or even a truck or car. Granted they may try consciously to scare me off the road but they are still good at their job. Lastly, IMHO, for me anyway, when listening to music I ride slower to compensate. I decided a while back I am not doing it to beat my average time anymore. Too much hassle with cars that do not know how to handle seeing a bike and what is a safe cross over distance for them crossing or for me crossing. I always got honked at when it was perfectly safe so I pay myself back by listening to music instead, watching my mirror every 8 seconds not 10 minutes as someone suggested. No one has been able to say that is unsafe yet so if you have not done it I cannot hear you. : )       Date: 26 Feb 2007 15:00:05 From: Curtis L. Russell Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 19:31:32 GMT, "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net > wrote: >Nascar drivers can speed all they want as far as I am concerned. They are >200X more skilled than you or I. No risk there either. That is simply a stupid statement. All the skill in the world does not remove risk when speeding in traffic. If that driver was speeding in open country with no traffic, perhaps. In traffic, with other drivers, no. This is the reasoning of a teen age driver that thinks his or her reflexes will bail them out of any situation, including a clueless driver that changes lanes expecting a normal flow of traffic. They scrape them off the tarmac all the time. Curtis L. Russell Odenton, MD (USA) Just someone on two wheels...         Date: 26 Feb 2007 23:13:53 From: nash Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons "Curtis L. Russell" <curtis@md-bicycling.org > wrote in message news:iqe6u21q03r3dl0rihkj3t1q4p90er8o2e@4ax.com... > On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 19:31:32 GMT, "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net> > wrote: > >>Nascar drivers can speed all they want as far as I am concerned. They are >>200X more skilled than you or I. No risk there either. > > That is simply a stupid statement. All the skill in the world does not > remove risk when speeding in traffic. If that driver was speeding in > open country with no traffic, perhaps. In traffic, with other drivers, > no. This is the reasoning of a teen age driver that thinks his or her > reflexes will bail them out of any situation, including a clueless > driver that changes lanes expecting a normal flow of traffic. They > scrape them off the tarmac all the time. > > Curtis L. Russell > Odenton, MD (USA) > Just someone on two wheels... You have your opinion I have mine. Still no comment on the 8 sec. rule so I must be right. Other's arguments are equally extreme in the reverse so just try to make things balanced. You are not doing that.           Date: 27 Feb 2007 08:29:03 From: Curtis L. Russell Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 23:13:53 GMT, "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net > wrote: > >You have your opinion I have mine. Still no comment on the 8 sec. rule so I >must be right. Other's arguments are equally extreme in the reverse so just >try to make things balanced. You are not doing that. You say something stupid and you want to defend something indefensible. I'm not really part of this discussion, other than to note this really stupid comment, so balance has nothing to do with it. I suggest you simply stop trying to defend the idea that a NASCAR driver has any business speeding on public roads. Curtis L. Russell Odenton, MD (USA) Just someone on two wheels...             Date: 27 Feb 2007 17:47:33 From: nash Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons "Curtis L. Russell" <curtis@md-bicycling.org > wrote in message news:7cc8u299rs1grue7cktqq8r3pp6dai4i4g@4ax.com... > On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 23:13:53 GMT, "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net> > wrote: > >> >>You have your opinion I have mine. Still no comment on the 8 sec. rule so >>I >>must be right. Other's arguments are equally extreme in the reverse so >>just >>try to make things balanced. You are not doing that. > > You say something stupid and you want to defend something > indefensible. I'm not really part of this discussion, other than to > note this really stupid comment, so balance has nothing to do with it. > I suggest you simply stop trying to defend the idea that a NASCAR > driver has any business speeding on public roads. > > Curtis L. Russell > Odenton, MD (USA) > Just someone on two wheels... You cannot deny that everyone speeds so why not a Nascar driver. I do not have to defend my opinion because everyone has their own and that would take a life time to discuss.           Date: 27 Feb 2007 06:30:27 From: skiffrun Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons nash;181277 Wrote: > "Curtis L. Russell" <curtis@md-bicycling.org> wrote in message > news:iqe6u21q03r3dl0rihkj3t1q4p90er8o2e@4ax.com... > > On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 19:31:32 GMT, "nash" > <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net> > > wrote: > > > >>Nascar drivers can speed all they want as far as I am concerned. > They are > >>200X more skilled than you or I. No risk there either. > > > > That is simply a stupid statement. All the skill in the world does > not > > remove risk when speeding in traffic. If that driver was speeding in > > open country with no traffic, perhaps. In traffic, with other > drivers, > > no. This is the reasoning of a teen age driver that thinks his or > her > > reflexes will bail them out of any situation, including a clueless > > driver that changes lanes expecting a normal flow of traffic. They > > scrape them off the tarmac all the time. > > > > Curtis L. Russell > > Odenton, MD (USA) > > Just someone on two wheels... > > You have your opinion I have mine. Still no comment on the 8 sec. rule > so I > must be right. Other's arguments are equally extreme in the reverse so > just > try to make things balanced. You are not doing that. All opinions / actions are not equal. If two things are diametrically opposed, and one contributes to the general welfare & one detracts, the one detracting is invalid. An opinion that reckless action is okay if a particular person is the actor is that of an uneducated or childish oaf. -- skiffrun ------------------------------------------------------------------------ skiffrun's Profile: http://www.trianglecycling.com/member.php?userid=28 View this thread: http://www.trianglecycling.com/showthread.php?t=18205             Date: 27 Feb 2007 17:52:49 From: nash Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons "skiffrun" <skiffrun.2mo19f@no-mx.forums.yourdomain.com.au > wrote in message news:skiffrun.2mo19f@no-mx.forums.yourdomain.com.au... > > nash;181277 Wrote: >> "Curtis L. Russell" <curtis@md-bicycling.org> wrote in message >> news:iqe6u21q03r3dl0rihkj3t1q4p90er8o2e@4ax.com... >> > On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 19:31:32 GMT, "nash" >> <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net> >> > wrote: >> > >> >>Nascar drivers can speed all they want as far as I am concerned. >> They are >> >>200X more skilled than you or I. No risk there either. >> > >> > That is simply a stupid statement. All the skill in the world does >> not >> > remove risk when speeding in traffic. If that driver was speeding in >> > open country with no traffic, perhaps. In traffic, with other >> drivers, >> > no. This is the reasoning of a teen age driver that thinks his or >> her >> > reflexes will bail them out of any situation, including a clueless >> > driver that changes lanes expecting a normal flow of traffic. They >> > scrape them off the tarmac all the time. >> > >> > Curtis L. Russell >> > Odenton, MD (USA) >> > Just someone on two wheels... >> >> You have your opinion I have mine. Still no comment on the 8 sec. rule >> so I >> must be right. Other's arguments are equally extreme in the reverse so >> just >> try to make things balanced. You are not doing that. > > All opinions / actions are not equal. If two things are diametrically > opposed, and one contributes to the general welfare & one detracts, the > one detracting is invalid. > > An opinion that reckless action is okay if a particular person is the > actor is that of an uneducated or childish oaf. > > > -- > skiffrun > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > skiffrun's Profile: http://www.trianglecycling.com/member.php?userid=28 > View this thread: http://www.trianglecycling.com/showthread.php?t=18205 I was not detracting just the opposite. You all like to attack me at once and that does not add anything so why do you do it? I am alllowed my opinion and all the better if you disagree. You are just too narrow minded. It is not reckless just the opposite. There is no way you can drive as well as a race driver. So stuff it. You do not even get what I am saying. False accusations and slander is destructive, not what I do at all.     Date: 26 Feb 2007 11:39:01 From: Roger Zoul Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons gds wrote: :: On Feb 23, 10:23 am, "Roger Zoul" <rogerzo...@hotmail.com > wrote: ::: ::: Well, read the subject line! ::: ::: Where is your proof that cyclist who ride with music are a ::: minority? I've seen professional cyclist doing it. Likewise, one ::: could claim that lots of activities that cyclist do have some ::: negative contribution to safety. ::: ::: Those of you who consider people who cycle with music to be unsafe, ::: idiots, and morons have absolutely no understanding of those who ::: are able to do so in a safe manner. It seems to me that if you ::: don't feel comfortable cycling with music, then all you have to do ::: is not do so, rather than ranting on with your unfounded opinions ::: and name calling. :: :: :: Roger, please re read my post. I agreed that calling folks names :: isn't a very strong form of argument. Of course, you directed it at me and not to others who had done so. :: :: As to who is in the minority. I ride ~5,000 miles a year and have :: done so for the last 40 years. During that time I have seen an :: awfull lot of folks on the road. My observations over this long :: period and many miles would put folks listening while riding at :: under 10%. Anecdotal but that is an awful lot of anecdotes. Anedotoal yes and merely a guesstimate. And it not that I really disagree with your guesstimate, but I'm pointing out that that's merely what it is. :: :: I'm interested in the pros you se riding with msic. I've seen them :: while warming up on their trainers but not out on the road. In races :: they are listening- but it is to race directors not music. :: But it may well be the case that you have witnessed pros riding along :: listening to music. I don't see what that contributes to the :: argument. If they are diminishing their awareness it doesn't make it :: OK for others. Again, there you go. Strawman argument. Please quantify "diminished awareness". :: I've heard of NASCARdrivers getting speeding tickets; so, by your :: argument it's OK for everyone to speed. :: I've made no such argument. :: This argument will be like the helmet threads. Folks will believe :: what they want and neither data nor reason will have a big impact. Except that there is neither good date nor reason that I can see. People keep mentioning decreased awareness yet this is a term that can't be quantified for a human being. It therefore resides strictly in the theoretical domain and can't be trusted in the real world. We're all free to believe what we wish to believe. However, people here are making harsh comments about those who ride with buds with little else but a flimsy belief to base their comments on. That's sad.       Date: 26 Feb 2007 16:44:38 From: Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 11:39:01 -0500, "Roger Zoul" <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com > wrote: >People >keep mentioning decreased awareness yet this is a term that can't be >quantified for a human being. Nonsense. Probe techniques have been used for decades.   Date: 25 Feb 2007 20:40:18 From: marian.rosenberg@gmail.com Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On Feb 25, 12:29 am, k Hickey <m...@habcycles.com > wrote: > jtay...@NOSPAM.hfx.andara.com wrote: > >On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 22:39:26 -0600, fred <f...@fred.com> wrote: > > >>> (2) one cannot depend on hearing while cycling > > >>I agree that you cannot depend on hearing while cycling. However: > > >Piffle. > > >Get your ears tested. > > My thoughts exactly. I constantly "depend on my hearing" when > cycling. I listen for change in the sound of a car coming up behind > me (indicating they might be planning a turn), and can reasonably tell > when a car is likely to be passing close to me before it gets there. > I also listen for the sound of a parked car starting or shifting into > gear (or the sound of the front tires turning on the pavement). I > listen for the clinking of dog tags or kids behind the parked cars. I > even listen for the sound of another bike on my tail. > > You can't rely ONLY on your hearing, obviously - but it's ludicrous to > think that there's no down side to eliminating one source of input > about your surroundings without taking unnecessary risks. I had a crash about two months ago that might not have happened if I hadn't been listening to music. It simply did not occur to me that anyone who was not significantly slower than me and who had specifically been invited to draft me would get on my rear wheel without asking me or would so diligently follow me that he'd follow me as I slowed and pulled off to the side of the road. I realized I was still going to fast to catch that fruit stand and hit my brakes at which point he hit me. He'd been following me for about ten minutes without making any effort to get my attention. If I hadn't been listening to music I _might_ have picked up the minimal noises of his bicycle and breathing over the noises of my bicycle and breathing. It still wouldn't have occurred to me that someone would draft without asking first but I _might_ have heard him. -M     Date: 26 Feb 2007 07:29:31 From: Roger Zoul Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons ian.rosenberg@gmail.com wrote: :: On Feb 25, 12:29 am, k Hickey <m...@habcycles.com > wrote: ::: jtay...@NOSPAM.hfx.andara.com wrote: :::: On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 22:39:26 -0600, fred <f...@fred.com > wrote: ::: :::::: (2) one cannot depend on hearing while cycling ::: ::::: I agree that you cannot depend on hearing while cycling. However: ::: :::: Piffle. ::: :::: Get your ears tested. ::: ::: My thoughts exactly. I constantly "depend on my hearing" when ::: cycling. I listen for change in the sound of a car coming up behind ::: me (indicating they might be planning a turn), and can reasonably ::: tell when a car is likely to be passing close to me before it gets ::: there. I also listen for the sound of a parked car starting or ::: shifting into gear (or the sound of the front tires turning on the ::: pavement). I listen for the clinking of dog tags or kids behind ::: the parked cars. I even listen for the sound of another bike on my ::: tail. ::: ::: You can't rely ONLY on your hearing, obviously - but it's ludicrous ::: to think that there's no down side to eliminating one source of ::: input about your surroundings without taking unnecessary risks. :: :: I had a crash about two months ago that might not have happened if I :: hadn't been listening to music. :: :: It simply did not occur to me that anyone who was not significantly :: slower than me and who had specifically been invited to draft me :: would get on my rear wheel without asking me or would so diligently :: follow me that he'd follow me as I slowed and pulled off to the side :: of the road. I realized I was still going to fast to catch that :: fruit stand and hit my brakes at which point he hit me. :: :: He'd been following me for about ten minutes without making any :: effort to get my attention. :: :: If I hadn't been listening to music I _might_ have picked up the :: minimal noises of his bicycle and breathing over the noises of my :: bicycle and breathing. It still wouldn't have occurred to me that :: someone would draft without asking first but I _might_ have heard :: him. :: :: -M I wear a mirror when I wear an iPod. I never go 10 mintues without checking it. Also, you may or may not have heard him. He could have been there a much shorter time before you decided to stop. His presence could have been undetectable due to simple wind noise.       Date: 09 Mar 2007 10:53:44 From: DanKMTB@gmail.com Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On 9, 1:32 pm, "nash" <zwepytzkehil...@jetable.net > wrote: > "k Hickey" <m...@habcycles.com> wrote in message > > news:0pm2v2p9de4hovta330a5tcuqfvft4dvam@4ax.com... > > > > > > > "nash" <zwepytzkehil...@jetable.net> wrote: > > >>But, if your front brake wears out first maybe you have to depend on the > >>rear brake more. So it depends on your bike and your brakes. I just > >>retired > >>my front and I know it is perfectly aligned. Though as I just said maybe > >>it > >>is worn being that it does stop more than half the weight if you are > >>correct. > >>I was not doing any downhill, just average speed in the rain, feather it, > >>and see which is more pronounced. It's the rear in my case. > >>I guess all I am trying to add is it depends on your situation as in all > >>things. > > > Thing is, physics isn't a "depends on thing"... you're giving advice > > that is wrong and that could potentially hurt someone. The front > > brake is the one you MUST use to stop as quickly as possible in an > > emergency situation. To rely on the back brake in such a situation is > > a horribly bad idea. > > > k Hickey > > Habanero Cycles > >http://www.habcycles.com > > Home of the $795 ti frame > > How am I trying to hurt someone? That is slander DA. I said they should > test their brakes like everyone else on the road does. > You would be killing me if I followed your advice then, obviously as I > described to you already. You don't need to be *trying* to hurt somebody in order to do so. As has been discussed here, physics dictate that the front brake has more stopping power. If word gets around that the back brake has more stopping power, that misconception could hurt people. Those sharing the misconception don't have to be trying to hurt anyone; they could have the best intentions in the world. The problem is that when it comes to braking, bad advice offered with factual misconceptions could hurt somebody.         Date: 09 Mar 2007 19:26:44 From: nash Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons <DanKMTB@gmail.com > wrote in message news:1173466424.775860.33680@30g2000cwc.googlegroups.com... > On 9, 1:32 pm, "nash" <zwepytzkehil...@jetable.net> wrote: >> "k Hickey" <m...@habcycles.com> wrote in message >> >> news:0pm2v2p9de4hovta330a5tcuqfvft4dvam@4ax.com... >> >> >> >> >> >> > "nash" <zwepytzkehil...@jetable.net> wrote: >> >> >>But, if your front brake wears out first maybe you have to depend on >> >>the >> >>rear brake more. So it depends on your bike and your brakes. I just >> >>retired >> >>my front and I know it is perfectly aligned. Though as I just said >> >>maybe >> >>it >> >>is worn being that it does stop more than half the weight if you are >> >>correct. >> >>I was not doing any downhill, just average speed in the rain, feather >> >>it, >> >>and see which is more pronounced. It's the rear in my case. >> >>I guess all I am trying to add is it depends on your situation as in >> >>all >> >>things. >> >> > Thing is, physics isn't a "depends on thing"... you're giving advice >> > that is wrong and that could potentially hurt someone. The front >> > brake is the one you MUST use to stop as quickly as possible in an >> > emergency situation. To rely on the back brake in such a situation is >> > a horribly bad idea. >> >> > k Hickey >> > Habanero Cycles >> >http://www.habcycles.com >> > Home of the $795 ti frame >> >> How am I trying to hurt someone? That is slander DA. I said they should >> test their brakes like everyone else on the road does. >> You would be killing me if I followed your advice then, obviously as I >> described to you already. > > You don't need to be *trying* to hurt somebody in order to do so. As > has been discussed here, physics dictate that the front brake has more > stopping power. If word gets around that the back brake has more > stopping power, that misconception could hurt people. Those sharing > the misconception don't have to be trying to hurt anyone; they could > have the best intentions in the world. The problem is that when it > comes to braking, bad advice offered with factual misconceptions could > hurt somebody. Well, the previous post just proved you wrong. MTB have better back brakes, ergo you are deceiving people           Date: 09 Mar 2007 14:49:20 From: Curtis L. Russell Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On Fri, 09 2007 19:26:44 GMT, "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net > wrote: >Well, the previous post just proved you wrong. MTB have better back brakes, >ergo you are deceiving people Its possible if they mixed brake types, but the issue isn't the brake itself, but what happens when you hit the brakes. Under most road conditions, this is pretty much the same regardless of the bike type. I have a recumbent with a 20" front and a 26" rear wheel, a tandem recumbent, have had a standard Santana tandem, various MTBs, also ride a Fuji Roubaix Pro. That's a fairly wide range of vehicles and with even remotely equivalent brakes, the front tire provides the priy braking. Its never been otherwise. If the front brakes work well and you aren't doing deliberately stupid stuff, or you aren't riding a really trick bike that has you sitting off the back wheel (and I'm not really sure that the physics changes here), then the front brake does the majority of the stopping. You can also put yourself well behind the seat when braking, but that mainly effects stability in my experience, maybe keeping the rear wheel down longer, but the front still does most of the work. You are left saying that you deliberately feather the front so the rear does most of the stopping. That will do it all right... Curtis L. Russell Odenton, MD (USA) Just someone on two wheels...             Date: 09 Mar 2007 20:28:57 From: nash Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons "Curtis L. Russell" <curtis@md-bicycling.org > wrote in message news:i1e3v2papnu8lb9ksdn44q302o44tor57o@4ax.com... > On Fri, 09 2007 19:26:44 GMT, "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net> > wrote: > >>Well, the previous post just proved you wrong. MTB have better back >>brakes, >>ergo you are deceiving people > > Its possible if they mixed brake types, but the issue isn't the brake > itself, but what happens when you hit the brakes. Under most road > conditions, this is pretty much the same regardless of the bike type. > I have a recumbent with a 20" front and a 26" rear wheel, a tandem > recumbent, have had a standard Santana tandem, various MTBs, also ride > a Fuji Roubaix Pro. That's a fairly wide range of vehicles and with > even remotely equivalent brakes, the front tire provides the priy > braking. Its never been otherwise. > > If the front brakes work well and you aren't doing deliberately stupid > stuff, or you aren't riding a really trick bike that has you sitting > off the back wheel (and I'm not really sure that the physics changes > here), then the front brake does the majority of the stopping. You can > also put yourself well behind the seat when braking, but that mainly > effects stability in my experience, maybe keeping the rear wheel down > longer, but the front still does most of the work. > > You are left saying that you deliberately feather the front so the > rear does most of the stopping. That will do it all right... > > Curtis L. Russell > Odenton, MD (USA) > Just someone on two wheels... I have never seen a tandem recumbent. neat Oh and did the lab data tell you it was the same for big bottom girls. We have our center of gravity lower than yours. Thus the rear wheel stays down and does the work. I use my right for sudden slowing if I am on my road bike because it is the quickest. Maybe you are just fouling everybody with your twit knowledge. Plus I have always done both and pump so your line of thinking is as usual going to be counter to mine because that is the way you learned it. Your physics only proves what you set out to prove in the first place. It is contaminated with your needs. And if you start breaking up messages, anyone, just to prove your point and not my whole dialogue then you are deceiving and harmful as well. As well you know. Why don't you drink some of this delicious Kool-Aid and go to sleep. Forever. Zen               Date: 09 Mar 2007 15:38:47 From: Curtis L. Russell Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On Fri, 09 2007 20:28:57 GMT, "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net > wrote: >Maybe you are just fouling everybody with your twit knowledge. >Plus I have always done both and pump so your line of thinking is as usual >going to be counter to mine because that is the way you learned it. Your >physics only proves what you set out to prove in the first place. It is >contaminated with your needs. You are a wate of effort. Go on, make it up as you go. Just try not to believe the stuff you make up - it could get you killed. Sure, your experience on bikes with bad brakes or whatever - seems to change from email to email - trumps that of all of us, like my 50 years on a variety to Mike's as a bike shop owner. Last comment. As I said above, a waste of effort. Curtis L. Russell Odenton, MD (USA) Just someone on two wheels...                 Date: 09 Mar 2007 20:45:49 From: nash Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons "Curtis L. Russell" <curtis@md-bicycling.org > wrote in message news:lug3v21761hqgqlpk8igbu2g06jn45lb1t@4ax.com... > On Fri, 09 2007 20:28:57 GMT, "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net> > wrote: > >>Maybe you are just fouling everybody with your twit knowledge. >>Plus I have always done both and pump so your line of thinking is as usual >>going to be counter to mine because that is the way you learned it. Your >>physics only proves what you set out to prove in the first place. It is >>contaminated with your needs. > > You are a wate of effort. Go on, make it up as you go. Just try not to > believe the stuff you make up - it could get you killed. Sure, your > experience on bikes with bad brakes or whatever - seems to change from > email to email - trumps that of all of us, like my 50 years on a > variety to Mike's as a bike shop owner. > > Last comment. As I said above, a waste of effort. > > Curtis L. Russell > Odenton, MD (USA) > Just someone on two wheels... I am not making it up. It is just logic. Something people forget to use like you. In fact other people brought it to light. Things have changed in the last 50 years. And I did not ever change my stance on anything. prove it. Ergonomics is a new word for you too.               Date: 09 Mar 2007 20:32:57 From: nash Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net > wrote in message news:dsjIh.19850$Ym.1595@pd7urf1no... > > "Curtis L. Russell" <curtis@md-bicycling.org> wrote in message > news:i1e3v2papnu8lb9ksdn44q302o44tor57o@4ax.com... >> On Fri, 09 2007 19:26:44 GMT, "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net> >> wrote: >> >>>Well, the previous post just proved you wrong. MTB have better back >>>brakes, >>>ergo you are deceiving people >> >> Its possible if they mixed brake types, but the issue isn't the brake >> itself, but what happens when you hit the brakes. Under most road >> conditions, this is pretty much the same regardless of the bike type. >> I have a recumbent with a 20" front and a 26" rear wheel, a tandem >> recumbent, have had a standard Santana tandem, various MTBs, also ride >> a Fuji Roubaix Pro. That's a fairly wide range of vehicles and with >> even remotely equivalent brakes, the front tire provides the priy >> braking. Its never been otherwise. >> >> If the front brakes work well and you aren't doing deliberately stupid >> stuff, or you aren't riding a really trick bike that has you sitting >> off the back wheel (and I'm not really sure that the physics changes >> here), then the front brake does the majority of the stopping. You can >> also put yourself well behind the seat when braking, but that mainly >> effects stability in my experience, maybe keeping the rear wheel down >> longer, but the front still does most of the work. >> >> You are left saying that you deliberately feather the front so the >> rear does most of the stopping. That will do it all right... >> >> Curtis L. Russell >> Odenton, MD (USA) >> Just someone on two wheels... > > I have never seen a tandem recumbent. neat > Oh and did the lab data tell you it was the same for big bottom girls. > We have our center of gravity lower than yours. Thus the rear wheel stays > down and does the work. I use my right for sudden slowing if I am on my > road bike because it is the quickest. > Maybe you are just fouling everybody with your twit knowledge. > Plus I have always done both and pump so your line of thinking is as usual > going to be counter to mine because that is the way you learned it. Your > physics only proves what you set out to prove in the first place. It is > contaminated with your needs. > And if you start breaking up messages, anyone, just to prove your point > and not my whole dialogue then you are deceiving and harmful as well. As > well you know. > Why don't you drink some of this delicious Kool-Aid and go to sleep. > Forever. > > Zen Oh, and add to that I always carry a pannier with tools and half the time it is full so that also weights the rear. Zen       Date: 09 Mar 2007 08:06:30 From: DanKMTB@gmail.com Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On 9, 8:06 am, k Hickey <m...@habcycles.com > wrote: > "nash" <zwepytzkehil...@jetable.net> wrote: > >But, if your front brake wears out first maybe you have to depend on the > >rear brake more. So it depends on your bike and your brakes. I just retired > >my front and I know it is perfectly aligned. Though as I just said maybe it > >is worn being that it does stop more than half the weight if you are > >correct. > >I was not doing any downhill, just average speed in the rain, feather it, > >and see which is more pronounced. It's the rear in my case. > >I guess all I am trying to add is it depends on your situation as in all > >things. > > Thing is, physics isn't a "depends on thing"... you're giving advice > that is wrong and that could potentially hurt someone. The front > brake is the one you MUST use to stop as quickly as possible in an > emergency situation. To rely on the back brake in such a situation is > a horribly bad idea. > > k Hickey > Habanero Cycleshttp://www.habcycles.com > Home of the $795 ti frame Back in my BMX days, it was all rear brake only. When riding on the street, if we needed a true emergency stop standard procedure was to lay the bike down and drag the pedal & bars, as well as a foot sometimes. This procedue also leaves the rider in a great bail-out position if the bike isn't stopping in time. I seem to recall this being a fairly effective braking method. It was certainly more effective than threshold braking the rear down to a stop. I wonder how it would match up to reasonable use of front brakes (assuming speeds ~20, under 25mph)? I suspect my recollection is a little off, and I didn't have any front brake experience to compare it to. I may have to pretend I'm employed by Fogel Labs LLC this weekend and check it out. What will the neighbors think?         Date: 09 Mar 2007 09:14:25 From: Mark Hickey Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons "DanKMTB@gmail.com" <DanKMTB@gmail.com > wrote: >k Hickey <m...@habcycles.com> wrote: >> "nash" <zwepytzkehil...@jetable.net> wrote: >> >But, if your front brake wears out first maybe you have to depend on the >> >rear brake more. So it depends on your bike and your brakes. I just retired >> >my front and I know it is perfectly aligned. Though as I just said maybe it >> >is worn being that it does stop more than half the weight if you are >> >correct. >> >I was not doing any downhill, just average speed in the rain, feather it, >> >and see which is more pronounced. It's the rear in my case. >> >I guess all I am trying to add is it depends on your situation as in all >> >things. >> >> Thing is, physics isn't a "depends on thing"... you're giving advice >> that is wrong and that could potentially hurt someone. The front >> brake is the one you MUST use to stop as quickly as possible in an >> emergency situation. To rely on the back brake in such a situation is >> a horribly bad idea. > >Back in my BMX days, it was all rear brake only. When riding on the >street, if we needed a true emergency stop standard procedure was to >lay the bike down and drag the pedal & bars, as well as a foot >sometimes. This procedue also leaves the rider in a great bail-out >position if the bike isn't stopping in time. I seem to recall this >being a fairly effective braking method. It was certainly more >effective than threshold braking the rear down to a stop. I wonder >how it would match up to reasonable use of front brakes (assuming >speeds ~20, under 25mph)? I suspect my recollection is a little off, >and I didn't have any front brake experience to compare it to. I may >have to pretend I'm employed by Fogel Labs LLC this weekend and check >it out. What will the neighbors think? Heh... sounds like fun though. I suspect two things will come out of testing: 1) It's theoretically possible to stop quicker with a picture-perfect slide and a low enough center of gravity (not to mention adding a dragged foot and/or pedal into the mix). 2) It'll be very difficult to properly achieve a good stopping distance with this method, even with the advantage of forethought, practice and planning. 3) The odds of pulling it off in a TRUE emergency are pretty small (IMHO of course). But please DO post the result of any testing - it could still be very interesting. k Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.habcycles.com Home of the $795 ti frame     Date: 26 Feb 2007 05:03:43 From: nash Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons <ian.rosenberg@gmail.com > wrote in message news:1172464818.939485.239300@q2g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > On Feb 25, 12:29 am, k Hickey <m...@habcycles.com> wrote: >> jtay...@NOSPAM.hfx.andara.com wrote: >> >On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 22:39:26 -0600, fred <f...@fred.com> wrote: >> >> >>> (2) one cannot depend on hearing while cycling >> >> >>I agree that you cannot depend on hearing while cycling. However: >> >> >Piffle. >> >> >Get your ears tested. >> >> My thoughts exactly. I constantly "depend on my hearing" when >> cycling. I listen for change in the sound of a car coming up behind >> me (indicating they might be planning a turn), and can reasonably tell >> when a car is likely to be passing close to me before it gets there. >> I also listen for the sound of a parked car starting or shifting into >> gear (or the sound of the front tires turning on the pavement). I >> listen for the clinking of dog tags or kids behind the parked cars. I >> even listen for the sound of another bike on my tail. >> >> You can't rely ONLY on your hearing, obviously - but it's ludicrous to >> think that there's no down side to eliminating one source of input >> about your surroundings without taking unnecessary risks. > > I had a crash about two months ago that might not have happened if I > hadn't been listening to music. > > It simply did not occur to me that anyone who was not significantly > slower than me and who had specifically been invited to draft me would > get on my rear wheel without asking me or would so diligently follow > me that he'd follow me as I slowed and pulled off to the side of the > road. I realized I was still going to fast to catch that fruit stand > and hit my brakes at which point he hit me. > > He'd been following me for about ten minutes without making any effort > to get my attention. > > If I hadn't been listening to music I _might_ have picked up the > minimal noises of his bicycle and breathing over the noises of my > bicycle and breathing. It still wouldn't have occurred to me that > someone would draft without asking first but I _might_ have heard him. > > -M Maybe you cannot compare that to driving a car but if a car hit someone in front it is definitely there fault not the one in front. He had more disregard than you.       Date: 25 Feb 2007 21:39:07 From: GaryG Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net > wrote in message news:PStEh.1142309$5R2.67809@pd7urf3no... > > <ian.rosenberg@gmail.com> wrote in message > news:1172464818.939485.239300@q2g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > > On Feb 25, 12:29 am, k Hickey <m...@habcycles.com> wrote: > >> jtay...@NOSPAM.hfx.andara.com wrote: > >> >On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 22:39:26 -0600, fred <f...@fred.com> wrote: > >> > >> >>> (2) one cannot depend on hearing while cycling > >> > >> >>I agree that you cannot depend on hearing while cycling. However: > >> > >> >Piffle. > >> > >> >Get your ears tested. > >> > >> My thoughts exactly. I constantly "depend on my hearing" when > >> cycling. I listen for change in the sound of a car coming up behind > >> me (indicating they might be planning a turn), and can reasonably tell > >> when a car is likely to be passing close to me before it gets there. > >> I also listen for the sound of a parked car starting or shifting into > >> gear (or the sound of the front tires turning on the pavement). I > >> listen for the clinking of dog tags or kids behind the parked cars. I > >> even listen for the sound of another bike on my tail. > >> > >> You can't rely ONLY on your hearing, obviously - but it's ludicrous to > >> think that there's no down side to eliminating one source of input > >> about your surroundings without taking unnecessary risks. > > > > I had a crash about two months ago that might not have happened if I > > hadn't been listening to music. > > > > It simply did not occur to me that anyone who was not significantly > > slower than me and who had specifically been invited to draft me would > > get on my rear wheel without asking me or would so diligently follow > > me that he'd follow me as I slowed and pulled off to the side of the > > road. I realized I was still going to fast to catch that fruit stand > > and hit my brakes at which point he hit me. > > > > He'd been following me for about ten minutes without making any effort > > to get my attention. > > > > If I hadn't been listening to music I _might_ have picked up the > > minimal noises of his bicycle and breathing over the noises of my > > bicycle and breathing. It still wouldn't have occurred to me that > > someone would draft without asking first but I _might_ have heard him. > > > > -M > > Maybe you cannot compare that to driving a car but if a car hit someone in > front it is definitely there fault not the one in front. He had more > disregard than you. > On that we're in agreement - I make it a point to never draft the Pod people. I've had too many instances of passing them and saying "On your left", with no reaction whatsoever that they heard me. Give the Pod people a wide berth when passing. GG         Date: 26 Feb 2007 08:37:49 From: nash Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons Give the Pod people a wide berth when passing. GG What, did the pot just call the kettle black. Can't hear anything sorry. dunk   Date: 24 Feb 2007 10:36:13 From: Ozark Bicycle Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On Feb 24, 11:36 am, jtay...@NOSPAM.hfx.andara.com wrote: > On Sat, 24 Feb 2007 09:21:11 -0800, "Bill Sornson" <a...@ask.me> > wrote: > > >GaryG wrote: > >> <jtay...@NOSPAM.hfx.andara.com> wrote in message > >>news:svj0u21av1189mffg70n89s659u22vv44b@4ax.com... > > >>> Are you aware of the research that shows that drivers pass helmeted > >>> cyclists more closely than unhelmeted ones? You may well have been > >>> hit because of exactly this effect. > > >> I am aware of those studies, but highly doubt that had anything to do > >> with my accident. > > >/Studies/ plural? I'm only aware of that one crack-potted (non-scientific) > >Brit wearing a weird wig as a "control". > > I see you still believe that insult is a complete rebuttal to fact. Care to rebut the premise that the aforementioned wig-wearing Brit is, in fact, a non-scientific crackpot?     Date: 24 Feb 2007 18:58:09 From: Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On 24 Feb 2007 10:36:13 -0800, "Ozark Bicycle" <bicycleatelier@ozarkbicycleservice.com > wrote: >On Feb 24, 11:36 am, jtay...@NOSPAM.hfx.andara.com wrote: >> On Sat, 24 Feb 2007 09:21:11 -0800, "Bill Sornson" <a...@ask.me> >> wrote: >> >> >GaryG wrote: >> >> <jtay...@NOSPAM.hfx.andara.com> wrote in message >> >>news:svj0u21av1189mffg70n89s659u22vv44b@4ax.com... >> >> >>> Are you aware of the research that shows that drivers pass helmeted >> >>> cyclists more closely than unhelmeted ones? You may well have been >> >>> hit because of exactly this effect. >> >> >> I am aware of those studies, but highly doubt that had anything to do >> >> with my accident. >> >> >/Studies/ plural? I'm only aware of that one crack-potted (non-scientific) >> >Brit wearing a weird wig as a "control". >> >> I see you still believe that insult is a complete rebuttal to fact. > > > >Care to rebut the premise that the aforementioned wig-wearing Brit is, >in fact, a non-scientific crackpot? > Easy. No evidence that he is has been presented.   Date: 23 Feb 2007 13:55:43 From: DanKMTB@gmail.com Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On Feb 23, 4:36 pm, "nash" <zwepytzkehil...@jetable.net > wrote: > I had a clown the other day zoom through a four way stop because he got hot > under the collar when I had the tiity to ride to the left for a left hand > turn maybe 1/2 block back. Rules says to get in the turn lane one block > back. Anyway we were all left standing there wondering what he was > thinking. 3 already waiting at the 4 stop and him being the last there. > Note also that he was not even there when I started drifting over. > > Zen I run into a similar problem from time to time. When I'm in the left lane waiting to turn left it seems any car that comes up behind me also wishing to turn left gets into the horn or starts yelling, as though they'd be able to turn left into oncoming traffic without repercussion if I wasn't in the way. Depending on my mood I'll either take the time to discuss the situation with them or I'll just unclick, sip some water, relax and wait for a realllllly big opening before I go. Either way, it costs the idiot behind me some time without too much conflict. It's fun to see the responses to "If you hadn't sounded your horn, causing me to assume there was some problem and stop to address that, we'd both be down the road by now. It doesn't seem to me I'm the one causing the hold-up. If everything is OK, I'll be sure to go on the next suitable opening." What kills me is the police ignorance on the matters. I've had a cop come find me after a complaint call and tell me that I shouldn't be holding up cars with my bike. The following conversation was a real- life South Park episode; I felt I could have had a more intelligent debate about my position with to a toddler.     Date: 23 Feb 2007 17:15:00 From: Bellsouth Ijit 2.0 Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons <DanKMTB@gmail.com > wrote in message news:1172267742.964461.123520@a75g2000cwd.googlegroups.com... > On Feb 23, 4:36 pm, "nash" <zwepytzkehil...@jetable.net> wrote: >> I had a clown the other day zoom through a four way stop because he got >> hot >> under the collar when I had the tiity to ride to the left for a left >> hand >> turn maybe 1/2 block back. Rules says to get in the turn lane one block >> back. Anyway we were all left standing there wondering what he was >> thinking. 3 already waiting at the 4 stop and him being the last there. >> Note also that he was not even there when I started drifting over. >> >> Zen > > I run into a similar problem from time to time. When I'm in the left > lane waiting to turn left it seems any car that comes up behind me > also wishing to turn left gets into the horn or starts yelling, as > though they'd be able to turn left into oncoming traffic without > repercussion if I wasn't in the way. Depending on my mood I'll either > take the time to discuss the situation with them or I'll just unclick, > sip some water, relax and wait for a realllllly big opening before I > go. Either way, it costs the idiot behind me some time without too > much conflict. > It's fun to see the responses to "If you hadn't sounded your horn, > causing me to assume there was some problem and stop to address that, > we'd both be down the road by now. It doesn't seem to me I'm the one > causing the hold-up. If everything is OK, I'll be sure to go on the > next suitable opening." > > What kills me is the police ignorance on the matters. I've had a cop > come find me after a complaint call and tell me that I shouldn't be > holding up cars with my bike. The following conversation was a real- > life South Park episode; I felt I could have had a more intelligent > debate about my position with to a toddler. > Unlike Europe or many other parts of the world, most of US is not a bike-friendly culture because they think of bikes as toys and sporting equipment and not a daily transportational vehicle. And that attitude, especially with the right wing jackasses in the White house, is not going to change any time soon.       Date: 23 Feb 2007 16:56:14 From: di Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons "Bellsouth Ijit 2.0" <bjit@bellsouth.net > wrote in message news:45df677b$0$1429$4c368faf@roadrunner.com... >> > > Unlike Europe or many other parts of the world, most of US is not a > bike-friendly culture because they think of bikes as toys and sporting > equipment and not a daily transportational vehicle. And that attitude, > especially with the right wing jackasses in the White house, is not going > to change any time soon. > You're right, that attitude did not exist until Bush was elected. What a dumbass you are.         Date: 23 Feb 2007 19:47:54 From: Bellsouth Ijit 2.0 Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons "di" <di9999@cox.net > wrote in message news:miKDh.5588$qr5.4429@newsfe19.lga... > > "Bellsouth Ijit 2.0" <bjit@bellsouth.net> wrote in message > news:45df677b$0$1429$4c368faf@roadrunner.com... >>> >> >> Unlike Europe or many other parts of the world, most of US is not a >> bike-friendly culture because they think of bikes as toys and sporting >> equipment and not a daily transportational vehicle. And that attitude, >> especially with the right wing jackasses in the White house, is not going >> to change any time soon. >> > > You're right, that attitude did not exist until Bush was elected. What a > dumbass you are. > It's the culture it breeds, you moron. We've got an administration that thinks global warming is a hoax. Do you think they care about cutting down CO2 emission and supporting green transportation such as bicycles?         Date: 23 Feb 2007 23:20:19 From: nash Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons "di" <di9999@cox.net > wrote in message news:miKDh.5588$qr5.4429@newsfe19.lga... > > "Bellsouth Ijit 2.0" <bjit@bellsouth.net> wrote in message > news:45df677b$0$1429$4c368faf@roadrunner.com... >>> >> >> Unlike Europe or many other parts of the world, most of US is not a >> bike-friendly culture because they think of bikes as toys and sporting >> equipment and not a daily transportational vehicle. And that attitude, >> especially with the right wing jackasses in the White house, is not going >> to change any time soon. >> > > You're right, that attitude did not exist until Bush was elected. What a > dumbass you are. If you have panniers they assume you are doing errands and are not the same hassle target.   Date: 23 Feb 2007 12:33:47 From: AustinMN Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On Feb 23, 1:53 pm, Kristian M Zoerhoff <kristian.zoerh...@gmail.com > wrote: > On 2007-02-23, Roger Zoul <rogerzo...@hotmail.com> wrote: > No sidewalks on that road; this was on the paved shoulder, which is effectively > an unked bike lane. Traffic moves at a good clip in this area (45 mph > limit, but if the cops aren't out, 55 is common), so I really don't like > jumping out into the through lane if I can avoid it. With him there, I > couldn't avoid it, and it threw me out of my rhythm. Sounds like you met Bill Baka. Austin     Date: 24 Feb 2007 02:39:07 From: Bill Baka Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons AustinMN wrote: > On Feb 23, 1:53 pm, Kristian M Zoerhoff <kristian.zoerh...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> On 2007-02-23, Roger Zoul <rogerzo...@hotmail.com> wrote: > >> No sidewalks on that road; this was on the paved shoulder, which is effectively >> an unked bike lane. Traffic moves at a good clip in this area (45 mph >> limit, but if the cops aren't out, 55 is common), so I really don't like >> jumping out into the through lane if I can avoid it. With him there, I >> couldn't avoid it, and it threw me out of my rhythm. > > Sounds like you met Bill Baka. > > Austin > Not yet, he hasn't. I ride for survival and you city punks can think what you want. Anybody who wants to prove me wrong can try riding on some of the roads I have to deal with. Some of you guys can can ride strictly on the right and take the lane and get Darwin'd. You can be right, dead right. Bill Baka       Date: 24 Feb 2007 15:08:33 From: Roger Zoul Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons Bill Baka wrote: :: AustinMN wrote: ::: On Feb 23, 1:53 pm, Kristian M Zoerhoff ::: <kristian.zoerh...@gmail.com > wrote: :::: On 2007-02-23, Roger Zoul <rogerzo...@hotmail.com > wrote: ::: :::: No sidewalks on that road; this was on the paved shoulder, which :::: is effectively an unked bike lane. Traffic moves at a good clip :::: in this area (45 mph limit, but if the cops aren't out, 55 is :::: common), so I really don't like jumping out into the through lane :::: if I can avoid it. With him there, I couldn't avoid it, and it :::: threw me out of my rhythm. ::: ::: Sounds like you met Bill Baka. ::: ::: Austin ::: :: Not yet, he hasn't. I ride for survival and you city punks can think :: what you want. Anybody who wants to prove me wrong can try riding on :: some of the roads I have to deal with. Some of you guys can can ride :: strictly on the right and take the lane and get Darwin'd. You can be :: right, dead right. :: Bill Baka Boy, you and Darwin. You know you're day will like come, considering some of the stupid things you do on a regular basis.         Date: 24 Feb 2007 20:29:32 From: Bill Baka Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons Roger Zoul wrote: > Bill Baka wrote: > :: Not yet, he hasn't. I ride for survival and you city punks can think > :: what you want. Anybody who wants to prove me wrong can try riding on > :: some of the roads I have to deal with. Some of you guys can can ride > :: strictly on the right and take the lane and get Darwin'd. You can be > :: right, dead right. > :: Bill Baka > > Boy, you and Darwin. You know you're day will like come, considering some > of the stupid things you do on a regular basis. > > 58+ years and still waiting. What you may consider stupid I consider taking the safe way rather than the strictly legal way. You can be 'dead right', I will be 'alive wrong'. Until you've been blown into a ditch by 5 double trailer gravel semis tailgating each other you will never have a clue as to why I ride on the wrong side, only as dictated by survival. If there's a bike lane I use it, but on a 55+ MPH road with no shoulders at all and more semis than cars then I ride on the wrong side. This allows me to stop and walk about 5 feet into the weeds to avoid the convoy. The first one usually sees me and pulls over but the rest are tailgating so close they don't see me until they would be hitting me. Survival of the fittest doesn't mean following all the laws to the letter. Roger, at the pearly gates "But, but, I was following the law." Answer, "We have a place for self righteous and stupid, down there." Bill Baka           Date: 24 Feb 2007 17:47:05 From: Daryl Hunt Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons "Bill Baka" <bbaka@comcast.net > wrote in message news:Me1Eh.1279$m85.549@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net... > Roger Zoul wrote: >> Bill Baka wrote: >> :: Not yet, he hasn't. I ride for survival and you city punks can think >> :: what you want. Anybody who wants to prove me wrong can try riding on >> :: some of the roads I have to deal with. Some of you guys can can ride >> :: strictly on the right and take the lane and get Darwin'd. You can be >> :: right, dead right. >> :: Bill Baka >> >> Boy, you and Darwin. You know you're day will like come, considering >> some of the stupid things you do on a regular basis. > 58+ years and still waiting. What you may consider stupid I consider > taking the safe way rather than the strictly legal way. > You can be 'dead right', I will be 'alive wrong'. Until you've been blown > into a ditch by 5 double trailer gravel semis tailgating each other you > will never have a clue as to why I ride on the wrong side, only as > dictated by survival. If there's a bike lane I use it, but on a 55+ MPH > road with no shoulders at all and more semis than cars then I ride on the > wrong side. This allows me to stop and walk about 5 feet into the weeds to > avoid the convoy. The first one usually sees me and pulls over but the > rest are tailgating so close they don't see me until they would be hitting > me. > Survival of the fittest doesn't mean following all the laws to the letter. > Roger, at the pearly gates "But, but, I was following the law." > Answer, "We have a place for self righteous and stupid, down there." > > Bill Baka AS one person said after impact: "LSdr kjljLaoped". Made sense to me. But if the drivers are familiar with bicyclist then the accident rate goes way down. And this includes the proper lane and position. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users. It has removed 2953 spam emails to date. Paying users do not have this message in their emails. Try SPAMfighter for free now!             Date: 28 Feb 2007 04:00:01 From: Bill Baka Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons Daryl Hunt wrote: > "Bill Baka" <bbaka@comcast.net> wrote in message > news:Me1Eh.1279$m85.549@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net... >> Survival of the fittest doesn't mean following all the laws to the letter. >> Roger, at the pearly gates "But, but, I was following the law." >> Answer, "We have a place for self righteous and stupid, down there." >> >> Bill Baka > > AS one person said after impact: "LSdr kjljLaoped". Made sense to me. But > if the drivers are familiar with bicyclist then the accident rate goes way > down. And this includes the proper lane and position. You fail to include the fact that I am near Beale AFB and some of the flyboys don't exactly drive for safety. Combine that with the gravel semis and the drunk/drug addled drivers and I just ride on the safest part of the road. I do not live in a bicycle friendly community. Bill Baka           Date: 25 Feb 2007 04:16:03 From: Roger Zoul Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons Bill Baka wrote: :: Roger Zoul wrote: ::: Bill Baka wrote: ::::: Not yet, he hasn't. I ride for survival and you city punks can ::::: think what you want. Anybody who wants to prove me wrong can try ::::: riding on some of the roads I have to deal with. Some of you guys ::::: can can ride strictly on the right and take the lane and get ::::: Darwin'd. You can be right, dead right. ::::: Bill Baka ::: ::: Boy, you and Darwin. You know you're day will like come, ::: considering some of the stupid things you do on a regular basis. ::: ::: :: 58+ years and still waiting. That just means you're overdue. When you finally stop showing up in here we'll know why. What you may consider stupid I consider :: taking the safe way rather than the strictly legal way. :: You can be 'dead right', I will be 'alive wrong'. Until you've been :: blown into a ditch by 5 double trailer gravel semis tailgating each :: other you will never have a clue as to why I ride on the wrong side, :: only as dictated by survival. If there's a bike lane I use it, but :: on a 55+ MPH road with no shoulders at all and more semis than cars :: then I ride on the wrong side. This allows me to stop and walk about :: 5 feet :: into the weeds to avoid the convoy. The first one usually sees me and :: pulls over but the rest are tailgating so close they don't see me :: until they would be hitting me. :: Survival of the fittest doesn't mean following all the laws to the :: letter. Roger, at the pearly gates "But, but, I was following the :: law." :: Answer, "We have a place for self righteous and stupid, down there." Dude....I was referring to all the other stuff you claim to have done, not just WWR. You're not too st, you know.             Date: 25 Feb 2007 22:30:03 From: Bill Baka Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons Roger Zoul wrote: > Bill Baka wrote: > :: Roger Zoul wrote: > ::: Bill Baka wrote: > ::::: Not yet, he hasn't. I ride for survival and you city punks can > ::::: think what you want. Anybody who wants to prove me wrong can try > ::::: riding on some of the roads I have to deal with. Some of you guys > ::::: can can ride strictly on the right and take the lane and get > ::::: Darwin'd. You can be right, dead right. > ::::: Bill Baka > ::: > ::: Boy, you and Darwin. You know you're day will like come, > ::: considering some of the stupid things you do on a regular basis. > ::: > ::: > :: 58+ years and still waiting. > > That just means you're overdue. When you finally stop showing up in here > we'll know why. > > What you may consider stupid I consider > :: taking the safe way rather than the strictly legal way. > :: You can be 'dead right', I will be 'alive wrong'. Until you've been > :: blown into a ditch by 5 double trailer gravel semis tailgating each > :: other you will never have a clue as to why I ride on the wrong side, > :: only as dictated by survival. If there's a bike lane I use it, but > :: on a 55+ MPH road with no shoulders at all and more semis than cars > :: then I ride on the wrong side. This allows me to stop and walk about > :: 5 feet > :: into the weeds to avoid the convoy. The first one usually sees me and > :: pulls over but the rest are tailgating so close they don't see me > :: until they would be hitting me. > :: Survival of the fittest doesn't mean following all the laws to the > :: letter. Roger, at the pearly gates "But, but, I was following the > :: law." > :: Answer, "We have a place for self righteous and stupid, down there." > > Dude....I was referring to all the other stuff you claim to have done, not > just WWR. You're not too st, you know. > > Way past Mensa level dude. I'm more likely to off myself climbing a near vertical rock face or one of those million volt towers for a good picture. Following the law exactly is great for cars, not always for bikes. As for all the other stuff I have done, yes, I was aware of the dangers, but having a blast doing them. One of my close calls was simply swimming a reservoir lengthwise, somewhat overestimating my swimming endurance. The last 100 feet I was seriously hurting, but my girlfriend was waiting for me on the dam slope so I made it only to collapse in her arms. No more hot shot swimming for me. BTW, I wasn't speeding or wrong way swimming. Bill Baka               Date: 25 Feb 2007 21:16:23 From: Roger Zoul Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons Bill Baka wrote: :: Roger Zoul wrote: ::: Bill Baka wrote: ::::: Roger Zoul wrote: :::::: Bill Baka wrote: :::::::: Not yet, he hasn't. I ride for survival and you city punks can :::::::: think what you want. Anybody who wants to prove me wrong can :::::::: try riding on some of the roads I have to deal with. Some of :::::::: you guys can can ride strictly on the right and take the lane :::::::: and get Darwin'd. You can be right, dead right. :::::::: Bill Baka :::::: :::::: Boy, you and Darwin. You know you're day will like come, :::::: considering some of the stupid things you do on a regular basis. :::::: :::::: ::::: 58+ years and still waiting. ::: ::: That just means you're overdue. When you finally stop showing up ::: in here we'll know why. ::: ::: What you may consider stupid I consider ::::: taking the safe way rather than the strictly legal way. ::::: You can be 'dead right', I will be 'alive wrong'. Until you've ::::: been blown into a ditch by 5 double trailer gravel semis ::::: tailgating each other you will never have a clue as to why I ride ::::: on the wrong side, only as dictated by survival. If there's a ::::: bike lane I use it, but on a 55+ MPH road with no shoulders at ::::: all and more semis than cars then I ride on the wrong side. This ::::: allows me to stop and walk about 5 feet ::::: into the weeds to avoid the convoy. The first one usually sees me ::::: and pulls over but the rest are tailgating so close they don't ::::: see me until they would be hitting me. ::::: Survival of the fittest doesn't mean following all the laws to the ::::: letter. Roger, at the pearly gates "But, but, I was following the ::::: law." ::::: Answer, "We have a place for self righteous and stupid, down ::::: there." ::: ::: Dude....I was referring to all the other stuff you claim to have ::: done, not just WWR. You're not too st, you know. ::: ::: :: Way past Mensa level dude. Oh, obviously. Probably more like way past moron level (toward zero). :: I'm more likely to off myself climbing a near vertical rock face or :: one of those million volt towers for a good picture. Following the :: law exactly is great for cars, not always for bikes. :: As for all the other stuff I have done, yes, I was aware of the :: dangers, but having a blast doing them. One of my close calls was :: simply swimming a reservoir lengthwise, somewhat overestimating my :: swimming endurance. The last 100 feet I was seriously hurting, but :: my girlfriend was waiting for me on the dam slope so I made it only :: to collapse in her arms. :: No more hot shot swimming for me. BTW, I wasn't speeding or wrong way :: swimming. :: Bill Baka                 Date: 26 Feb 2007 02:57:18 From: Bill Baka Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons Roger Zoul wrote: > Bill Baka wrote: > :: Roger Zoul wrote: > ::: Bill Baka wrote: > ::::: Roger Zoul wrote: > :::::: Bill Baka wrote: > :::::::: Not yet, he hasn't. I ride for survival and you city punks can > :::::::: think what you want. Anybody who wants to prove me wrong can > :::::::: try riding on some of the roads I have to deal with. Some of > :::::::: you guys can can ride strictly on the right and take the lane > :::::::: and get Darwin'd. You can be right, dead right. > :::::::: Bill Baka > :::::: > :::::: Boy, you and Darwin. You know you're day will like come, > :::::: considering some of the stupid things you do on a regular basis. > :::::: > :::::: > ::::: 58+ years and still waiting. > ::: > ::: That just means you're overdue. When you finally stop showing up > ::: in here we'll know why. > ::: > ::: What you may consider stupid I consider > ::::: taking the safe way rather than the strictly legal way. > ::::: You can be 'dead right', I will be 'alive wrong'. Until you've > ::::: been blown into a ditch by 5 double trailer gravel semis > ::::: tailgating each other you will never have a clue as to why I ride > ::::: on the wrong side, only as dictated by survival. If there's a > ::::: bike lane I use it, but on a 55+ MPH road with no shoulders at > ::::: all and more semis than cars then I ride on the wrong side. This > ::::: allows me to stop and walk about 5 feet > ::::: into the weeds to avoid the convoy. The first one usually sees me > ::::: and pulls over but the rest are tailgating so close they don't > ::::: see me until they would be hitting me. > ::::: Survival of the fittest doesn't mean following all the laws to the > ::::: letter. Roger, at the pearly gates "But, but, I was following the > ::::: law." > ::::: Answer, "We have a place for self righteous and stupid, down > ::::: there." > ::: > ::: Dude....I was referring to all the other stuff you claim to have > ::: done, not just WWR. You're not too st, you know. > ::: > ::: > :: Way past Mensa level dude. > > Oh, obviously. Probably more like way past moron level (toward zero). As I have said before, whatever you want to believe is up to you. I know what I have done (and survived) and how low the IQ requirements are for Mensa (only 132). If I were to try to catalog what stunts I have done over the years it would be a book. I was born hyperactive and the years have not diminished that. What I am lacking is what my wife calls any semblance of 'common sense'. I see, I do, I think about it later, sometimes at the cop shop, but hey, I did it. You must live a pathetically boring life. Bill Baka > > :: I'm more likely to off myself climbing a near vertical rock face or > :: one of those million volt towers for a good picture. Following the > :: law exactly is great for cars, not always for bikes. > :: As for all the other stuff I have done, yes, I was aware of the > :: dangers, but having a blast doing them. One of my close calls was > :: simply swimming a reservoir lengthwise, somewhat overestimating my > :: swimming endurance. The last 100 feet I was seriously hurting, but > :: my girlfriend was waiting for me on the dam slope so I made it only > :: to collapse in her arms. > :: No more hot shot swimming for me. BTW, I wasn't speeding or wrong way > :: swimming. > :: Bill Baka > >                   Date: 25 Feb 2007 22:01:53 From: GaryG Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons "Bill Baka" <bbaka@comcast.net > wrote in message news:i0sEh.1697$jx3.606@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net... > Roger Zoul wrote: > > Bill Baka wrote: > > :: Roger Zoul wrote: > > ::: Bill Baka wrote: > > ::::: Roger Zoul wrote: > > :::::: Bill Baka wrote: > > :::::::: Not yet, he hasn't. I ride for survival and you city punks can > > :::::::: think what you want. Anybody who wants to prove me wrong can > > :::::::: try riding on some of the roads I have to deal with. Some of > > :::::::: you guys can can ride strictly on the right and take the lane > > :::::::: and get Darwin'd. You can be right, dead right. > > :::::::: Bill Baka > > :::::: > > :::::: Boy, you and Darwin. You know you're day will like come, > > :::::: considering some of the stupid things you do on a regular basis. > > :::::: > > :::::: > > ::::: 58+ years and still waiting. > > ::: > > ::: That just means you're overdue. When you finally stop showing up > > ::: in here we'll know why. > > ::: > > ::: What you may consider stupid I consider > > ::::: taking the safe way rather than the strictly legal way. > > ::::: You can be 'dead right', I will be 'alive wrong'. Until you've > > ::::: been blown into a ditch by 5 double trailer gravel semis > > ::::: tailgating each other you will never have a clue as to why I ride > > ::::: on the wrong side, only as dictated by survival. If there's a > > ::::: bike lane I use it, but on a 55+ MPH road with no shoulders at > > ::::: all and more semis than cars then I ride on the wrong side. This > > ::::: allows me to stop and walk about 5 feet > > ::::: into the weeds to avoid the convoy. The first one usually sees me > > ::::: and pulls over but the rest are tailgating so close they don't > > ::::: see me until they would be hitting me. > > ::::: Survival of the fittest doesn't mean following all the laws to the > > ::::: letter. Roger, at the pearly gates "But, but, I was following the > > ::::: law." > > ::::: Answer, "We have a place for self righteous and stupid, down > > ::::: there." > > ::: > > ::: Dude....I was referring to all the other stuff you claim to have > > ::: done, not just WWR. You're not too st, you know. > > ::: > > ::: > > :: Way past Mensa level dude. > > > > Oh, obviously. Probably more like way past moron level (toward zero). > > As I have said before, whatever you want to believe is up to you. > I know what I have done (and survived) and how low the IQ requirements > are for Mensa (only 132). If I were to try to catalog what stunts I have > done over the years it would be a book. You really *should* write a book. I propose the working title of "Bill's Story". However, for the sake of accuracy I'd recommend it be published using the acronym form of the title. GG > I was born hyperactive and the > years have not diminished that. What I am lacking is what my wife calls > any semblance of 'common sense'. I see, I do, I think about it later, > sometimes at the cop shop, but hey, I did it. > You must live a pathetically boring life. > Bill Baka > > > > :: I'm more likely to off myself climbing a near vertical rock face or > > :: one of those million volt towers for a good picture. Following the > > :: law exactly is great for cars, not always for bikes. > > :: As for all the other stuff I have done, yes, I was aware of the > > :: dangers, but having a blast doing them. One of my close calls was > > :: simply swimming a reservoir lengthwise, somewhat overestimating my > > :: swimming endurance. The last 100 feet I was seriously hurting, but > > :: my girlfriend was waiting for me on the dam slope so I made it only > > :: to collapse in her arms. > > :: No more hot shot swimming for me. BTW, I wasn't speeding or wrong way > > :: swimming. > > :: Bill Baka > > > >                     Date: 28 Feb 2007 03:54:58 From: Bill Baka Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons GaryG wrote: > "Bill Baka" <bbaka@comcast.net> wrote in message > news:i0sEh.1697$jx3.606@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net... >> As I have said before, whatever you want to believe is up to you. >> I know what I have done (and survived) and how low the IQ requirements >> are for Mensa (only 132). If I were to try to catalog what stunts I have >> done over the years it would be a book. > > You really *should* write a book. > > I propose the working title of "Bill's Story". However, for the sake of > accuracy I'd recommend it be published using the acronym form of the title. > > GG > I'd rather be out there doing what I do and having fun doing it. If I ever wipe myself out so bad I can't ride then I might do some memoirs. I really do feel sorry for some of the pathetic sissies who never do anything exciting or ginally illegal. I have a life and I have damn well lived it. Can you say that? Maybe the most exciting thing in your life is setting a new best speed on your bike. PATHETIC! Bill Baka   Date: 23 Feb 2007 19:20:22 From: fluffy bunny Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons In article <PkrDh.469$8x.445@newssvr14.news.prodigy.net >, Kristian M Zoerhoff <kristian.zoerhoff@gmail.com > wrote: > 1. Yesterday afternoon, I'm riding along, when I spot 5 teenagers > walking along the other side of the road approaching me. > > "Hey, A**hole!" > > What the? I've no idea what prompted this. I should have ignored > it, but was in a foul mood, so I pulled a Baka and confronted > them, resulting in them backing down; no firearms, thankfully. Teenagers are generally pretty easy to back down; yapping chihuahua syndrome. (exceptions noted and validated) > > > 2. Today, riding down to my father-in-law's, I see a wrong-way > rider coming at me, so I point across the road and shout "Other > side." He shakes his head, and I repeat (yes, I hate wrong-way > riding). He shakes it again, and forces me out into 45 mph > traffic to go around him. He's got an iPod glued into both ears. > OK, so maybe that just makes him a typical teenager, but it > annoys me (too many iPod-addled joggers around here). Soon, we will have what i call Amateur Saturdays on the Fox River Trail. This isn't an indictment of their character as people (exceptions noted, ibid) and more of an observation of the general cluelessness people have about shared use trails + good manners + cabin fever. Good luck, and take heart: it's supposed to sneaux this weekend. .max who was HOPING to take off the Nokian '294's this weekend...     Date: 23 Feb 2007 20:09:24 From: Kristian M Zoerhoff Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On 2007-02-23, fluffy bunny <betatron@earthlink.net > wrote: > > Soon, we will have what i call Amateur Saturdays on the Fox River Trail. > This isn't an indictment of their character as people (exceptions > noted, ibid) and more of an observation of the general cluelessness > people have about shared use trails + good manners + cabin fever. Ah, yes, Amateur Time is always a good time. Fortunately, my FRT Paranoia is high enough that I'm rarely surprised there; I always hit the trail assuming one or more of the following will occur: 1. I'll go endo from a rogue sq*rr*l in the front wheel 2. I'll taco the front wheel due to a rogue tricycle cutting me off 3. I'll go down sideways when I get clipped by a rogue stroller 4. I'll knock a filling loose on the losuy asphalt between Elgin and East Dundee, swallow it, choke, and end up in the bushes. > who was HOPING to take off the Nokian '294's this weekend... Man, what's that do to your average speed? -- __o Kristian Zoerhoff _'\(,_ kristian.zoerhoff@gmail.com (_)/ (_)       Date: 24 Feb 2007 08:26:21 From: fluffy bunny Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons In article <URHDh.1348$MV7.850@newssvr23.news.prodigy.net >, Kristian M Zoerhoff <kristian.zoerhoff@gmail.com > wrote: > > who was HOPING to take off the Nokian '294's this weekend... > > Man, what's that do to your average speed? In general they cost me one to two gears, my speed seems to have dropped into the 13~16 range with the omnidirectional headwinds we've been having and i thought i would die of old age when it was -10. Interestingly (to me) there was a v.v.stiff *tail*wind tonight, for a change, and i was pulling maybe 22+ going across the lab with no big effort. .max       Date: 23 Feb 2007 21:36:49 From: nash Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons I had a clown the other day zoom through a four way stop because he got hot under the collar when I had the tiity to ride to the left for a left hand turn maybe 1/2 block back. Rules says to get in the turn lane one block back. Anyway we were all left standing there wondering what he was thinking. 3 already waiting at the 4 stop and him being the last there. Note also that he was not even there when I started drifting over. Zen   Date: 23 Feb 2007 08:51:26 From: gds Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On Feb 23, 8:33 am, "Roger Zoul" <rogerzo...@hotmail.com > wrote: >> > (1) Headphones and earbuds are two different things > (2) one cannot depend on hearing while cycling > (3) only a moron wouldn't understand (1) & (2) It seems that cyclist divide into two groups. 1) a minority that need to have music while they ride and argue that it creates no greter risk, and 2) all the other cyclists I've not seen any statistics that prove either side's position. My own view is that it (listening to music) is just one more distraction and that it must have some negative contribution to safety. But it certainly isn't going to help anyone's argument to be calling folks names. Didn't that go out of vogue in 4th grade?     Date: 23 Feb 2007 12:23:03 From: Roger Zoul Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons gds wrote: :: On Feb 23, 8:33 am, "Roger Zoul" <rogerzo...@hotmail.com > wrote: :::: ::: (1) Headphones and earbuds are two different things ::: (2) one cannot depend on hearing while cycling ::: (3) only a moron wouldn't understand (1) & (2) :: :: :: It seems that cyclist divide into two groups. :: 1) a minority that need to have music while they ride and argue that :: it creates no greter risk, and :: 2) all the other cyclists :: :: I've not seen any statistics that prove either side's position. My :: own view is that it (listening to music) is just one more :: distraction and that it must have some negative contribution to :: safety. :: But it certainly isn't going to help anyone's argument to be calling :: folks names. Didn't that go out of vogue in 4th grade? Well, read the subject line! Where is your proof that cyclist who ride with music are a minority? I've seen professional cyclist doing it. Likewise, one could claim that lots of activities that cyclist do have some negative contribution to safety. Those of you who consider people who cycle with music to be unsafe, idiots, and morons have absolutely no understanding of those who are able to do so in a safe manner. It seems to me that if you don't feel comfortable cycling with music, then all you have to do is not do so, rather than ranting on with your unfounded opinions and name calling.       Date: 24 Feb 2007 02:25:03 From: Bill Baka Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons Roger Zoul wrote: > gds wrote: > :: On Feb 23, 8:33 am, "Roger Zoul" <rogerzo...@hotmail.com> wrote: > :::: > ::: (1) Headphones and earbuds are two different things > ::: (2) one cannot depend on hearing while cycling > ::: (3) only a moron wouldn't understand (1) & (2) > :: > :: > :: It seems that cyclist divide into two groups. > :: 1) a minority that need to have music while they ride and argue that > :: it creates no greter risk, and > :: 2) all the other cyclists > :: > :: I've not seen any statistics that prove either side's position. My > :: own view is that it (listening to music) is just one more > :: distraction and that it must have some negative contribution to > :: safety. > :: But it certainly isn't going to help anyone's argument to be calling > :: folks names. Didn't that go out of vogue in 4th grade? > > Well, read the subject line! > > Where is your proof that cyclist who ride with music are a minority? I've > seen professional cyclist doing it. Likewise, one could claim that lots of > activities that cyclist do have some negative contribution to safety. > > Those of you who consider people who cycle with music to be unsafe, idiots, > and morons have absolutely no understanding of those who are able to do so > in a safe manner. It seems to me that if you don't feel comfortable cycling > with music, then all you have to do is not do so, rather than ranting on > with your unfounded opinions and name calling. > > Sorry, I agree with the group that only an idiot would ride in traffic with any kind of hearing impediment. Riding on a trail that is totally non-motor traffic might be OK, as long as the rider doesn't try blasting around turns at 15-20 MPH or more and hitting hikers. The moron here is the person who thinks he/she can ride safely with no hint of what is going on around them. Same for drivers and pedestrians, obviously. Maybe we should just let the dumb shits Darwin themselves. Bill Baka       Date: 23 Feb 2007 19:02:13 From: Kristian M Zoerhoff Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On 2007-02-23, Roger Zoul <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com > wrote: > > Well, read the subject line! As writer of the subject line, yeah, it's juvenile. I will point out that I did not call this guy what I did because of the headphones; it was the wrong-way riding that triggered that judgement. The headphones do trigger a primal reaction in me, though, because of the huge number of close calls they've caused me on MUPs (especially with joggers). -- __o Kristian Zoerhoff _'\(,_ kristian.zoerhoff@gmail.com (_)/ (_)         Date: 24 Feb 2007 02:29:23 From: Bill Baka Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons Kristian M Zoerhoff wrote: > On 2007-02-23, Roger Zoul <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com> wrote: >> Well, read the subject line! > > As writer of the subject line, yeah, it's juvenile. I will point out > that I did not call this guy what I did because of the headphones; it > was the wrong-way riding that triggered that judgement. The headphones > do trigger a primal reaction in me, though, because of the huge number > of close calls they've caused me on MUPs (especially with joggers). > I won't advocate wrong way riding but this area has had some bone headed planning on the 55 MPH county roads. Many have an 8 foot wide bicycle lane, but only on one side of the road. This forces me to ride wrong way, but at least in a bicycle lane, rather than try to be a righteous right way rider and dice it up with semis, pickups full of kids, and the usual mix of careless drivers. Headphones or ear buds? Not likely. Bill Baka         Date: 23 Feb 2007 14:29:07 From: Roger Zoul Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons Kristian M Zoerhoff wrote: :: On 2007-02-23, Roger Zoul <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com > wrote: ::: ::: Well, read the subject line! :: :: As writer of the subject line, yeah, it's juvenile. I will point out :: that I did not call this guy what I did because of the headphones; it :: was the wrong-way riding that triggered that judgement. The :: headphones do trigger a primal reaction in me, though, because of :: the huge number of close calls they've caused me on MUPs (especially :: with joggers). The problem, if you ask me, it not with headphones, but with the people not thinking about the fact that they need to hear others nearby. You blame the headphones when I think you'll never get people, as a whole, to appear to be anything but clueless.           Date: 23 Feb 2007 19:47:50 From: nash Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons "Roger Zoul" <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com > wrote in message news:12tuft92rhg76c9@news.supernews.com... > Kristian M Zoerhoff wrote: > :: On 2007-02-23, Roger Zoul <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com> wrote: > ::: > ::: Well, read the subject line! > :: > :: As writer of the subject line, yeah, it's juvenile. I will point out > :: that I did not call this guy what I did because of the headphones; it > :: was the wrong-way riding that triggered that judgement. The > :: headphones do trigger a primal reaction in me, though, because of > :: the huge number of close calls they've caused me on MUPs (especially > :: with joggers). > > The problem, if you ask me, it not with headphones, but with the people > not thinking about the fact that they need to hear others nearby. You > blame the headphones when I think you'll never get people, as a whole, to > appear to be anything but clueless. I do not wear noise cancellation ear buds and I do hear Ambulances before anyone else. If they are wearing them so loud they do not hear traffic I think they must have ear damage. Just let nature take it's course.           Date: 23 Feb 2007 19:44:48 From: Kristian M Zoerhoff Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On 2007-02-23, Roger Zoul <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com > wrote: > > The problem, if you ask me, it not with headphones, but with the people not > thinking about the fact that they need to hear others nearby. You blame the > headphones when I think you'll never get people, as a whole, to appear to be > anything but clueless. You are almost certainly correct. Unfortunately, you can't really see cluelessness, so people attach it to objects they can see, if only on a subconscious level. In my case, it's become (rightly or wrongly) attached to headphones. I'll probably get over it someday. -- __o Kristian Zoerhoff _'\(,_ kristian.zoerhoff@gmail.com (_)/ (_)   Date: 23 Feb 2007 09:41:47 From: Roger Zoul Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons Kristian M Zoerhoff wrote: :: 1. Yesterday afternoon, I'm riding along, when I spot 5 teenagers :: walking along the other side of the road approaching me. :: :: "Hey, A**hole!" :: :: What the? I've no idea what prompted this. I should have ignored :: it, but was in a foul mood, so I pulled a Baka and confronted :: them, resulting in them backing down; no firearms, thankfully. :: :: :: 2. Today, riding down to my father-in-law's, I see a wrong-way :: rider coming at me, so I point across the road and shout "Other :: side." He shakes his head, and I repeat (yes, I hate wrong-way :: riding). He shakes it again, and forces me out into 45 mph :: traffic to go around him. He's got an iPod glued into both ears. :: OK, so maybe that just makes him a typical teenager, but it :: annoys me (too many iPod-addled joggers around here). Who is the moron here? You actually expected to educate a WWR while riding down the street, by shouting "Other side"? What does his having an iPod have to do with anything? :: :: :: Bring back the snow! :: :: :: -- :: :: __o Kristian Zoerhoff :: _'\(,_ kristian.zoerhoff@gmail.com :: (_)/ (_)     Date: 05 Mar 2007 01:33:03 From: marian.rosenberg@gmail.com Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On 2, 2:59 pm, "GaryG" <sorrynoem...@NOSPAMX.com > wrote: > <ian.rosenb...@gmail.com> wrote in message > > news:1172810005.165568.249960@z35g2000cwz.googlegroups.com... > > > > > On 1, 10:22 pm, "DanK...@gmail.com" <DanK...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Feb 28, 10:06 pm, "ian.rosenb...@gmail.com" > > > > <ian.rosenb...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > I was under the impression that the rear brake was used for slowing > > > > and the front brake for stopping. > > > > That's an interesting perspective. I've never heard that before, but > > > I don't normally spend a whole lot of time paying attention to how > > > others use their brakes. Perhaps this is more common than I thought. > > > Still, if a front brake is for stopping, wouldn't that in its self > > > dictate that the front brake can be used for slowing (which is a > > > significant part of stopping)? > > > On the 14km of 4-6% down I did last week I used both brakes to keep > > myself from going too too fast. > > Unless there are tight switchbacks or corners, there's no real reason to use > the brakes very much at all on a downhill like that. If you feel like your > speed is getting a bit too high, just sit up a bit to "catch air". It also > helps if you get "wider" with your arms and legs. Switchbacks, corners, curves, and the occasional patch of wet leaves the whole way down... also some cattle wandering across the road at one point, some inexplicable sand at the halfway point, and a village at the bottom with the usual compliment of dogs and small children. Lots of fun. -M     Date: 02 Mar 2007 13:42:39 From: Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On 1, 11:33 pm, "ian.rosenb...@gmail.com" <ian.rosenb...@gmail.com > wrote: > > > On the 14km of 4-6% down I did last week I used both brakes to keep > myself from going too too fast. However, I've been told that when you > are coasting down something steep and don't want to go too fast you > should generally keep yourself to the rear brake. Does anyone else > want to chime in? On a long descent like that, use both brakes moderately (in addition to sitting up, etc, which helps just a little). What you're trying to do is convert some of your kinetic energy to heat. It makes sense to spread the heat into both rims, heating both up moderately, rather than putting all the heat into one rim. Panic stops are a different animal. For them, it's all about using traction properly, not controlling heat buildup. You'll stop fastest if you use both brakes, but take advantage of the front wheel's greater traction, which is caused by your "weight transfer" to the front. The usual rule of thumb is to be three times as hard on the front brake, compared to the rear. Of course, you don't want to go over the bars. Keep a good grip to prevent the front wheel from turning out from under you. Shifting your weight low and back helps a little. And if you feel the back lighten up (maybe evidenced by a skidding rear wheel) ease off the front brake as well as the back. All this takes practice. Literally. - Frank Krygowski       Date: 03 Mar 2007 07:51:35 From: Mark Hickey Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons frkrygow@gmail.com wrote: >Panic stops are a different animal. For them, it's all about using >traction properly, not controlling heat buildup. You'll stop fastest >if you use both brakes, but take advantage of the front wheel's >greater traction, which is caused by your "weight transfer" to the >front. The usual rule of thumb is to be three times as hard on the >front brake, compared to the rear. > >Of course, you don't want to go over the bars. Keep a good grip to >prevent the front wheel from turning out from under you. Shifting >your weight low and back helps a little. And if you feel the back >lighten up (maybe evidenced by a skidding rear wheel) ease off the >front brake as well as the back. > >All this takes practice. Literally. Absolutely - if anyone really thinks (and I know you don't, ian) that the rear brake provides the major stopping power, you owe it to yourself and your dependents to go out and practice making fast stops. Something I tell people to help them get their head around the physics involved - you can make the fastest possible stop with or without the rear brake. That's right - if you apply the front brake in the manner to stop as fast as possible, your rear brake won't matter one way or the other since there will be virtually no weight on the rear wheel. To give you an idea just how little the rear brake matters when your weight is shifted forward as it would be during a panic stop properly using the front brake... http://www.citypaper.com/news/story.asp?id=10344 ... in which an "unofficial record" for the longest rear-wheel skid of 509 feet (over 160m) was set by a guy on a track bike. k Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.habcycles.com Home of the $795 ti frame     Date: 01 Mar 2007 20:33:25 From: marian.rosenberg@gmail.com Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On 1, 10:22 pm, "DanK...@gmail.com" <DanK...@gmail.com > wrote: > On Feb 28, 10:06 pm, "ian.rosenb...@gmail.com" > > <ian.rosenb...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I was under the impression that the rear brake was used for slowing > > and the front brake for stopping. > > That's an interesting perspective. I've never heard that before, but > I don't normally spend a whole lot of time paying attention to how > others use their brakes. Perhaps this is more common than I thought. > Still, if a front brake is for stopping, wouldn't that in its self > dictate that the front brake can be used for slowing (which is a > significant part of stopping)? On the 14km of 4-6% down I did last week I used both brakes to keep myself from going too too fast. However, I've been told that when you are coasting down something steep and don't want to go too fast you should generally keep yourself to the rear brake. Does anyone else want to chime in? The local impressives whose word I take as gospel have never actually taught me anything about braking technique > > When you know that mountains are going to be happening between you and > > the next bike shop and that even if the general trend will be up will > > have the occasional sharp down it is less than brilliant to ride > > without a brake. > > I never suggested he ride without a brake, I just suggested the front > brake can be sufficient. And so can a coaster brake on a fixie if you know what you're doing. My point is that for someone accustomed to riding with two brakes the disabling of one of those brakes is equivalent to riding without a brake. > > I've personally hit over 60kph on some of those > > descents (though on the really big ones like Ertouling and Yinggeling > > limit myself to the low 40s with lots of judicious braking). > > There is a rather notorius (at least locally) hill right up the street > from my house. I couldn't tell you the grade, but it is STEEP. > Adjacent to the road is a free snowboard & sledding park with about > the same grade, to put it in perspective. I enjoy riding down this > hill almost as much as I enjoy suffering up it. I use my front brake > to slow myself down the hill, and then to stop at the bottom. If on > my mountain bike, which does have a rear brake, I still use the same > front brake only technique. Respectively 10.1km at 4.9% and about 14km at about 5% ... I really enjoyed riding down the first one because I was with people who knew what they were doing and knew the mountain. I did -not- enjoy riding down the second one because I was alone and it was drizzling. > > I think there is a difference between a bike that has never had a rear > > brake being ridden by someone who is accustomed to not having a rear > > brake and a bike that just had it's rear brake screwed up in a crash > > being ridden by the rider who just showed his inability to brake > > efficiently with both brakes present. > > You bring up a good point in that this rider had just demonstrated his > inability to brake under normal circumstance. Perhaps if he was > accustomed to using his front brake, he'd have been able to stop in > time to avoid the crash? I don't know which brake he was accustomed to using. I only know which brake I'm accustomed to using. The rear one when I want to go slower without stopping. The front one when I intend to come to a complete stop. > I really can't imagine myself rear-ending > somebody on a bike, though I don't take other riders wheels while out > tooling about. I think my lack of lycra, gears, (perhaps rear brake?) > and funny looking helmet keep all the dedicated roadies away from me, > and the other guys who look like me tend to be slower. I digress... I think (hope) most dedicated roadies have been taught same as I that taking someone's wheel without permission is rude. As for your lack of lycra etc that might keep people from following you, not from being followed by you. -M       Date: 01 Mar 2007 22:59:24 From: GaryG Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons <ian.rosenberg@gmail.com > wrote in message news:1172810005.165568.249960@z35g2000cwz.googlegroups.com... > On 1, 10:22 pm, "DanK...@gmail.com" <DanK...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Feb 28, 10:06 pm, "ian.rosenb...@gmail.com" > > > > <ian.rosenb...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I was under the impression that the rear brake was used for slowing > > > and the front brake for stopping. > > > > That's an interesting perspective. I've never heard that before, but > > I don't normally spend a whole lot of time paying attention to how > > others use their brakes. Perhaps this is more common than I thought. > > Still, if a front brake is for stopping, wouldn't that in its self > > dictate that the front brake can be used for slowing (which is a > > significant part of stopping)? > > On the 14km of 4-6% down I did last week I used both brakes to keep > myself from going too too fast. Unless there are tight switchbacks or corners, there's no real reason to use the brakes very much at all on a downhill like that. If you feel like your speed is getting a bit too high, just sit up a bit to "catch air". It also helps if you get "wider" with your arms and legs. > However, I've been told that when you > are coasting down something steep and don't want to go too fast you > should generally keep yourself to the rear brake. Does anyone else > want to chime in? If you need to use the brakes to slow down, use both brakes together, but never use them for very long. It's much better to use the brakes briefly, then get off of them as quick as you can. This reduces the risk of overheating your rims, which can lead to a blowout due to the tube getting too hot. Also, when approaching curves/corners, it's best to brake well before the corner, then stay off the brakes through the curve. Trying to brake through a corner risks loss of control. GG >The local impressives whose word I take as gospel > have never actually taught me anything about braking technique > > > > When you know that mountains are going to be happening between you and > > > the next bike shop and that even if the general trend will be up will > > > have the occasional sharp down it is less than brilliant to ride > > > without a brake. > > > > I never suggested he ride without a brake, I just suggested the front > > brake can be sufficient. > > And so can a coaster brake on a fixie if you know what you're doing. > My point is that for someone accustomed to riding with two brakes the > disabling of one of those brakes is equivalent to riding without a > brake. > > > > I've personally hit over 60kph on some of those > > > descents (though on the really big ones like Ertouling and Yinggeling > > > limit myself to the low 40s with lots of judicious braking). > > > > There is a rather notorius (at least locally) hill right up the street > > from my house. I couldn't tell you the grade, but it is STEEP. > > Adjacent to the road is a free snowboard & sledding park with about > > the same grade, to put it in perspective. I enjoy riding down this > > hill almost as much as I enjoy suffering up it. I use my front brake > > to slow myself down the hill, and then to stop at the bottom. If on > > my mountain bike, which does have a rear brake, I still use the same > > front brake only technique. > > Respectively 10.1km at 4.9% and about 14km at about 5% ... > > I really enjoyed riding down the first one because I was with people > who knew what they were doing and knew the mountain. > I did -not- enjoy riding down the second one because I was alone and > it was drizzling. > > > > I think there is a difference between a bike that has never had a rear > > > brake being ridden by someone who is accustomed to not having a rear > > > brake and a bike that just had it's rear brake screwed up in a crash > > > being ridden by the rider who just showed his inability to brake > > > efficiently with both brakes present. > > > > You bring up a good point in that this rider had just demonstrated his > > inability to brake under normal circumstance. Perhaps if he was > > accustomed to using his front brake, he'd have been able to stop in > > time to avoid the crash? > > I don't know which brake he was accustomed to using. I only know > which brake I'm accustomed to using. The rear one when I want to go > slower without stopping. The front one when I intend to come to a > complete stop. > > > I really can't imagine myself rear-ending > > somebody on a bike, though I don't take other riders wheels while out > > tooling about. I think my lack of lycra, gears, (perhaps rear brake?) > > and funny looking helmet keep all the dedicated roadies away from me, > > and the other guys who look like me tend to be slower. I digress... > > I think (hope) most dedicated roadies have been taught same as I that > taking someone's wheel without permission is rude. > > As for your lack of lycra etc that might keep people from following > you, not from being followed by you. > > -M >         Date: 02 Mar 2007 19:45:29 From: nash Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons I have always been told it is better to pump the brakes. and always use both An earlier thread said when you use the front braked for unexpected quick stops you will wear it out faster and especially since it is doing all the work. If I used only my front brake on a downhill I would go ass over tea kettle. the rear raises even when suddenly stopping at a light. I have a Trek 1500. So with all that in mind I use both always. I heard of one biker who used both and feather touched the front. I prefer pumping both. Car drivers know and do as such too. Whether it is for just disc or drum I do not know. GG is right about the corners. My Dad was a race car driver when I was growing up so I learned stuff like from him too.     Date: 01 Mar 2007 06:22:16 From: DanKMTB@gmail.com Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On Feb 28, 10:06 pm, "ian.rosenb...@gmail.com" <ian.rosenb...@gmail.com > wrote: > I was under the impression that the rear brake was used for slowing > and the front brake for stopping. That's an interesting perspective. I've never heard that before, but I don't normally spend a whole lot of time paying attention to how others use their brakes. Perhaps this is more common than I thought. Still, if a front brake is for stopping, wouldn't that in its self dictate that the front brake can be used for slowing (which is a significant part of stopping)? > When you know that mountains are going to be happening between you and > the next bike shop and that even if the general trend will be up will > have the occasional sharp down it is less than brilliant to ride > without a brake. I never suggested he ride without a brake, I just suggested the front brake can be sufficient. > I've personally hit over 60kph on some of those > descents (though on the really big ones like Ertouling and Yinggeling > limit myself to the low 40s with lots of judicious braking). There is a rather notorius (at least locally) hill right up the street from my house. I couldn't tell you the grade, but it is STEEP. Adjacent to the road is a free snowboard & sledding park with about the same grade, to put it in perspective. I enjoy riding down this hill almost as much as I enjoy suffering up it. I use my front brake to slow myself down the hill, and then to stop at the bottom. If on my mountain bike, which does have a rear brake, I still use the same front brake only technique. > I think there is a difference between a bike that has never had a rear > brake being ridden by someone who is accustomed to not having a rear > brake and a bike that just had it's rear brake screwed up in a crash > being ridden by the rider who just showed his inability to brake > efficiently with both brakes present. You bring up a good point in that this rider had just demonstrated his inability to brake under normal circumstance. Perhaps if he was accustomed to using his front brake, he'd have been able to stop in time to avoid the crash? I really can't imagine myself rear-ending somebody on a bike, though I don't take other riders wheels while out tooling about. I think my lack of lycra, gears, (perhaps rear brake?) and funny looking helmet keep all the dedicated roadies away from me, and the other guys who look like me tend to be slower. I digress... Dan     Date: 28 Feb 2007 19:06:08 From: marian.rosenberg@gmail.com Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On Feb 28, 9:59 pm, "DanK...@gmail.com" <DanK...@gmail.com > wrote: > On Feb 27, 9:18 pm, "ian.rosenb...@gmail.com" > > <ian.rosenb...@gmail.com> wrote: > > His general disregard for safety concerns such as his insistence on > > trying to ride post crash without a rear brake because there weren't > > that many downhills between here and the next bike shop (50 > > kilometers) make me pretty certain that I know who was at fault in the > > accident. > > -M > > You must be kidding us. Insistence? Am I correct to assume that > means you repeatedly tried to stop him from riding the bike without a > rear brake? Personally, I'd have continued to ride the bike like that > daily until the mail-order parts came in if I couldn't find what I > wanted at a fair price at a LBS. I certainly wouldn't reroute/stop my > ride to have it fixed immediately. > The vast majority of your stopping is done with the front brake > anyway. Do you really consider riding without a rear brake a serious > disregard for safety? I was under the impression that the rear brake was used for slowing and the front brake for stopping. When you know that mountains are going to be happening between you and the next bike shop and that even if the general trend will be up will have the occasional sharp down it is less than brilliant to ride without a brake. I've personally hit over 60kph on some of those descents (though on the really big ones like Ertouling and Yinggeling limit myself to the low 40s with lots of judicious braking). > My road bike doesn't even have a rear brake; > didn't come with one from the shop and I never felt the need to add > one. While the rear brake is ginally useful on my *mountain* bike, > I still wouldn't hesitate to ride back to the car or shop without it > if it broke on the trail (though I may dismount for any moderatly > challenging technical downhill). I wonder how many people consider me > dangerous and likely to cause an accident when they see me out on the > road bike without a rear brake setup? FWIW, my front-brake only road > bike can be stopped a whole lot faster than my rear-brake only BMX in > an emergency stop. I think there is a difference between a bike that has never had a rear brake being ridden by someone who is accustomed to not having a rear brake and a bike that just had it's rear brake screwed up in a crash being ridden by the rider who just showed his inability to brake efficiently with both brakes present. -M       Date: 09 Mar 2007 02:33:18 From: nash Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons <ian.rosenberg@gmail.com > wrote in message news:1172718368.568599.133460@z35g2000cwz.googlegroups.com... > On Feb 28, 9:59 pm, "DanK...@gmail.com" <DanK...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Feb 27, 9:18 pm, "ian.rosenb...@gmail.com" >> >> <ian.rosenb...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > His general disregard for safety concerns such as his insistence on >> > trying to ride post crash without a rear brake because there weren't >> > that many downhills between here and the next bike shop (50 >> > kilometers) make me pretty certain that I know who was at fault in the >> > accident. >> > -M >> >> You must be kidding us. Insistence? Am I correct to assume that >> means you repeatedly tried to stop him from riding the bike without a >> rear brake? Personally, I'd have continued to ride the bike like that >> daily until the mail-order parts came in if I couldn't find what I >> wanted at a fair price at a LBS. I certainly wouldn't reroute/stop my >> ride to have it fixed immediately. > >> The vast majority of your stopping is done with the front brake >> anyway. Do you really consider riding without a rear brake a serious >> disregard for safety? > > I was under the impression that the rear brake was used for slowing > and the front brake for stopping. > > When you know that mountains are going to be happening between you and > the next bike shop and that even if the general trend will be up will > have the occasional sharp down it is less than brilliant to ride > without a brake. I've personally hit over 60kph on some of those > descents (though on the really big ones like Ertouling and Yinggeling > limit myself to the low 40s with lots of judicious braking). > >> My road bike doesn't even have a rear brake; >> didn't come with one from the shop and I never felt the need to add >> one. While the rear brake is ginally useful on my *mountain* bike, >> I still wouldn't hesitate to ride back to the car or shop without it >> if it broke on the trail (though I may dismount for any moderatly >> challenging technical downhill). I wonder how many people consider me >> dangerous and likely to cause an accident when they see me out on the >> road bike without a rear brake setup? FWIW, my front-brake only road >> bike can be stopped a whole lot faster than my rear-brake only BMX in >> an emergency stop. > > I think there is a difference between a bike that has never had a rear > brake being ridden by someone who is accustomed to not having a rear > brake and a bike that just had it's rear brake screwed up in a crash > being ridden by the rider who just showed his inability to brake > efficiently with both brakes present. > > -M BTW If I emergency stopped, my rear brake is alot more effective. Maybe that is a disc brake thing. or floppy disc I dunno whitch. Still I double pump the way you are suppose to fancy pants.         Date: 08 Mar 2007 20:04:04 From: Dane Buson Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons nash <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net > wrote: > <ian.rosenberg@gmail.com> wrote in message >> >> I think there is a difference between a bike that has never had a rear >> brake being ridden by someone who is accustomed to not having a rear >> brake and a bike that just had it's rear brake screwed up in a crash >> being ridden by the rider who just showed his inability to brake >> efficiently with both brakes present. > > BTW If I emergency stopped, my rear brake is alot more effective. Maybe > that is a disc brake thing. or floppy disc I dunno whitch. The only way your rear brake is more effective is if your front brake is incredibly poorly adjusted. It has nothing to do with the type of brake and everything to do with geometry. As you brake your weight transfers from back to front, unweighting the rear. These rules don't necessarily apply if you are riding something other than a diamond frame of course. -- Dane Buson - sigdane@unixbigots.org The opossum is a very sophisticated animal. It doesn't even get up until 5 or 6 PM.           Date: 09 Mar 2007 04:29:06 From: nash Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons "Dane Buson" <dane@unseen.edu > wrote in message news:ku27c4-g8v.ln1@curare.zuvembi.homelinux.org... > nash <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net> wrote: >> <ian.rosenberg@gmail.com> wrote in message >>> >>> I think there is a difference between a bike that has never had a rear >>> brake being ridden by someone who is accustomed to not having a rear >>> brake and a bike that just had it's rear brake screwed up in a crash >>> being ridden by the rider who just showed his inability to brake >>> efficiently with both brakes present. >> >> BTW If I emergency stopped, my rear brake is alot more effective. Maybe >> that is a disc brake thing. or floppy disc I dunno whitch. > > The only way your rear brake is more effective is if your front brake is > incredibly poorly adjusted. It has nothing to do with the type of brake > and everything to do with geometry. As you brake your weight transfers > from back to front, unweighting the rear. These rules don't necessarily > apply if you are riding something other than a diamond frame of course. > > -- > Dane Buson - sigdane@unixbigots.org > The opossum is a very sophisticated animal. It doesn't even get up > until 5 or 6 PM. But, if your front brake wears out first maybe you have to depend on the rear brake more. So it depends on your bike and your brakes. I just retired my front and I know it is perfectly aligned. Though as I just said maybe it is worn being that it does stop more than half the weight if you are correct. I was not doing any downhill, just average speed in the rain, feather it, and see which is more pronounced. It's the rear in my case. I guess all I am trying to add is it depends on your situation as in all things. Zen             Date: 09 Mar 2007 06:06:13 From: Mark Hickey Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net > wrote: >But, if your front brake wears out first maybe you have to depend on the >rear brake more. So it depends on your bike and your brakes. I just retired >my front and I know it is perfectly aligned. Though as I just said maybe it >is worn being that it does stop more than half the weight if you are >correct. >I was not doing any downhill, just average speed in the rain, feather it, >and see which is more pronounced. It's the rear in my case. >I guess all I am trying to add is it depends on your situation as in all >things. Thing is, physics isn't a "depends on thing"... you're giving advice that is wrong and that could potentially hurt someone. The front brake is the one you MUST use to stop as quickly as possible in an emergency situation. To rely on the back brake in such a situation is a horribly bad idea. k Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.habcycles.com Home of the $795 ti frame               Date: 09 Mar 2007 18:32:36 From: nash Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons "k Hickey" <k@habcycles.com > wrote in message news:0pm2v2p9de4hovta330a5tcuqfvft4dvam@4ax.com... > "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net> wrote: > >>But, if your front brake wears out first maybe you have to depend on the >>rear brake more. So it depends on your bike and your brakes. I just >>retired >>my front and I know it is perfectly aligned. Though as I just said maybe >>it >>is worn being that it does stop more than half the weight if you are >>correct. >>I was not doing any downhill, just average speed in the rain, feather it, >>and see which is more pronounced. It's the rear in my case. >>I guess all I am trying to add is it depends on your situation as in all >>things. > > Thing is, physics isn't a "depends on thing"... you're giving advice > that is wrong and that could potentially hurt someone. The front > brake is the one you MUST use to stop as quickly as possible in an > emergency situation. To rely on the back brake in such a situation is > a horribly bad idea. > > k Hickey > Habanero Cycles > http://www.habcycles.com > Home of the $795 ti frame How am I trying to hurt someone? That is slander DA. I said they should test their brakes like everyone else on the road does. You would be killing me if I followed your advice then, obviously as I described to you already.                 Date: 11 Mar 2007 08:26:03 From: Mark Hickey Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net > wrote: >"k Hickey" <k@habcycles.com> wrote in message >news:0pm2v2p9de4hovta330a5tcuqfvft4dvam@4ax.com... >> "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net> wrote: >> >>>But, if your front brake wears out first maybe you have to depend on the >>>rear brake more. So it depends on your bike and your brakes. I just >>>retired >>>my front and I know it is perfectly aligned. Though as I just said maybe >>>it >>>is worn being that it does stop more than half the weight if you are >>>correct. >>>I was not doing any downhill, just average speed in the rain, feather it, >>>and see which is more pronounced. It's the rear in my case. >>>I guess all I am trying to add is it depends on your situation as in all >>>things. >> >> Thing is, physics isn't a "depends on thing"... you're giving advice >> that is wrong and that could potentially hurt someone. The front >> brake is the one you MUST use to stop as quickly as possible in an >> emergency situation. To rely on the back brake in such a situation is >> a horribly bad idea. >> >How am I trying to hurt someone? That is slander DA. I said they should >test their brakes like everyone else on the road does. >You would be killing me if I followed your advice then, obviously as I >described to you already. OK, even though you're either a troll or hopelessly uninformed and/or naive, I'll play along. I'll make you the same offer (challenge) I have others... You disconnect the front brake on your bike. I disconnect teh rear brake on my bike. We both ride 20+mph toward a brick wall. You don't hit the brakes 'til I do. The winner is the one who has front teeth when the challenge is over. Interested? k Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.habcycles.com Home of the $795 ti frame                   Date: 11 Mar 2007 17:51:13 From: nash Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons "k Hickey" <k@habcycles.com > wrote in message news:3oj5v21i32em2u6h8qfd8sdp2ip0m5sarh@4ax.com... > "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net> wrote: > >>"k Hickey" <k@habcycles.com> wrote in message >>news:0pm2v2p9de4hovta330a5tcuqfvft4dvam@4ax.com... >>> "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net> wrote: >>> >>>>But, if your front brake wears out first maybe you have to depend on the >>>>rear brake more. So it depends on your bike and your brakes. I just >>>>retired >>>>my front and I know it is perfectly aligned. Though as I just said >>>>maybe >>>>it >>>>is worn being that it does stop more than half the weight if you are >>>>correct. >>>>I was not doing any downhill, just average speed in the rain, feather >>>>it, >>>>and see which is more pronounced. It's the rear in my case. >>>>I guess all I am trying to add is it depends on your situation as in all >>>>things. >>> >>> Thing is, physics isn't a "depends on thing"... you're giving advice >>> that is wrong and that could potentially hurt someone. The front >>> brake is the one you MUST use to stop as quickly as possible in an >>> emergency situation. To rely on the back brake in such a situation is >>> a horribly bad idea. >>> >>How am I trying to hurt someone? That is slander DA. I said they should >>test their brakes like everyone else on the road does. >>You would be killing me if I followed your advice then, obviously as I >>described to you already. > > OK, even though you're either a troll or hopelessly uninformed and/or > naive, I'll play along. > > I'll make you the same offer (challenge) I have others... > > You disconnect the front brake on your bike. > > I disconnect teh rear brake on my bike. > > We both ride 20+mph toward a brick wall. > > You don't hit the brakes 'til I do. > > The winner is the one who has front teeth when the challenge is over. > > Interested? > > k Hickey > Habanero Cycles > http://www.habcycles.com > Home of the $795 ti frame You are disgustingly without manners. You obviously have read nothing I wrote. I have been biking since I was 8. You are not even talking about the same thing so shove off.         Date: 08 Mar 2007 18:44:59 From: Bill Baka Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons nash wrote: > <ian.rosenberg@gmail.com> wrote in message > news:1172718368.568599.133460@z35g2000cwz.googlegroups.com... >> On Feb 28, 9:59 pm, "DanK...@gmail.com" <DanK...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Feb 27, 9:18 pm, "ian.rosenb...@gmail.com" >>> >>> <ian.rosenb...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> His general disregard for safety concerns such as his insistence on >>>> trying to ride post crash without a rear brake because there weren't >>>> that many downhills between here and the next bike shop (50 >>>> kilometers) make me pretty certain that I know who was at fault in the >>>> accident. >>>> -M >>> You must be kidding us. Insistence? Am I correct to assume that >>> means you repeatedly tried to stop him from riding the bike without a >>> rear brake? Personally, I'd have continued to ride the bike like that >>> daily until the mail-order parts came in if I couldn't find what I >>> wanted at a fair price at a LBS. I certainly wouldn't reroute/stop my >>> ride to have it fixed immediately. >>> The vast majority of your stopping is done with the front brake >>> anyway. Do you really consider riding without a rear brake a serious >>> disregard for safety? >> I was under the impression that the rear brake was used for slowing >> and the front brake for stopping. >> >> When you know that mountains are going to be happening between you and >> the next bike shop and that even if the general trend will be up will >> have the occasional sharp down it is less than brilliant to ride >> without a brake. I've personally hit over 60kph on some of those >> descents (though on the really big ones like Ertouling and Yinggeling >> limit myself to the low 40s with lots of judicious braking). Only 60kph????? I've hit over 50 MPH without even being on that steep a grade. I'm shooting for 60++MPH this summer. Adrenaline junky, me???? >> >>> My road bike doesn't even have a rear brake; >>> didn't come with one from the shop and I never felt the need to add >>> one. While the rear brake is ginally useful on my *mountain* bike, >>> I still wouldn't hesitate to ride back to the car or shop without it >>> if it broke on the trail (though I may dismount for any moderatly >>> challenging technical downhill). I wonder how many people consider me >>> dangerous and likely to cause an accident when they see me out on the >>> road bike without a rear brake setup? FWIW, my front-brake only road >>> bike can be stopped a whole lot faster than my rear-brake only BMX in >>> an emergency stop. >> I think there is a difference between a bike that has never had a rear >> brake being ridden by someone who is accustomed to not having a rear >> brake and a bike that just had it's rear brake screwed up in a crash >> being ridden by the rider who just showed his inability to brake >> efficiently with both brakes present. >> >> -M There is the road part of things and the side of the road where the front wheel will just start to skid and you WILL go down from lack of steering control. Been there and done that. > > > BTW If I emergency stopped, my rear brake is alot more effective. Maybe > that is a disc brake thing. or floppy disc I dunno whitch. > Still I double pump the way you are suppose to fancy pants. > > On 40 MPH downhills on pavement I try the rear brake first and if it doesn't slow me enough then I use the front and the rear just skids until I let it go. I did do a sort of stoppie reverse wheely coming down Fitch mountain in Healdsburg, Ca. where I used to work and rode that mountain every day at lunch. This was the day when I decided to ride clockwise instead of my usual CCW. I forgot about the one part where I had to huff and puff up about a 15-20% going up. Coming down was way too exciting as I was almost doing an endo just to keep my speed to where I could make a switchback. That was about 20 miles north of Santa Rosa where I hear Levi Leipheimer lives. You know, the guy who won the tour of California. maybe the next Lance, who knows? Bill Baka     Date: 28 Feb 2007 05:59:13 From: DanKMTB@gmail.com Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On Feb 27, 9:18 pm, "ian.rosenb...@gmail.com" <ian.rosenb...@gmail.com > wrote: > His general disregard for safety concerns such as his insistence on > trying to ride post crash without a rear brake because there weren't > that many downhills between here and the next bike shop (50 > kilometers) make me pretty certain that I know who was at fault in the > accident. > -M You must be kidding us. Insistence? Am I correct to assume that means you repeatedly tried to stop him from riding the bike without a rear brake? Personally, I'd have continued to ride the bike like that daily until the mail-order parts came in if I couldn't find what I wanted at a fair price at a LBS. I certainly wouldn't reroute/stop my ride to have it fixed immediately. The vast majority of your stopping is done with the front brake anyway. Do you really consider riding without a rear brake a serious disregard for safety? My road bike doesn't even have a rear brake; didn't come with one from the shop and I never felt the need to add one. While the rear brake is ginally useful on my *mountain* bike, I still wouldn't hesitate to ride back to the car or shop without it if it broke on the trail (though I may dismount for any moderatly challenging technical downhill). I wonder how many people consider me dangerous and likely to cause an accident when they see me out on the road bike without a rear brake setup? FWIW, my front-brake only road bike can be stopped a whole lot faster than my rear-brake only BMX in an emergency stop.       Date: 09 Mar 2007 13:07:08 From: DanKMTB@gmail.com Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons Nash, Since I'm going to be doing some experimenting this weekend, perhaps I could persuade you to try an experiment as well? I think you trying my experiment would be an interesting lesson in the unbiased nature of physics, and will prove whether or not "physics only proves what you set out to prove in the first place". If that's the case, physics will prove that a rear brake stops faster than a front, since that's what you're out to prove. My proposed experiment: Find a decent downhill, as to ensure you can get some decent speed. Pedal down the hill until you're traveling at least 20mph. Grab the front brake lever, normally on the left, and pull it all the way in to the bars, as hard as you can. My deduction: You will stop astoundingly fast, perhaps painfully so. I anticipate it will take roughly one bike length to stop you, regardless of your weight. If you find that you are still rolling down the road with the brakes pulled all the way into the handlebars, please proceed immediately to your local bike shop for brake adjustment/repair. Really, the only way I could imagine you are able to stop better with the rear brakes than the front is if your front brakes are horribly misadjusted and/or in a state of terrible disrepair.         Date: 09 Mar 2007 22:17:36 From: nash Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons Tell me something Are all roads downhill for you? careful trick question..... tick tock tick tock tick tock         Date: 09 Mar 2007 22:09:22 From: nash Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons <DanKMTB@gmail.com > wrote in message news:1173474428.661230.172280@s48g2000cws.googlegroups.com... > Nash, > > Since I'm going to be doing some experimenting this weekend, perhaps I > could persuade you to try an experiment as well? I think you trying > my experiment would be an interesting lesson in the unbiased nature of > physics, and will prove whether or not "physics only proves what you > set out to prove in the first place". If that's the case, physics > will prove that a rear brake stops faster than a front, since that's > what you're out to prove. > > My proposed experiment: > Find a decent downhill, as to ensure you can get some decent speed. > Pedal down the hill until you're traveling at least 20mph. > Grab the front brake lever, normally on the left, and pull it all the > way in to the bars, as hard as you can. > > My deduction: You will stop astoundingly fast, perhaps painfully so. > I anticipate it will take roughly one bike length to stop you, > regardless of your weight. If you find that you are still rolling > down the road with the brakes pulled all the way into the handlebars, > please proceed immediately to your local bike shop for brake > adjustment/repair. > > Really, the only way I could imagine you are able to stop better with > the rear brakes than the front is if your front brakes are horribly > misadjusted and/or in a state of terrible disrepair. Why would I want to waste my front brake on you. My bike weighs more than yours probably so you can go outside and start the fight without me. Since you do not listen to anybody your mom and teachers must be really honored to know you. >         Date: 09 Mar 2007 22:06:54 From: nash Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons In other words you both purport that the front brake is always faster and it is not. Re: my first post said as much. ridiculing gets you no where with me bboy. -- Just remember, if the world didn't suck, we'd all fall off.         Date: 09 Mar 2007 22:04:43 From: nash Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons <DanKMTB@gmail.com > wrote in message news:1173474428.661230.172280@s48g2000cws.googlegroups.com... > Nash, > > Since I'm going to be doing some experimenting this weekend, perhaps I > could persuade you to try an experiment as well? I think you trying > my experiment would be an interesting lesson in the unbiased nature of > physics, and will prove whether or not "physics only proves what you > set out to prove in the first place". If that's the case, physics > will prove that a rear brake stops faster than a front, since that's > what you're out to prove. > > My proposed experiment: > Find a decent downhill, as to ensure you can get some decent speed. > Pedal down the hill until you're traveling at least 20mph. > Grab the front brake lever, normally on the left, and pull it all the > way in to the bars, as hard as you can. > > My deduction: You will stop astoundingly fast, perhaps painfully so. > I anticipate it will take roughly one bike length to stop you, > regardless of your weight. If you find that you are still rolling > down the road with the brakes pulled all the way into the handlebars, > please proceed immediately to your local bike shop for brake > adjustment/repair. > > Really, the only way I could imagine you are able to stop better with > the rear brakes than the front is if your front brakes are horribly > misadjusted and/or in a state of terrible disrepair. You never read my posts. I said, again, I did not do on a downhill and the OP was talking about brakes period. Get that through your skull. test your brakes in all situations. Geeezzz it is the law or should be of driving, riding, skateboarding, rbing. Is that enough undeniable physics for you? You lose because you did not read the instructions bboy.     Date: 27 Feb 2007 18:18:37 From: marian.rosenberg@gmail.com Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On Feb 27, 5:22 pm, jtay...@NOSPAM.hfx.andara.com wrote: > On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 22:13:46 -0500, "Roger Zoul" > > <rogerzo...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > >Interesting. I've never considered the need to give a hand signal that I'm > >going to stop on a bike. > > In some situations it is essential that you do this - but one must be > aware of such a situation developing; harder to do when your hearing > is impaired. Please tell me how the music I was listening to affected Ah Wei not telling me he was going to catch my rear wheel and how it caused him to spend around ten minutes drafting me without ever once trying to get my attention or offer to take the front? His general disregard for safety concerns such as his insistence on trying to ride post crash without a rear brake because there weren't that many downhills between here and the next bike shop (50 kilometers) make me pretty certain that I know who was at fault in the accident. However, just as Ah Wei broke the generally accepted rules of conduct among local bikers by drafting me without invitation or permission, I also broke the generally accepted rules of conduct by going fast on a road bike and not making hand signals as if the whole of the paceline were behind me. There is a -chance- that I might have heard his bike over mine if I hadn't had music. But I don't think my listening to music caused the accident. Merely that it was a factor (in an unlikely bike bike crash) that, had it not been there, might have been one of the causations. -M       Date: 27 Feb 2007 21:27:57 From: Mark Hickey Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons "ian.rosenberg@gmail.com" <ian.rosenberg@gmail.com > wrote: >There is a -chance- that I might have heard his bike over mine if I >hadn't had music. But I don't think my listening to music caused the >accident. Merely that it was a factor (in an unlikely bike bike >crash) that, had it not been there, might have been one of the >causations. I'd say it's a near certainty that you would have heard him back there had you not been listening to music. In the course of 10 minutes, I'm sure he soft-pedaled at least once or twice enough to rachet the freehub (which is a very sure sign someone's behind you). When someone is on my wheel unannounced, I'll almost invariably pick up something audible to clue me in - whether it's the tires crunching a rock or (more likely) a rattle. Often I'll think it's just something on my bike that needs oil at first... ;-) k Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.habcycles.com Home of the $795 ti frame     Date: 23 Feb 2007 19:07:07 From: Kristian M Zoerhoff Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On 2007-02-23, Roger Zoul <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com > wrote: > > Who is the moron here? You actually expected to educate a WWR while riding > down the street, by shouting "Other side"? In my previous repsonse to this post, I failed to point out that I actually have a pretty good track record of getting WWRs to switch the the correct side of the road; in fact, prior to today, I can't remember anyone refusing to do so. Maybe the law of averages finally caught up with me, and I just wasn't ready for it. All the same, if I see a car on my side of the double yellow line coming at me, I'm making damn sure he knows I'm unhappy, even as I take evasive action. I view this as exactly the same situation, and just as dangerous. I freely admit that others may be more forgiving of WWRs than I. -- __o Kristian Zoerhoff _'\(,_ kristian.zoerhoff@gmail.com (_)/ (_)       Date: 23 Feb 2007 14:35:14 From: Roger Zoul Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons Kristian M Zoerhoff wrote: :: On 2007-02-23, Roger Zoul <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com > wrote: ::: ::: Who is the moron here? You actually expected to educate a WWR ::: while riding down the street, by shouting "Other side"? :: :: In my previous repsonse to this post, I failed to point out that I :: actually have a pretty good track record of getting WWRs to switch :: the the correct side of the road; in fact, prior to today, I can't :: remember anyone refusing to do so. Maybe the law of averages finally :: caught up with me, and I just wasn't ready for it. :: :: All the same, if I see a car on my side of the double yellow line :: coming at me, I'm making damn sure he knows I'm unhappy, even as I :: take evasive action. I view this as exactly the same situation, and :: just as dangerous. I freely admit that others may be more forgiving :: of WWRs than I. I disagree that it is really that dangerous. Are you riding on the sidewalk? WWR rarely, IME, ridng the wrong way in the full lane. When I see one, and I frequently do, I just take the lane and let them hug the edge of the road. Only once was I surprised by a WWR at an intersection where I was to make a right turn. She caught me off guard because I was looking for traffic and NOT look where she was, since cars don't come from that direction. There certainly wasn't time for me to yell at the poor clueless lady to get to the other side of this huge divided road, so I just went around her, rather than trying to make a scene or a point, which might have gotten one of us killed.         Date: 27 Feb 2007 04:35:12 From: skiffrun Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons Roger Zoul;180444 Wrote: > Kristian M Zoerhoff wrote: > > I disagree that it is really that dangerous. Are you riding on the > sidewalk? WWR rarely, IME, ridng the wrong way in the full lane. When > I > see one, and I frequently do, I just take the lane and let them hug the > edge > of the road. Only once was I surprised by a WWR at an intersection > where I > was to make a right turn. She caught me off guard because I was > looking for > traffic and NOT look where she was, since cars don't come from that > direction. There certainly wasn't time for me to yell at the poor > clueless > lady to get to the other side of this huge divided road, so I just went > > around her, rather than trying to make a scene or a point, which might > have > gotten one of us killed. U 1st claim that WWR is not that dangerous. Then you describe what was almost a head-on collision w/ a WWR. Apparently you did not learn from that situation. It only takes one incident - that could have / should have been avoided if all were following the rules and common sense - to be DEAD. -- skiffrun ------------------------------------------------------------------------ skiffrun's Profile: http://www.trianglecycling.com/member.php?userid=28 View this thread: http://www.trianglecycling.com/showthread.php?t=18205         Date: 23 Feb 2007 19:53:09 From: Kristian M Zoerhoff Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On 2007-02-23, Roger Zoul <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com > wrote: > > I disagree that it is really that dangerous. Are you riding on the > sidewalk? No sidewalks on that road; this was on the paved shoulder, which is effectively an unked bike lane. Traffic moves at a good clip in this area (45 mph limit, but if the cops aren't out, 55 is common), so I really don't like jumping out into the through lane if I can avoid it. With him there, I couldn't avoid it, and it threw me out of my rhythm. I don't bother with WWRs on sidewalks; I don't ride there, so I don't much care what they do. I keep a close enough eye out for pedestrians at corners (close calls make you learn quick) that I tend not be surprised there. It's my sidewalk-less country roads where I get miffed at these folks. > WWR rarely, IME, ridng the wrong way in the full lane. When I > see one, and I frequently do, I just take the lane and let them hug the edge > of the road. That's what I ended up doing, but I'd prefer the next cyclist to not have to deal with this fellow in the same manner. -- __o Kristian Zoerhoff _'\(,_ kristian.zoerhoff@gmail.com (_)/ (_)     Date: 23 Feb 2007 18:07:22 From: Kristian M Zoerhoff Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On 2007-02-23, Roger Zoul <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com > wrote: >:: OK, so maybe that just makes him a typical teenager, but it >:: annoys me (too many iPod-addled joggers around here). > > Who is the moron here? You actually expected to educate a WWR while riding > down the street, by shouting "Other side"? I expected him to get the f*ck out of my lane, yes. He's still a moron. > What does his having an iPod have to do with anything? It was there, he pissed me off. It might be completely irrelevant, but the fact is, the only time I see cyclists wearing headphones around here, it's the stupid ones. Wrong-way riders, unlit night riders, etc. If I saw more responsible riders sporting headphones, I'd be less likely to suffer the knee-jerk reaction that I do. But it just doesn't seem to work that way around here. -- __o Kristian Zoerhoff _'\(,_ kristian.zoerhoff@gmail.com (_)/ (_)     Date: 23 Feb 2007 15:01:10 From: Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 09:41:47 -0500, "Roger Zoul" <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com > wrote: >Kristian M Zoerhoff wrote: >:: 1. Yesterday afternoon, I'm riding along, when I spot 5 teenagers >:: walking along the other side of the road approaching me. >:: >:: "Hey, A**hole!" >:: >:: What the? I've no idea what prompted this. I should have ignored >:: it, but was in a foul mood, so I pulled a Baka and confronted >:: them, resulting in them backing down; no firearms, thankfully. >:: >:: >:: 2. Today, riding down to my father-in-law's, I see a wrong-way >:: rider coming at me, so I point across the road and shout "Other >:: side." He shakes his head, and I repeat (yes, I hate wrong-way >:: riding). He shakes it again, and forces me out into 45 mph >:: traffic to go around him. He's got an iPod glued into both ears. >:: OK, so maybe that just makes him a typical teenager, but it >:: annoys me (too many iPod-addled joggers around here). > >Who is the moron here? You actually expected to educate a WWR while riding >down the street, by shouting "Other side"? > >What does his having an iPod have to do with anything? > Isn't it obvious? Only a moron would cycle with headphones.       Date: 27 Feb 2007 07:47:19 From: Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On Feb 27, 7:49 am, k Hickey <m...@habcycles.com > wrote: > frkry...@gmail.com wrote: > > > >I find that to be absolutely amazing, if not litererally incredible. > >Perhaps k and Pat haven't done enough riding in areas where loose > >dogs are common. > > Perhaps my hearing is just better than you, but to me the sound of a > dog running on asphalt is quite obvious over wind noise. Perhaps your hearing is better. OTOH, it may be selective memory at work. FWIW, I went through some extensive hearing tests a little over a year ago. The results were excellent. Still, I recall an incident riding to work where I was absolutely shocked to find a car alongside me when I did a shoulder check, prior to moving left. This was despite good hearing and despite my use of an eyeglass mirro. I imagine there must have been a headwind. But the incident taught me the limitations of both hearing and mirrors, and confirmed the value of a shoulder check. And, returning to the point, that car must have been louder than any dog. You can't trust your ears. You've got to use your eyes. And consequently, I think quiet use of earbuds is unlikely to have much safety consequence. - Frank Krygowski         Date: 27 Feb 2007 18:35:26 From: Mark Hickey Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons frkrygow@gmail.com wrote: >On Feb 27, 7:49 am, k Hickey <m...@habcycles.com> wrote: >> frkry...@gmail.com wrote: >> > >> >I find that to be absolutely amazing, if not litererally incredible. >> >Perhaps k and Pat haven't done enough riding in areas where loose >> >dogs are common. >> >> Perhaps my hearing is just better than you, but to me the sound of a >> dog running on asphalt is quite obvious over wind noise. > >Perhaps your hearing is better. OTOH, it may be selective memory at >work. FWIW, I went through some extensive hearing tests a little over >a year ago. The results were excellent. I suspect it has less to do with hearing than it does audible pattern recognition. I suspect I've trained my senses to detect the unique sound of Fido at a full gallop. >Still, I recall an incident riding to work where I was absolutely >shocked to find a car alongside me when I did a shoulder check, prior >to moving left. This was despite good hearing and despite my use of >an eyeglass mirro. I imagine there must have been a headwind. But >the incident taught me the limitations of both hearing and mirrors, >and confirmed the value of a shoulder check. Sure, that does happen occasionally (some cars are very quiet). >And, returning to the point, that car must have been louder than any >dog. But the noise it was making was one easily lost in wind noise (obviously). I've never heard wind noise that sounded anything like a running dog (tags or not). >You can't trust your ears. You've got to use your eyes. And >consequently, I think quiet use of earbuds is unlikely to have much >safety consequence. I respect your opinion, but think it's flat wrong. I maintain that choosing to deny yourself ANY input about your surroundings while riding increases your chance of an incident. As we all know, the chance of something actually going wrong on any given ride is very small, so it's hard to calculate the added danger. But FWIW, today I was riding into a VERY stiff headwind, and heard a parked car (several parked cars down the road) running. Hearing the car gave me a chance to check over my shoulder for traffic and plan my escape should it pull out suddenly. Wouldn't have had that option if I'd been wearing earbuds. It's not hard to imagine a scenario where this could have ended badly had I been unaware of the car's status. k Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.habcycles.com Home of the $795 ti frame       Date: 23 Feb 2007 10:33:52 From: Roger Zoul Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons jtaylor@NOSPAM.hfx.andara.com wrote: :: On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 09:41:47 -0500, "Roger Zoul" :: <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com > wrote: :: ::: Kristian M Zoerhoff wrote: ::::: 1. Yesterday afternoon, I'm riding along, when I spot 5 teenagers ::::: walking along the other side of the road approaching me. ::::: ::::: "Hey, A**hole!" ::::: ::::: What the? I've no idea what prompted this. I should have ignored ::::: it, but was in a foul mood, so I pulled a Baka and confronted ::::: them, resulting in them backing down; no firearms, thankfully. ::::: ::::: ::::: 2. Today, riding down to my father-in-law's, I see a wrong-way ::::: rider coming at me, so I point across the road and shout "Other ::::: side." He shakes his head, and I repeat (yes, I hate wrong-way ::::: riding). He shakes it again, and forces me out into 45 mph ::::: traffic to go around him. He's got an iPod glued into both ears. ::::: OK, so maybe that just makes him a typical teenager, but it ::::: annoys me (too many iPod-addled joggers around here). ::: ::: Who is the moron here? You actually expected to educate a WWR ::: while riding down the street, by shouting "Other side"? ::: ::: What does his having an iPod have to do with anything? ::: :: :: Isn't it obvious? :: :: Only a moron would cycle with headphones. (1) Headphones and earbuds are two different things (2) one cannot depend on hearing while cycling (3) only a moron wouldn't understand (1) & (2)         Date: 27 Feb 2007 21:41:14 From: Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On Feb 27, 9:57 pm, Patrick Lamb <pdl678NOS...@comcast.net > wrote: > > > Next Frank will be telling me rural Georgia is sooo much worse than > rural Alabama for dogs. Amazing, if not literally incredible! I can't say. Although I lived quite close to Alabama for a while, I did almost no riding there. I think I rode more in Mobile while on vacation than I did in rural Alabama. But it is true that rural northwest Georgia was absolutely the worst place I've ever ridden regarding loose, aggressive dogs. Hmm. My one recollection comparing those two states had nothing to do with dogs. Instead, it's about the junk cars in the yard. In Georgia, they were right side up. Alabama boys seemed to usually turn them upside down. That always struck me as odd. - Frank Krygowski           Date: 28 Feb 2007 08:44:30 From: Pat Lamb Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons frkrygow@gmail.com wrote: > > Hmm. My one recollection comparing those two states had nothing to do > with dogs. Instead, it's about the junk cars in the yard. In > Georgia, they were right side up. Alabama boys seemed to usually turn > them upside down. That always struck me as odd. That's just how they landed when they drove them into the yard. :) Pat         Date: 26 Feb 2007 21:47:29 From: Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons frkrygow@gmail.com wrote: > Read http://www.bikexprt.com/bicycle/hearing.htm before responding. "This is in addition to the uncertainty as to whether the major noise source, the exhaust pipe, for example, is on the right or the left side of the overtaking vehicle." If Allen can't even properly identify the 'major noise source' from approaching vehicles (the tires), it seems unlikely that he has done enough actual observation to have much of a clue on this issue. It comes down to this. If you want to ride deaf, there is a way to do it. If you want to ride a track bike with no brakes in heavy traffic, there is a way to do that, too. If you want to ride at night in black clothing with absolutely no lights, there is also a way to do that. Et cetera. Robert           Date: 27 Feb 2007 07:47:19 From: Roger Zoul Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons r15757@aol.com wrote: :: frkrygow@gmail.com wrote: :: ::: Read http://www.bikexprt.com/bicycle/hearing.htm before responding. :: :: "This is in addition to the uncertainty as to whether :: the major noise source, the exhaust pipe, for :: example, is on the right or the left side of the :: overtaking vehicle." :: :: If Allen can't even properly identify the 'major :: noise source' from approaching vehicles (the tires), :: it seems unlikely that he has done enough actual :: observation to have much of a clue on this issue. :: That really depends on the vehicle. That's why he said "for example" in that sentence. :: It comes down to this. If you want to ride deaf, :: there is a way to do it. If you want to ride a track :: bike with no brakes in heavy traffic, there is a way :: to do that, too. If you want to ride at night in :: black clothing with absolutely no lights, there is :: also a way to do that. Et cetera. :: It doesn't come down to this at all. :: Robert         Date: 26 Feb 2007 21:00:32 From: Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On Feb 26, 7:53 am, jtay...@NOSPAM.hfx.andara.com wrote: > On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 07:37:24 -0500, "Roger Zoul" > > <rogerzo...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > >::: The fact that many experts recommend against the use of > >::: headphones/earbuds while cycling, > >Perhaps. But that doesn't change the fact that one can wear buds with soft > >music playing and hear sounds around quite well. > > As well as you can hear them without earphones? > > If yes, please explain the mechanism; new developments in the > physiological underpinnings of perception would be most interesting. > > If no, why do you defend impairing the awareness of cyclists? I put earphones in a continuum of "impairing awareness." As examples: There are times I'll ride to work, and think about work's problems, instead of concentrating 100% on the road. That must reduce my awareness somewhat. When I ride, I sometimes (gasp!) look at the scenery. Yes, even when riding downtown. That means I actually take my eyes off the pavement in front of me. When I ride with friends, occasionally we talk. That's surely a distraction. I like to whistle. I'm well-known among my friends for whistling as I ride. Since that involves music, it's a special hazard. Sometimes when I whistle, they actually listen. More musical hazard. When my daughter was young and we rode the tandem together, we would sometimes sing. Surely, that's a worse musical hazard. And remembering lyrics can sometimes be a real distraction! I sometimes ride into headwinds. The wind noise has, on occasion, completely masked the sound of a passing car. Worse yet, I'm sure. Finally, I promise that, in the unlikely event I ever go deaf, I will continue to cycle. I already know that no law prevents it. For now, I'll leave aside the issue of listening to music, whistling and even singing while driving a car - except to point out that few object to any of those. Now where does cycling to quiet music played through earbuds fit in that spectrum? Read http://www.bikexprt.com/bicycle/hearing.htm before responding. - Frank Krygowski         Date: 23 Feb 2007 22:39:26 From: fred Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons Roger Zoul wrote: > jtaylor@NOSPAM.hfx.andara.com wrote: > :: On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 09:41:47 -0500, "Roger Zoul" > :: <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com> wrote: > :: > ::: Kristian M Zoerhoff wrote: > ::::: 1. Yesterday afternoon, I'm riding along, when I spot 5 teenagers > ::::: walking along the other side of the road approaching me. > ::::: > ::::: "Hey, A**hole!" > ::::: > ::::: What the? I've no idea what prompted this. I should have ignored > ::::: it, but was in a foul mood, so I pulled a Baka and confronted > ::::: them, resulting in them backing down; no firearms, thankfully. > ::::: > ::::: > ::::: 2. Today, riding down to my father-in-law's, I see a wrong-way > ::::: rider coming at me, so I point across the road and shout "Other > ::::: side." He shakes his head, and I repeat (yes, I hate wrong-way > ::::: riding). He shakes it again, and forces me out into 45 mph > ::::: traffic to go around him. He's got an iPod glued into both ears. > ::::: OK, so maybe that just makes him a typical teenager, but it > ::::: annoys me (too many iPod-addled joggers around here). > ::: > ::: Who is the moron here? You actually expected to educate a WWR > ::: while riding down the street, by shouting "Other side"? > ::: > ::: What does his having an iPod have to do with anything? > ::: > :: > :: Isn't it obvious? > :: > :: Only a moron would cycle with headphones. > > (1) Headphones and earbuds are two different things > (2) one cannot depend on hearing while cycling > (3) only a moron wouldn't understand (1) & (2) > > I agree that you cannot depend on hearing while cycling. However: 1. If you cannot hear while cycling, you won't be able to hear the iPod unless you crank the volume to levels damaging to your hearing 2. Why go the extra step and ensure that you cannot hear while cycling?           Date: 24 Feb 2007 15:04:52 From: Roger Zoul Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons fred wrote: :: Roger Zoul wrote: ::: jtaylor@NOSPAM.hfx.andara.com wrote: ::::: On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 09:41:47 -0500, "Roger Zoul" ::::: <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com > wrote: ::::: :::::: Kristian M Zoerhoff wrote: :::::::: 1. Yesterday afternoon, I'm riding along, when I spot 5 :::::::: teenagers walking along the other side of the road approaching :::::::: me. :::::::: :::::::: "Hey, A**hole!" :::::::: :::::::: What the? I've no idea what prompted this. I should have :::::::: ignored it, but was in a foul mood, so I pulled a Baka and :::::::: confronted them, resulting in them backing down; no firearms, :::::::: thankfully. :::::::: :::::::: :::::::: 2. Today, riding down to my father-in-law's, I see a wrong-way :::::::: rider coming at me, so I point across the road and shout "Other :::::::: side." He shakes his head, and I repeat (yes, I hate wrong-way :::::::: riding). He shakes it again, and forces me out into 45 mph :::::::: traffic to go around him. He's got an iPod glued into both :::::::: ears. OK, so maybe that just makes him a typical teenager, but :::::::: it annoys me (too many iPod-addled joggers around here). :::::: :::::: Who is the moron here? You actually expected to educate a WWR :::::: while riding down the street, by shouting "Other side"? :::::: :::::: What does his having an iPod have to do with anything? :::::: ::::: ::::: Isn't it obvious? ::::: ::::: Only a moron would cycle with headphones. ::: ::: (1) Headphones and earbuds are two different things ::: (2) one cannot depend on hearing while cycling ::: (3) only a moron wouldn't understand (1) & (2) ::: ::: :: I agree that you cannot depend on hearing while cycling. However: :: 1. If you cannot hear while cycling, you won't be able to hear the :: iPod unless you crank the volume to levels damaging to your hearing Silliness from someone who has no experience riding with buds. 1) I can hear while cycling except when there is wind noise. When there is wind noise, I can't hear. If I'm wearing my iPod, I can still hear while cycling, except when there is wind noise. When there is wind noise, I can't hear - including the music. :: 2. Why go the extra step and ensure that you cannot hear while :: cycling? ??           Date: 24 Feb 2007 14:48:34 From: Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 22:39:26 -0600, fred <fred@fred.com > wrote: >> (2) one cannot depend on hearing while cycling >> >I agree that you cannot depend on hearing while cycling. However: Piffle. Get your ears tested.             Date: 28 Feb 2007 12:44:52 From: gds Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On Feb 28, 1:09 pm, frkry...@gmail.com wrote: SNIP > The question is, how serious is the supposed decrease in safety? IMO, > quiet music in quiet surroundings imparts negligible danger. > > If you want something causing frequent "surprises" while riding, try > riding in a group. I've seen it cause people to miss traffic lights > turning red, to fail to notice cars approaching from behind or from > ahead (despite "Car Back" calls), to fail to notice potholes, other > riders, etc. I've seen bike-bike crashes that would never have > happened if the group size had been smaller - that is, three riders > instead of ten. > > I think the distraction caused by a group ride is far greater than the > distraction of a solo rider caused by quiet music. But would you > recommend never riding in a group - that is, outlawing bike clubs, > group training rides and invitational rides? > > - Frank Krygowski- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - I wouldn't outlaw anything. And I have witnessed what you say in groups. That said I find that when I'm in a group my attention is pretty focused. In a fast group doing a serious training ride my attention is total. In such cases I don't look at the computer (no need as you know the binary situation, you are either with the group or dropped). And even with that multiple bike crashes are much more common in such a situation than in most others. But don't think this is caused so much by inattentions as it is by such factors as riding at threshold for long periods and the inability to maneuver around obstacles in a tightly bunched pack. Back to the original discussion: I'm not for outlawing music while riding and I tend to agree with you that there are situations where listening to music at a low level probably doesn't add more than a neglible amount of risk. My argument is with those who state that hearing is pretty much irrelevant and that "they" can ride safely while liestening in all (or most) situations.             Date: 28 Feb 2007 12:09:14 From: Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On Feb 28, 12:14 pm, "gds" <gary_j...@msn.com > wrote: > On Feb 27, 10:55 pm, frkry...@gmail.com wrote: > > SNIP > > > Is listening to quiet music worse than those? From my (admittedly > > small) experience doing so, I very much doubt it. And I'm certainly > > not prepared to say we shouldn't allow "ANY" distraction while > > riding. > > > So, while I don't particularly recommend riding with earbuds, I'm not > > prepared to call it extremely dangerous, or evidence of idiocy, or any > > of the other extreme condemnations I read here. > > > I'd recommend saving the tunes for calm surroundings, and keeping the > > volume down. People should be reasonably careful. And reasonably > > tolerant. > > > - Frank Krygowski > > I agree that we all do a number of things while riding that diminish > attentiveness to our surroundings. I also agree that it is not a > particulary helpfull form of argument to call folks names. > > As to your last recommendation I can only say that in my experience > "calm surroundings" have yielded some of the biggest "surprises" in my > cycling. I know that while riding in heavy traffic or in a fast pack I > tend to be extremely attentive. Glancing at my computer, talking, and > reaching for a bottle is pretty much at a minimum. > However, there have been times when riding solo on a country road > where attention to surroundings seems to wander. On some of these > occasioons I have been very much "surprised" by an overtaking vehicle. > I can only think that a further distraction would make things worse > not better. But by the same token, looking at the scenery, talking with a friend, drinking from a water bottle, all could be equally distracting when riding on a quiet country road. The question is, how serious is the supposed decrease in safety? IMO, quiet music in quiet surroundings imparts negligible danger. If you want something causing frequent "surprises" while riding, try riding in a group. I've seen it cause people to miss traffic lights turning red, to fail to notice cars approaching from behind or from ahead (despite "Car Back" calls), to fail to notice potholes, other riders, etc. I've seen bike-bike crashes that would never have happened if the group size had been smaller - that is, three riders instead of ten. I think the distraction caused by a group ride is far greater than the distraction of a solo rider caused by quiet music. But would you recommend never riding in a group - that is, outlawing bike clubs, group training rides and invitational rides? - Frank Krygowski             Date: 28 Feb 2007 09:14:08 From: gds Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On Feb 27, 10:55 pm, frkry...@gmail.com wrote: > SNIP > Is listening to quiet music worse than those? From my (admittedly > small) experience doing so, I very much doubt it. And I'm certainly > not prepared to say we shouldn't allow "ANY" distraction while > riding. > > So, while I don't particularly recommend riding with earbuds, I'm not > prepared to call it extremely dangerous, or evidence of idiocy, or any > of the other extreme condemnations I read here. > > I'd recommend saving the tunes for calm surroundings, and keeping the > volume down. People should be reasonably careful. And reasonably > tolerant. > > - Frank Krygowski I agree that we all do a number of things while riding that diminish attentiveness to our surroundings. I also agree that it is not a particulary helpfull form of argument to call folks names. As to your last recommendation I can only say that in my experience "calm surroundings" have yielded some of the biggest "surprises" in my cycling. I know that while riding in heavy traffic or in a fast pack I tend to be extremely attentive. Glancing at my computer, talking, and reaching for a bottle is pretty much at a minimum. However, there have been times when riding solo on a country road where attention to surroundings seems to wander. On some of these occasioons I have been very much "surprised" by an overtaking vehicle. I can only think that a further distraction would make things worse not better.             Date: 27 Feb 2007 21:55:22 From: Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On Feb 27, 8:35 pm, k Hickey <m...@habcycles.com > wrote: > frkry...@gmail.com wrote: > > > >You can't trust your ears. You've got to use your eyes. And > >consequently, I think quiet use of earbuds is unlikely to have much > >safety consequence. > > I respect your opinion, but think it's flat wrong. I maintain that > choosing to deny yourself ANY input about your surroundings while > riding increases your chance of an incident. As I said, it's a continuum. I suppose denying ANY input increases your chance of an incident somewhat, but certainly some of those increases are negligible. We readily accept some distractions. My guess is that you drink from your water bottle while riding. Or look at your cyclometer. Or occasionally glance down to remind yourself what rear cog you're on - in addition to the things I listed upthread, like looking at scenery, talking to friends, or even singing. Is listening to quiet music worse than those? From my (admittedly small) experience doing so, I very much doubt it. And I'm certainly not prepared to say we shouldn't allow "ANY" distraction while riding. So, while I don't particularly recommend riding with earbuds, I'm not prepared to call it extremely dangerous, or evidence of idiocy, or any of the other extreme condemnations I read here. I'd recommend saving the tunes for calm surroundings, and keeping the volume down. People should be reasonably careful. And reasonably tolerant. - Frank Krygowski             Date: 24 Feb 2007 09:29:36 From: Mark Hickey Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons jtaylor@NOSPAM.hfx.andara.com wrote: >On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 22:39:26 -0600, fred <fred@fred.com> wrote: > >>> (2) one cannot depend on hearing while cycling > >>I agree that you cannot depend on hearing while cycling. However: > >Piffle. > >Get your ears tested. My thoughts exactly. I constantly "depend on my hearing" when cycling. I listen for change in the sound of a car coming up behind me (indicating they might be planning a turn), and can reasonably tell when a car is likely to be passing close to me before it gets there. I also listen for the sound of a parked car starting or shifting into gear (or the sound of the front tires turning on the pavement). I listen for the clinking of dog tags or kids behind the parked cars. I even listen for the sound of another bike on my tail. You can't rely ONLY on your hearing, obviously - but it's ludicrous to think that there's no down side to eliminating one source of input about your surroundings without taking unnecessary risks. k Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.habcycles.com Home of the $795 ti frame               Date: 24 Feb 2007 15:07:09 From: Roger Zoul Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons k Hickey wrote: :: jtaylor@NOSPAM.hfx.andara.com wrote: :: ::: On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 22:39:26 -0600, fred <fred@fred.com > wrote: ::: ::::: (2) one cannot depend on hearing while cycling ::: :::: I agree that you cannot depend on hearing while cycling. However: ::: ::: Piffle. ::: ::: Get your ears tested. :: :: My thoughts exactly. I constantly "depend on my hearing" when :: cycling. I listen for change in the sound of a car coming up behind :: me (indicating they might be planning a turn), and can reasonably :: tell when a car is likely to be passing close to me before it gets :: there. I also listen for the sound of a parked car starting or :: shifting into gear (or the sound of the front tires turning on the :: pavement). I listen for the clinking of dog tags or kids behind the :: parked cars. I even listen for the sound of another bike on my tail. :: :: You can't rely ONLY on your hearing, obviously - but it's ludicrous :: to think that there's no down side to eliminating one source of input :: about your surroundings without taking unnecessary risks. :: Again, you're making assumptions that don't have to exist. Who is eliminating one source of input? I don't know why I bother trying to educate people who are so closed minded.                 Date: 25 Feb 2007 08:22:10 From: Mark Hickey Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons "Roger Zoul" <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com > wrote: >k Hickey wrote: >:: jtaylor@NOSPAM.hfx.andara.com wrote: >::: On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 22:39:26 -0600, fred <fred@fred.com> wrote: >::: >::::: (2) one cannot depend on hearing while cycling >::: >:::: I agree that you cannot depend on hearing while cycling. However: >::: >::: Piffle. >::: >::: Get your ears tested. >:: >:: My thoughts exactly. I constantly "depend on my hearing" when >:: cycling. I listen for change in the sound of a car coming up behind >:: me (indicating they might be planning a turn), and can reasonably >:: tell when a car is likely to be passing close to me before it gets >:: there. I also listen for the sound of a parked car starting or >:: shifting into gear (or the sound of the front tires turning on the >:: pavement). I listen for the clinking of dog tags or kids behind the >:: parked cars. I even listen for the sound of another bike on my tail. >:: >:: You can't rely ONLY on your hearing, obviously - but it's ludicrous >:: to think that there's no down side to eliminating one source of input >:: about your surroundings without taking unnecessary risks. > >Again, you're making assumptions that don't have to exist. Who is >eliminating one source of input? Perhaps you feel you can hear input from your surroundings as well wearing earbuds with music playing. That would certainly make you a statistical oddity. I know I can't (nor can I imagine anyone else who could claim they can). >I don't know why I bother trying to educate people who are so closed minded. Show some reasonable data that shows that listening to music through earbuds does NOT affect your ability to hear what's going on around you, and we can discuss "education". k Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.habcycles.com Home of the $795 ti frame                   Date: 25 Feb 2007 11:22:11 From: Roger Zoul Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons k Hickey wrote: :: "Roger Zoul" <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com > wrote: :: ::: k Hickey wrote: ::::: jtaylor@NOSPAM.hfx.andara.com wrote: :::::: On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 22:39:26 -0600, fred <fred@fred.com > wrote: :::::: :::::::: (2) one cannot depend on hearing while cycling :::::: ::::::: I agree that you cannot depend on hearing while cycling. ::::::: However: :::::: :::::: Piffle. :::::: :::::: Get your ears tested. ::::: ::::: My thoughts exactly. I constantly "depend on my hearing" when ::::: cycling. I listen for change in the sound of a car coming up ::::: behind me (indicating they might be planning a turn), and can ::::: reasonably tell when a car is likely to be passing close to me ::::: before it gets there. I also listen for the sound of a parked car ::::: starting or shifting into gear (or the sound of the front tires ::::: turning on the pavement). I listen for the clinking of dog tags ::::: or kids behind the parked cars. I even listen for the sound of ::::: another bike on my tail. ::::: ::::: You can't rely ONLY on your hearing, obviously - but it's ::::: ludicrous to think that there's no down side to eliminating one ::::: source of input about your surroundings without taking ::::: unnecessary risks. ::: ::: Again, you're making assumptions that don't have to exist. Who is ::: eliminating one source of input? :: :: Perhaps you feel you can hear input from your surroundings as well :: wearing earbuds with music playing. What do you mean I feel? I know I can. Plain and simple. My question is, what makes you assume this can't be done? Perhaps you aren't considering all of the parameters that affect ones ability to hear input from surrounding while wearing earbuds with music playing? Perhaps you're simply making blanket statements that have no bearing on what happens in real life, based on your own notions. :: That would certainly make you a :: statistical oddity. I know I can't (nor can I imagine anyone else :: who could claim they can). Obviously, you don't know what makes a statistical oddity. :: ::: I don't know why I bother trying to educate people who are so ::: closed minded. :: :: Show some reasonable data that shows that listening to music through :: earbuds does NOT affect your ability to hear what's going on around :: you, and we can discuss "education". Why should I do this? Why don't you show some reasonable data that shows that thinking, or looking ahead, or the wind blowing, or old age, or poor hearing doesn't affect your ability to hear what's going on around you? What about traffic? Can the noise from traffic itself affect your ability to hear the car rushing up from behind to kill you?                     Date: 25 Feb 2007 19:54:32 From: Patrick Lamb Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On Sun, 25 Feb 2007 11:22:11 -0500, "Roger Zoul" <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com > wrote: >k Hickey wrote: >:: That would certainly make you a >:: statistical oddity. I know I can't (nor can I imagine anyone else >:: who could claim they can). > >Obviously, you don't know what makes a statistical oddity. Well, one cause for a statistical oddity would be including a point that should not have been included in a sample. For example, putting a person into the category of "situationally aware" when they're experiencing sensory deprivation. Email address works as is.                       Date: 25 Feb 2007 21:26:52 From: Roger Zoul Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons Patrick Lamb wrote: :: On Sun, 25 Feb 2007 11:22:11 -0500, "Roger Zoul" :: <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com > wrote: ::: k Hickey wrote: ::::: That would certainly make you a ::::: statistical oddity. I know I can't (nor can I imagine anyone else ::::: who could claim they can). ::: ::: Obviously, you don't know what makes a statistical oddity. :: :: Well, one cause for a statistical oddity would be including a point :: that should not have been included in a sample. For example, putting :: a person into the category of "situationally aware" when they're :: experiencing sensory deprivation. Do you have any practical means to demonstrate lack of situational awareness due to what you consider to be sensory deprivation? Do two people riding along together have the same situational awareness when neither is experiencing sensory deprivation?                     Date: 25 Feb 2007 15:31:00 From: Mark Hickey Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons "Roger Zoul" <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com > wrote: >k Hickey wrote: >:: Perhaps you feel you can hear input from your surroundings as well >:: wearing earbuds with music playing. > >What do you mean I feel? I know I can. Plain and simple. Fine. Then wear your earbuds, crank it up and "have fun". I just hope I don't get to say 'told ya' so'. >:: That would certainly make you a >:: statistical oddity. I know I can't (nor can I imagine anyone else >:: who could claim they can). > >Obviously, you don't know what makes a statistical oddity. Oh, I'm sure that there are LOTS of people who can stick things in their ear canals and add music to the mix without affecting their ability to hear background noise... as sure as I am that there really ARE flying pigs, that is. >:: Show some reasonable data that shows that listening to music through >:: earbuds does NOT affect your ability to hear what's going on around >:: you, and we can discuss "education". > >Why should I do this? Why don't you show some reasonable data that shows >that thinking, or looking ahead, or the wind blowing, or old age, or poor >hearing doesn't affect your ability to hear what's going on around you? What >about traffic? Can the noise from traffic itself affect your ability to >hear the car rushing up from behind to kill you? And rain on my glasses affects my ability to see so why don't I just ride with my eyes closed? Sigh - this is getting tiresome. Do what you want, and I wish you the best of luck in doing so. Hope you don't learn the hard way that you're flat wrong. k Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.habcycles.com Home of the $795 ti frame                       Date: 25 Feb 2007 20:58:26 From: Roger Zoul Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons k Hickey wrote: :: "Roger Zoul" <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com > wrote: :: ::: k Hickey wrote: :: ::::: Perhaps you feel you can hear input from your surroundings as well ::::: wearing earbuds with music playing. ::: ::: What do you mean I feel? I know I can. Plain and simple. :: :: Fine. Then wear your earbuds, crank it up and "have fun". I just :: hope I don't get to say 'told ya' so'. Why you do wish harm on me? I don't crank it up now? It seems you're clueless about riding with buds and are just spewing BS. :: ::::: That would certainly make you a ::::: statistical oddity. I know I can't (nor can I imagine anyone else ::::: who could claim they can). ::: ::: Obviously, you don't know what makes a statistical oddity. :: :: Oh, I'm sure that there are LOTS of people who can stick things in :: their ear canals and add music to the mix without affecting their :: ability to hear background noise... as sure as I am that there really :: ARE flying pigs, that is. I can wear buds are low volume and hear plenty. Perhaps your hearing is shot.... :: ::::: Show some reasonable data that shows that listening to music ::::: through earbuds does NOT affect your ability to hear what's going ::::: on around you, and we can discuss "education". ::: ::: Why should I do this? Why don't you show some reasonable data that ::: shows that thinking, or looking ahead, or the wind blowing, or old ::: age, or poor hearing doesn't affect your ability to hear what's ::: going on around you? What about traffic? Can the noise from ::: traffic itself affect your ability to hear the car rushing up from ::: behind to kill you? :: :: And rain on my glasses affects my ability to see so why don't I just :: ride with my eyes closed? Why don't you? :: :: Sigh - this is getting tiresome. Do what you want, and I wish you :: the best of luck in doing so. Hope you don't learn the hard way that :: you're flat wrong. I don't think I'm wrong at all and I have plenty of experience doing so. What make you think your experience is better than mine? Your logic sure isn't. :: :: k Hickey :: Habanero Cycles :: http://www.habcycles.com :: Home of the $795 ti frame                         Date: 25 Feb 2007 18:30:41 From: GaryG Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons "Roger Zoul" <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com > wrote in message news:12u4fm4jedkeq81@news.supernews.com... > k Hickey wrote: > :: "Roger Zoul" <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com> wrote: > :: > ::: k Hickey wrote: > :: > ::::: Perhaps you feel you can hear input from your surroundings as well > ::::: wearing earbuds with music playing. > ::: > ::: What do you mean I feel? I know I can. Plain and simple. > :: > :: Fine. Then wear your earbuds, crank it up and "have fun". I just > :: hope I don't get to say 'told ya' so'. > > Why you do wish harm on me? I don't crank it up now? It seems you're > clueless about riding with buds and are just spewing BS. > > :: > ::::: That would certainly make you a > ::::: statistical oddity. I know I can't (nor can I imagine anyone else > ::::: who could claim they can). > ::: > ::: Obviously, you don't know what makes a statistical oddity. > :: > :: Oh, I'm sure that there are LOTS of people who can stick things in > :: their ear canals and add music to the mix without affecting their > :: ability to hear background noise... as sure as I am that there really > :: ARE flying pigs, that is. > > I can wear buds are low volume and hear plenty. Perhaps your hearing is > shot.... > > :: > ::::: Show some reasonable data that shows that listening to music > ::::: through earbuds does NOT affect your ability to hear what's going > ::::: on around you, and we can discuss "education". > ::: > ::: Why should I do this? Why don't you show some reasonable data that > ::: shows that thinking, or looking ahead, or the wind blowing, or old > ::: age, or poor hearing doesn't affect your ability to hear what's > ::: going on around you? What about traffic? Can the noise from > ::: traffic itself affect your ability to hear the car rushing up from > ::: behind to kill you? > :: > :: And rain on my glasses affects my ability to see so why don't I just > :: ride with my eyes closed? > > Why don't you? > > :: > :: Sigh - this is getting tiresome. Do what you want, and I wish you > :: the best of luck in doing so. Hope you don't learn the hard way that > :: you're flat wrong. > > I don't think I'm wrong at all and I have plenty of experience doing so. > What make you think your experience is better than mine? Your logic sure > isn't. The fact that many experts recommend against the use of headphones/earbuds while cycling, and the fact that they are illegal per many state laws, lends more credence to the argument against their use than your assertions of "experience". GG > > :: > :: k Hickey > :: Habanero Cycles > :: http://www.habcycles.com > :: Home of the $795 ti frame > >                           Date: 26 Feb 2007 04:55:57 From: nash Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons > The fact that many experts recommend against the use of headphones/earbuds > while cycling, and the fact that they are illegal per many state laws, > lends > more credence to the argument against their use than your assertions of > "experience". > > GG Oh yeah, and throw that in with no legal abortions. All laws are serving who you might ask. do not even get me started on that slam dunk.                             Date: 26 Feb 2007 07:37:24 From: Roger Zoul Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons ::: The fact that many experts recommend against the use of ::: headphones/earbuds while cycling, Which experts and what studies do they use? :: and the fact that they are ::: illegal per many state laws, There are lots of laws on books that are there for poor reasons. lends ::: more credence to the argument against their use than your ::: assertions of "experience". Perhaps. But that doesn't change the fact that one can wear buds with soft music playing and hear sounds around quite well. And it doesn't change the fact that mere wind noise can eliminate the cyclist ability to hear anything around.                               Date: 26 Feb 2007 12:53:30 From: Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 07:37:24 -0500, "Roger Zoul" <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com > wrote: > >::: The fact that many experts recommend against the use of >::: headphones/earbuds while cycling, >Perhaps. But that doesn't change the fact that one can wear buds with soft >music playing and hear sounds around quite well. As well as you can hear them without earphones? If yes, please explain the mechanism; new developments in the physiological underpinnings of perception would be most interesting. If no, why do you defend impairing the awareness of cyclists?                                 Date: 26 Feb 2007 08:56:08 From: Roger Zoul Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons jtaylor@NOSPAM.hfx.andara.com wrote: :: On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 07:37:24 -0500, "Roger Zoul" :: <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com > wrote: :: ::: :::::: The fact that many experts recommend against the use of :::::: headphones/earbuds while cycling, :: ::: Perhaps. But that doesn't change the fact that one can wear buds ::: with soft music playing and hear sounds around quite well. :: :: As well as you can hear them without earphones? :: :: If yes, please explain the mechanism; new developments in the :: physiological underpinnings of perception would be most interesting. :: :: If no, why do you defend impairing the awareness of cyclists? Who is defending that? The awareness of cyclists is not something that can be quantified. Can you measure awareness?                                   Date: 26 Feb 2007 23:53:34 From: Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 08:56:08 -0500, "Roger Zoul" <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com > wrote: >jtaylor@NOSPAM.hfx.andara.com wrote: >:: On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 07:37:24 -0500, "Roger Zoul" >:: <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com> wrote: >:: >::: >:::::: The fact that many experts recommend against the use of >:::::: headphones/earbuds while cycling, >:: >::: Perhaps. But that doesn't change the fact that one can wear buds >::: with soft music playing and hear sounds around quite well. >:: >:: As well as you can hear them without earphones? >:: >:: If yes, please explain the mechanism; new developments in the >:: physiological underpinnings of perception would be most interesting. >:: >:: If no, why do you defend impairing the awareness of cyclists? > >Who is defending that? The awareness of cyclists is not something that can >be quantified. Wrong. >Can you measure awareness? > Yes.                                     Date: 26 Feb 2007 19:14:06 From: Roger Zoul Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons jtaylor@NOSPAM.hfx.andara.com wrote: :: On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 08:56:08 -0500, "Roger Zoul" :: <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com > wrote: :: ::: jtaylor@NOSPAM.hfx.andara.com wrote: ::::: On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 07:37:24 -0500, "Roger Zoul" ::::: <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com > wrote: ::::: :::::: ::::::::: The fact that many experts recommend against the use of ::::::::: headphones/earbuds while cycling, ::::: :::::: Perhaps. But that doesn't change the fact that one can wear buds :::::: with soft music playing and hear sounds around quite well. ::::: ::::: As well as you can hear them without earphones? ::::: ::::: If yes, please explain the mechanism; new developments in the ::::: physiological underpinnings of perception would be most ::::: interesting. ::::: ::::: If no, why do you defend impairing the awareness of cyclists? ::: ::: Who is defending that? The awareness of cyclists is not something ::: that can be quantified. :: :: Wrong. Proof. :: ::: Can you measure awareness? ::: :: :: Yes. Proof.                                       Date: 27 Feb 2007 01:05:31 From: Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 19:14:06 -0500, "Roger Zoul" <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com > wrote: >jtaylor@NOSPAM.hfx.andara.com wrote: >:: On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 08:56:08 -0500, "Roger Zoul" >:: <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com> wrote: >:: >::: jtaylor@NOSPAM.hfx.andara.com wrote: >::::: On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 07:37:24 -0500, "Roger Zoul" >::::: <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com> wrote: >::::: >:::::: >::::::::: The fact that many experts recommend against the use of >::::::::: headphones/earbuds while cycling, >::::: >:::::: Perhaps. But that doesn't change the fact that one can wear buds >:::::: with soft music playing and hear sounds around quite well. >::::: >::::: As well as you can hear them without earphones? >::::: >::::: If yes, please explain the mechanism; new developments in the >::::: physiological underpinnings of perception would be most >::::: interesting. >::::: >::::: If no, why do you defend impairing the awareness of cyclists? >::: >::: Who is defending that? The awareness of cyclists is not something >::: that can be quantified. >:: >:: Wrong. > >Proof. > >:: >::: Can you measure awareness? >::: >:: >:: Yes. > >Proof. > Here's an example: http://satechnologies.com/Papers/pdf/Bolstad%20(2000)%20HPSAA%20Conference.pdf (The use of probe techniques was referred to earlier in the thread - were you not aware of that? Perhaps you had your earphones on...)                                         Date: 27 Feb 2007 06:38:14 From: skiffrun Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons jtaylor@NOSPAM.hfx.andara.com;181318 Wrote: > On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 19:14:06 -0500, "Roger Zoul" > <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com> wrote: > [>[/color] > > Here's an example: > > http://tinyurl.com/22dv4k > > (The use of probe techniques was referred to earlier in the thread - > were you not aware of that? Perhaps you had your earphones on...) Useless study. 1st question of table 1: since the simulator has STOPPED the action, the only correct answer to "how fast are you going" is 0 mph. If they had asked "how fast were you going", then maybe there is a reason to look further. but if they cannot construct their questions correctly, the study has no data other than garbage. And I don't care if it agrees with my position or not. this looks to be typical psuedo-science, which is to say no science at all. -- skiffrun ------------------------------------------------------------------------ skiffrun's Profile: http://www.trianglecycling.com/member.php?userid=28 View this thread: http://www.trianglecycling.com/showthread.php?t=18205                                         Date: 26 Feb 2007 20:58:21 From: Roger Zoul Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons jtaylor@NOSPAM.hfx.andara.com wrote: :: On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 19:14:06 -0500, "Roger Zoul" :: <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com > wrote: :: ::: jtaylor@NOSPAM.hfx.andara.com wrote: ::::: On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 08:56:08 -0500, "Roger Zoul" ::::: <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com > wrote: ::::: :::::: jtaylor@NOSPAM.hfx.andara.com wrote: :::::::: On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 07:37:24 -0500, "Roger Zoul" :::::::: <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com > wrote: :::::::: ::::::::: :::::::::::: The fact that many experts recommend against the use of :::::::::::: headphones/earbuds while cycling, :::::::: ::::::::: Perhaps. But that doesn't change the fact that one can wear ::::::::: buds with soft music playing and hear sounds around quite ::::::::: well. :::::::: :::::::: As well as you can hear them without earphones? :::::::: :::::::: If yes, please explain the mechanism; new developments in the :::::::: physiological underpinnings of perception would be most :::::::: interesting. :::::::: :::::::: If no, why do you defend impairing the awareness of cyclists? :::::: :::::: Who is defending that? The awareness of cyclists is not something :::::: that can be quantified. ::::: ::::: Wrong. ::: ::: Proof. ::: ::::: :::::: Can you measure awareness? :::::: ::::: ::::: Yes. ::: ::: Proof. ::: :: :: Here's an example: :: :: http://satechnologies.com/Papers/pdf/Bolstad%20(2000)%20HPSAA%20Conference.pdf :: :: (The use of probe techniques was referred to earlier in the thread - :: were you not aware of that? Yes, I read that...however, since all you did was mention it in passing, it held no revelance. :: Perhaps you had your earphones on...) So, this is simply a conference paper which probably hasn't even been closely peer reviewed. And the so-called "probing technique" is based on memory, which definitely puts older people at a disadvantage. It also has little to say about what is preceived while actually driving, as the testing is done after the driving simulation has stopped. Moreover, it doesn't seem to even stress hearing as important. I think older people are also more than likely to be put off by using a driving simulator than younger people, who are more familiar with video game hardware. Also, according to this, merely being young or old is more likely to affect your "situational awareness" than anything else. So, obviously, if you're old and your hearing is shot, you don't lose much by listening to music while riding. In short, I'm willing to debate whether or not this really is any indication of situational awareness. And if so, it's indirect. And it gives us no clue as to how someone listening to soft music & using a mirror while riding as his/her situational awareness affected - in the moment. And what happens when you put the same rider in busy traffic vs no traffic vs when you put the rider out there on a very windy day. Hearing is the first thing to go under the conditions of busy traffic and/or wind. If someone really wants to measure situational awareness, then it really must be done "in the moment" rather than through an artificial assessment based on memory - a test taken after the fact. People learn to react instinctively and don't bother remembering details about the environment. They certainly don't attempt to put numbers or times on objects in front of them...they simply make a quick judgment or threat assessment and then act based on that. Hence, I question the usefulness of the queries given in this study. So yeah, they call this situational awareness, but it's not anything at all related to what we all seem to mean in here when we discuss being aware of your surroundings in order to avoid getting creamed while riding.                                           Date: 27 Feb 2007 09:21:09 From: Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 20:58:21 -0500, "Roger Zoul" <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com > wrote: >jtaylor@NOSPAM.hfx.andara.com wrote: >:: On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 19:14:06 -0500, "Roger Zoul" >:: <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com> wrote: >:: >::: jtaylor@NOSPAM.hfx.andara.com wrote: >::::: On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 08:56:08 -0500, "Roger Zoul" >::::: <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com> wrote: >::::: >:::::: jtaylor@NOSPAM.hfx.andara.com wrote: >:::::::: On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 07:37:24 -0500, "Roger Zoul" >:::::::: <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com> wrote: >:::::::: >::::::::: >:::::::::::: The fact that many experts recommend against the use of >:::::::::::: headphones/earbuds while cycling, >:::::::: >::::::::: Perhaps. But that doesn't change the fact that one can wear >::::::::: buds with soft music playing and hear sounds around quite >::::::::: well. >:::::::: >:::::::: As well as you can hear them without earphones? >:::::::: >:::::::: If yes, please explain the mechanism; new developments in the >:::::::: physiological underpinnings of perception would be most >:::::::: interesting. >:::::::: >:::::::: If no, why do you defend impairing the awareness of cyclists? >:::::: >:::::: Who is defending that? The awareness of cyclists is not something >:::::: that can be quantified. >::::: >::::: Wrong. >::: >::: Proof. >::: >::::: >:::::: Can you measure awareness? >:::::: >::::: >::::: Yes. >::: >::: Proof. >::: >:: >:: Here's an example: >:: >:: >http://satechnologies.com/Papers/pdf/Bolstad%20(2000)%20HPSAA%20Conference.pdf >:: >:: (The use of probe techniques was referred to earlier in the thread - >:: were you not aware of that? > >Yes, I read that...however, since all you did was mention it in passing, it >held no revelance. > >:: Perhaps you had your earphones on...) > > >So, this is simply a conference paper which probably hasn't even been >closely peer reviewed. And the so-called "probing technique" is based on >memory, which definitely puts older people at a disadvantage. It also has >little to say about what is preceived while actually driving, as the testing >is done after the driving simulation has stopped. Moreover, it doesn't seem >to even stress hearing as important. I think older people are also more >than likely to be put off by using a driving simulator than younger people, >who are more familiar with video game hardware. Also, according to this, >merely being young or old is more likely to affect your "situational >awareness" than anything else. So, obviously, if you're old and your hearing >is shot, you don't lose much by listening to music while riding. > >In short, I'm willing to debate whether or not this really is any indication >of situational awareness. And if so, it's indirect. And it gives us no clue >as to how someone listening to soft music & using a mirror while riding as >his/her situational awareness affected - in the moment. And what happens >when you put the same rider in busy traffic vs no traffic vs when you put >the rider out there on a very windy day. Hearing is the first thing to go >under the conditions of busy traffic and/or wind. > >If someone really wants to measure situational awareness, then it really >must be done "in the moment" rather than through an artificial assessment >based on memory - a test taken after the fact. People learn to react >instinctively and don't bother remembering details about the environment. >They certainly don't attempt to put numbers or times on objects in front of >them...they simply make a quick judgment or threat assessment and then act >based on that. Hence, I question the usefulness of the queries given in >this study. > >So yeah, they call this situational awareness, but it's not anything at all >related to what we all seem to mean in here when we discuss being aware of >your surroundings in order to avoid getting creamed while riding. > Piffle. Did you even read the study?                                             Date: 27 Feb 2007 05:41:25 From: Roger Zoul Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons jtaylor@NOSPAM.hfx.andara.com wrote: :: On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 20:58:21 -0500, "Roger Zoul" :: <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com > wrote: :: ::: jtaylor@NOSPAM.hfx.andara.com wrote: ::::: On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 19:14:06 -0500, "Roger Zoul" ::::: <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com > wrote: ::::: :::::: jtaylor@NOSPAM.hfx.andara.com wrote: :::::::: On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 08:56:08 -0500, "Roger Zoul" :::::::: <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com > wrote: :::::::: ::::::::: jtaylor@NOSPAM.hfx.andara.com wrote: ::::::::::: On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 07:37:24 -0500, "Roger Zoul" ::::::::::: <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com > wrote: ::::::::::: :::::::::::: ::::::::::::::: The fact that many experts recommend against the use of ::::::::::::::: headphones/earbuds while cycling, ::::::::::: :::::::::::: Perhaps. But that doesn't change the fact that one can wear :::::::::::: buds with soft music playing and hear sounds around quite :::::::::::: well. ::::::::::: ::::::::::: As well as you can hear them without earphones? ::::::::::: ::::::::::: If yes, please explain the mechanism; new developments in ::::::::::: the physiological underpinnings of perception would be most ::::::::::: interesting. ::::::::::: ::::::::::: If no, why do you defend impairing the awareness of ::::::::::: cyclists? ::::::::: ::::::::: Who is defending that? The awareness of cyclists is not ::::::::: something that can be quantified. :::::::: :::::::: Wrong. :::::: :::::: Proof. :::::: :::::::: ::::::::: Can you measure awareness? ::::::::: :::::::: :::::::: Yes. :::::: :::::: Proof. :::::: ::::: ::::: Here's an example: ::::: ::::: ::: http://satechnologies.com/Papers/pdf/Bolstad%20(2000)%20HPSAA%20Conference.pdf ::::: ::::: (The use of probe techniques was referred to earlier in the ::::: thread - were you not aware of that? ::: ::: Yes, I read that...however, since all you did was mention it in ::: passing, it held no revelance. ::: ::::: Perhaps you had your earphones on...) ::: ::: ::: So, this is simply a conference paper which probably hasn't even ::: been closely peer reviewed. And the so-called "probing technique" ::: is based on memory, which definitely puts older people at a ::: disadvantage. It also has little to say about what is preceived ::: while actually driving, as the testing is done after the driving ::: simulation has stopped. Moreover, it doesn't seem to even stress ::: hearing as important. I think older people are also more than ::: likely to be put off by using a driving simulator than younger ::: people, who are more familiar with video game hardware. Also, ::: according to this, merely being young or old is more likely to ::: affect your "situational awareness" than anything else. So, ::: obviously, if you're old and your hearing is shot, you don't lose ::: much by listening to music while riding. ::: ::: In short, I'm willing to debate whether or not this really is any ::: indication of situational awareness. And if so, it's indirect. And ::: it gives us no clue as to how someone listening to soft music & ::: using a mirror while riding as his/her situational awareness ::: affected - in the moment. And what happens when you put the same ::: rider in busy traffic vs no traffic vs when you put the rider out ::: there on a very windy day. Hearing is the first thing to go under ::: the conditions of busy traffic and/or wind. ::: ::: If someone really wants to measure situational awareness, then it ::: really must be done "in the moment" rather than through an ::: artificial assessment based on memory - a test taken after the ::: fact. People learn to react instinctively and don't bother ::: remembering details about the environment. They certainly don't ::: attempt to put numbers or times on objects in front of them...they ::: simply make a quick judgment or threat assessment and then act ::: based on that. Hence, I question the usefulness of the queries ::: given in this study. ::: ::: So yeah, they call this situational awareness, but it's not ::: anything at all related to what we all seem to mean in here when we ::: discuss being aware of your surroundings in order to avoid getting ::: creamed while riding. ::: :: :: Piffle. :: :: Did you even read the study? Yes, dumbass. Did you?                                               Date: 27 Feb 2007 14:02:41 From: Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 05:41:25 -0500, "Roger Zoul" <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com > wrote: >::::::::: >::::::::: Who is defending that? The awareness of cyclists is not >::::::::: something that can be quantified. >:::::::: >:::::::: Wrong. >:::::: >:::::: Proof. >:::::: >:::::::: >::::::::: Can you measure awareness? >::::::::: >:::::::: >:::::::: Yes. >:::::: >:::::: Proof. >:::::: >::::: >::::: Here's an example: >::::: >::::: >::: >http://satechnologies.com/Papers/pdf/Bolstad%20(2000)%20HPSAA%20Conference.pdf >::::: >::::: (The use of probe techniques was referred to earlier in the >::::: thread - were you not aware of that? >::: >::: Yes, I read that...however, since all you did was mention it in >::: passing, it held no revelance. >::: >::::: Perhaps you had your earphones on...) >::: >::: >::: So, this is simply a conference paper which probably hasn't even >::: been closely peer reviewed. And the so-called "probing technique" >::: is based on memory, which definitely puts older people at a >::: disadvantage. It also has little to say about what is preceived >::: while actually driving, as the testing is done after the driving >::: simulation has stopped. Moreover, it doesn't seem to even stress >::: hearing as important. I think older people are also more than >::: likely to be put off by using a driving simulator than younger >::: people, who are more familiar with video game hardware. Also, >::: according to this, merely being young or old is more likely to >::: affect your "situational awareness" than anything else. So, >::: obviously, if you're old and your hearing is shot, you don't lose >::: much by listening to music while riding. >::: >::: In short, I'm willing to debate whether or not this really is any >::: indication of situational awareness. And if so, it's indirect. And >::: it gives us no clue as to how someone listening to soft music & >::: using a mirror while riding as his/her situational awareness >::: affected - in the moment. And what happens when you put the same >::: rider in busy traffic vs no traffic vs when you put the rider out >::: there on a very windy day. Hearing is the first thing to go under >::: the conditions of busy traffic and/or wind. >::: >::: If someone really wants to measure situational awareness, then it >::: really must be done "in the moment" rather than through an >::: artificial assessment based on memory - a test taken after the >::: fact. People learn to react instinctively and don't bother >::: remembering details about the environment. They certainly don't >::: attempt to put numbers or times on objects in front of them...they >::: simply make a quick judgment or threat assessment and then act >::: based on that. Hence, I question the usefulness of the queries >::: given in this study. >::: >::: So yeah, they call this situational awareness, but it's not >::: anything at all related to what we all seem to mean in here when we >::: discuss being aware of your surroundings in order to avoid getting >::: creamed while riding. >::: >:: >:: Piffle. >:: >:: Did you even read the study? > >Yes, dumbass. Did you? > Then you will have noticed that they were using techniques for measuring situational awareness, techniques which have been in common use for these (and other) purposes for decdes, techniques accepted by the community of scientists who study such things. Your disparagement of this paper and dismissal of its methods because it was not "peer-reviewed" - conference papers seldom are - is invalid. Here are a few more references: http://web.mit.edu/aeroastro/www/labs/ASL/SA/sa.html http://www.leaonline.com/doi/abs/10.1207/s15327108ijap1404_2?cookieSet=1&journalCode=ijap http://www.glos.ac.uk/faculties/ehs/sciences/staff/gedgar.cfm Now, please read these and come back and tell us again that situational awareness cannot be measured; I'm sure that this revelation will be of interest to the community. And I note in passing that the use of personal insult is a sign that the user can find no other support.                             Date: 25 Feb 2007 21:34:02 From: GaryG Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net > wrote in message news:xLtEh.1149040$R63.329370@pd7urf1no... > > The fact that many experts recommend against the use of headphones/earbuds > > while cycling, and the fact that they are illegal per many state laws, > > lends > > more credence to the argument against their use than your assertions of > > "experience". > > > > GG > > > Oh yeah, and throw that in with no legal abortions. > All laws are serving who you might ask. > do not even get me started on that slam dunk. > What slam dunk? Abortion is a hotly contested political issue, with strong advocates and lobbies on both sides of the issue. The wearing of headphones while driving has no significant lobbies on either side...it's more an issue of common sense and safety. GG                     Date: 25 Feb 2007 18:43:10 From: nash Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons "Roger Zoul" <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com > wrote in message news:12u3dtl3i1ur7d2@news.supernews.com... > k Hickey wrote: > :: "Roger Zoul" <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com> wrote: > :: > ::: k Hickey wrote: > ::::: jtaylor@NOSPAM.hfx.andara.com wrote: > :::::: On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 22:39:26 -0600, fred <fred@fred.com> wrote: > :::::: > :::::::: (2) one cannot depend on hearing while cycling > :::::: > ::::::: I agree that you cannot depend on hearing while cycling. > ::::::: However: > :::::: > :::::: Piffle. > :::::: > :::::: Get your ears tested. > ::::: > ::::: My thoughts exactly. I constantly "depend on my hearing" when > ::::: cycling. I listen for change in the sound of a car coming up > ::::: behind me (indicating they might be planning a turn), and can > ::::: reasonably tell when a car is likely to be passing close to me > ::::: before it gets there. I also listen for the sound of a parked car > ::::: starting or shifting into gear (or the sound of the front tires > ::::: turning on the pavement). I listen for the clinking of dog tags > ::::: or kids behind the parked cars. I even listen for the sound of > ::::: another bike on my tail. > ::::: > ::::: You can't rely ONLY on your hearing, obviously - but it's > ::::: ludicrous to think that there's no down side to eliminating one > ::::: source of input about your surroundings without taking > ::::: unnecessary risks. > ::: > ::: Again, you're making assumptions that don't have to exist. Who is > ::: eliminating one source of input? > :: > :: Perhaps you feel you can hear input from your surroundings as well > :: wearing earbuds with music playing. > > What do you mean I feel? I know I can. Plain and simple. My question is, > what makes you assume this can't be done? Perhaps you aren't considering > all of the parameters that affect ones ability to hear input from > surrounding while wearing earbuds with music playing? Perhaps you're > simply making blanket statements that have no bearing on what happens in > real life, based on your own notions. > > :: That would certainly make you a > :: statistical oddity. I know I can't (nor can I imagine anyone else > :: who could claim they can). > > Obviously, you don't know what makes a statistical oddity. > > :: > ::: I don't know why I bother trying to educate people who are so > ::: closed minded. > :: > :: Show some reasonable data that shows that listening to music through > :: earbuds does NOT affect your ability to hear what's going on around > :: you, and we can discuss "education". > > Why should I do this? Why don't you show some reasonable data that shows > that thinking, or looking ahead, or the wind blowing, or old age, or poor > hearing doesn't affect your ability to hear what's going on around you? > What about traffic? Can the noise from traffic itself affect your ability > to hear the car rushing up from behind to kill you? > > k what you say you do not want an ipod for is why I use a mirror. Everything you stated can also be noticed in a mirror. And more because the traffic noise is louder than the music I play. And they are not noise cancelling ear buds. No one here seems to follow any 8 second rule and I usually follow more like a 4 sec rule to be looking at your mirror. Do you even use a mirror since you seem to rely entirely on your ears? >                       Date: 25 Feb 2007 15:34:29 From: Mark Hickey Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net > wrote: >k what you say you do not want an ipod for is why I use a mirror. >Everything you stated can also be noticed in a mirror. And more because the >traffic noise is louder than the music I play. And they are not noise >cancelling ear buds. No one here seems to follow any 8 second rule and I >usually follow more like a 4 sec rule to be looking at your mirror. >Do you even use a mirror since you seem to rely entirely on your ears? I'm not quite sure where you get the impression that I'm using hearing exclusively for detecting what's BEHIND me. Statistically, that's the least of my worries (accounting for a very small percentage of total injuries on a bike). Almost every example I gave was for being able to detect things audibly that are in FRONT of me. But I know you're not going to change your mind - I don't even really care about that. I'm sure anyone who's honestly considering the pros and cons of the issue has read my input and that's all I really care about. You have my permission to ride "as deaf as you wanna be" anywhere you like. Good luck with that, BTW. k Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.habcycles.com Home of the $795 ti frame                         Date: 26 Feb 2007 05:05:43 From: nash Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons "k Hickey" <k@habcycles.com > wrote in message news:rh34u21tnocd8770p48cuf3mpap9f2e1mv@4ax.com... > "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net> wrote: > >>k what you say you do not want an ipod for is why I use a mirror. >>Everything you stated can also be noticed in a mirror. And more because >>the >>traffic noise is louder than the music I play. And they are not noise >>cancelling ear buds. No one here seems to follow any 8 second rule and I >>usually follow more like a 4 sec rule to be looking at your mirror. >>Do you even use a mirror since you seem to rely entirely on your ears? > > I'm not quite sure where you get the impression that I'm using hearing > exclusively for detecting what's BEHIND me. Statistically, that's the > least of my worries (accounting for a very small percentage of total > injuries on a bike). Almost every example I gave was for being able > to detect things audibly that are in FRONT of me. > > But I know you're not going to change your mind - I don't even really > care about that. I'm sure anyone who's honestly considering the pros > and cons of the issue has read my input and that's all I really care > about. You have my permission to ride "as deaf as you wanna be" > anywhere you like. Good luck with that, BTW. > > k Hickey > Habanero Cycles > http://www.habcycles.com > Home of the $795 ti frame Because you said you know which way a car is turning behind you without even looking. Who cares what you think BTW                         Date: 26 Feb 2007 04:57:26 From: nash Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons "k Hickey" <k@habcycles.com > wrote in message news:rh34u21tnocd8770p48cuf3mpap9f2e1mv@4ax.com... > "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net> wrote: > >>k what you say you do not want an ipod for is why I use a mirror. >>Everything you stated can also be noticed in a mirror. And more because >>the >>traffic noise is louder than the music I play. And they are not noise >>cancelling ear buds. No one here seems to follow any 8 second rule and I >>usually follow more like a 4 sec rule to be looking at your mirror. >>Do you even use a mirror since you seem to rely entirely on your ears? > > I'm not quite sure where you get the impression that I'm using hearing > exclusively for detecting what's BEHIND me. Statistically, that's the > least of my worries (accounting for a very small percentage of total > injuries on a bike). Almost every example I gave was for being able > to detect things audibly that are in FRONT of me. > > But I know you're not going to change your mind - I don't even really > care about that. I'm sure anyone who's honestly considering the pros > and cons of the issue has read my input and that's all I really care > about. You have my permission to ride "as deaf as you wanna be" > anywhere you like. Good luck with that, BTW. > > k Hickey > Habanero Cycles > http://www.habcycles.com > Home of the $795 ti frame warm weather is bringing out the morons in this newsgroup                         Date: 25 Feb 2007 21:17:50 From: Roger Zoul Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons k Hickey wrote: :: "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net > wrote: :: ::: k what you say you do not want an ipod for is why I use a mirror. ::: Everything you stated can also be noticed in a mirror. And more ::: because the traffic noise is louder than the music I play. And ::: they are not noise cancelling ear buds. No one here seems to ::: follow any 8 second rule and I usually follow more like a 4 sec ::: rule to be looking at your mirror. ::: Do you even use a mirror since you seem to rely entirely on your ::: ears? :: :: I'm not quite sure where you get the impression that I'm using :: hearing exclusively for detecting what's BEHIND me. Statistically, :: that's the least of my worries (accounting for a very small :: percentage of total injuries on a bike). Almost every example I :: gave was for being able to detect things audibly that are in FRONT :: of me. :: :: But I know you're not going to change your mind - I don't even really :: care about that. I'm sure anyone who's honestly considering the pros :: and cons of the issue has read my input and that's all I really care :: about. You have my permission to ride "as deaf as you wanna be" :: anywhere you like. Good luck with that, BTW. No one is asking your permission for anything, but you really ought to be silence about things you have zero experience with.                       Date: 25 Feb 2007 14:48:36 From: Roger Zoul Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons nash wrote: :: "Roger Zoul" <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com > wrote in message :: news:12u3dtl3i1ur7d2@news.supernews.com... ::: k Hickey wrote: ::::: "Roger Zoul" <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com > wrote: ::::: :::::: k Hickey wrote: :::::::: jtaylor@NOSPAM.hfx.andara.com wrote: ::::::::: On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 22:39:26 -0600, fred <fred@fred.com > ::::::::: wrote: ::::::::: ::::::::::: (2) one cannot depend on hearing while cycling ::::::::: :::::::::: I agree that you cannot depend on hearing while cycling. :::::::::: However: ::::::::: ::::::::: Piffle. ::::::::: ::::::::: Get your ears tested. :::::::: :::::::: My thoughts exactly. I constantly "depend on my hearing" when :::::::: cycling. I listen for change in the sound of a car coming up :::::::: behind me (indicating they might be planning a turn), and can :::::::: reasonably tell when a car is likely to be passing close to me :::::::: before it gets there. I also listen for the sound of a parked :::::::: car starting or shifting into gear (or the sound of the front :::::::: tires turning on the pavement). I listen for the clinking of :::::::: dog tags or kids behind the parked cars. I even listen for :::::::: the sound of another bike on my tail. :::::::: :::::::: You can't rely ONLY on your hearing, obviously - but it's :::::::: ludicrous to think that there's no down side to eliminating one :::::::: source of input about your surroundings without taking :::::::: unnecessary risks. :::::: :::::: Again, you're making assumptions that don't have to exist. Who :::::: is eliminating one source of input? ::::: ::::: Perhaps you feel you can hear input from your surroundings as well ::::: wearing earbuds with music playing. ::: ::: What do you mean I feel? I know I can. Plain and simple. My ::: question is, what makes you assume this can't be done? Perhaps you ::: aren't considering all of the parameters that affect ones ability ::: to hear input from surrounding while wearing earbuds with music ::: playing? Perhaps you're simply making blanket statements that have ::: no bearing on what happens in real life, based on your own notions. ::: ::::: That would certainly make you a ::::: statistical oddity. I know I can't (nor can I imagine anyone else ::::: who could claim they can). ::: ::: Obviously, you don't know what makes a statistical oddity. ::: ::::: :::::: I don't know why I bother trying to educate people who are so :::::: closed minded. ::::: ::::: Show some reasonable data that shows that listening to music ::::: through earbuds does NOT affect your ability to hear what's going ::::: on around you, and we can discuss "education". ::: ::: Why should I do this? Why don't you show some reasonable data that ::: shows that thinking, or looking ahead, or the wind blowing, or old ::: age, or poor hearing doesn't affect your ability to hear what's ::: going on around you? What about traffic? Can the noise from ::: traffic itself affect your ability to hear the car rushing up from ::: behind to kill you? ::: ::: :: k what you say you do not want an ipod for is why I use a mirror. :: Everything you stated can also be noticed in a mirror. And more :: because the traffic noise is louder than the music I play. I usually just take my buds out when in lots of traffic because I can't hear the music at all. When on a lonely road, I leave them in even when wind noise is so high I can't hear them because I know that once I'm on a flat or climbing a hill I'll be able to get the beat again. I can also hear anyone talking to me on the side of the road or riding a bike the other way. And, I wear a mirror which I have learned to check frequently. Some people here seem to forget to sound is additive....superposition works fine as long as your drums are not in saturation. And they :: are not noise cancelling ear buds. No one here seems to follow any :: 8 second rule and I usually follow more like a 4 sec rule to be :: looking at your mirror. :: Do you even use a mirror since you seem to rely entirely on your :: ears?                         Date: 26 Feb 2007 04:42:42 From: nash Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons Some people here seem to forget to sound is additive....superposition works fine as long as your drums are not in saturation. Exactly, and another thing I forgot about. I wear earbuds because I get an ear ache if I don't so they have double usefulness. If you can hear traffic and music is where you should be. Do not assume everyone has the MP3 player cranked. that is predjudice. merci                           Date: 25 Feb 2007 21:35:40 From: GaryG Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net > wrote in message news:6ztEh.1142291$5R2.399738@pd7urf3no... > Some people here seem to forget to sound is additive....superposition works > fine as long as your drums are not in saturation. > > > Exactly, and another thing I forgot about. I wear earbuds because I get an > ear ache if I don't so they have double usefulness. > > If you can hear traffic and music is where you should be. Do not assume > everyone has the MP3 player cranked. that is predjudice. > > merci > Did you say something? Sorry, I couldn't hear you. Could you please repeat that? GG               Date: 24 Feb 2007 19:08:13 From: nash Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons > You can't rely ONLY on your hearing, obviously - but it's ludicrous to > think that there's no down side to eliminating one source of input > about your surroundings without taking unnecessary risks. > Compare it to being born blind, mute or deaf then. They excel at the senses they have to make up the difference. Haven't they also changed their tune on listening to music while doing your homework. pardon the pun                 Date: 25 Feb 2007 08:24:55 From: Mark Hickey Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net > wrote: >> You can't rely ONLY on your hearing, obviously - but it's ludicrous to >> think that there's no down side to eliminating one source of input >> about your surroundings without taking unnecessary risks. > >Compare it to being born blind, mute or deaf then. >They excel at the senses they have to make up the difference. Thing is, where your hearing is most important is where it's going to alert you to a situation that you DON'T see (like the sound of dog tags jingling behind a line of parked cars). Perhaps deaf people can taste that? ;-) > Haven't they also changed their tune on listening to music while doing >your homework. pardon the pun Different issue, though I will admit to needing "motivational music" while riding indoors. k Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.habcycles.com Home of the $795 ti frame                   Date: 25 Feb 2007 18:45:05 From: nash Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons Perhaps deaf people can taste that? ;-) Well perhaps you can ride blind folded then : )                   Date: 25 Feb 2007 11:28:24 From: Roger Zoul Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons k Hickey wrote: :: "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net > wrote: :: :::: You can't rely ONLY on your hearing, obviously - but it's :::: ludicrous to think that there's no down side to eliminating one :::: source of input about your surroundings without taking unnecessary :::: risks. ::: ::: Compare it to being born blind, mute or deaf then. ::: They excel at the senses they have to make up the difference. :: :: Thing is, where your hearing is most important is where it's going to :: alert you to a situation that you DON'T see (like the sound of dog :: tags jingling behind a line of parked cars). And what about the tagless dog that gets right on your ass that you never heard or the one that lies in wait behind parked cars for you to come by? Hearing is always going to be an iffy thing on a bike. It's affected much more than sight just due to the nature of the activity. Why depend on something you can't count on? On a bike, the thing you can do without most is hearing, compared to sight.                     Date: 25 Feb 2007 15:24:56 From: Mark Hickey Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons "Roger Zoul" <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com > wrote: >k Hickey wrote: >:: "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net> wrote: >:: >:::: You can't rely ONLY on your hearing, obviously - but it's >:::: ludicrous to think that there's no down side to eliminating one >:::: source of input about your surroundings without taking unnecessary >:::: risks. >::: >::: Compare it to being born blind, mute or deaf then. >::: They excel at the senses they have to make up the difference. >:: >:: Thing is, where your hearing is most important is where it's going to >:: alert you to a situation that you DON'T see (like the sound of dog >:: tags jingling behind a line of parked cars). > >And what about the tagless dog that gets right on your ass that you never >heard or the one that lies in wait behind parked cars for you to come by? > >Hearing is always going to be an iffy thing on a bike. It's affected much >more than sight just due to the nature of the activity. Why depend on >something you can't count on? > >On a bike, the thing you can do without most is hearing, compared to sight. I've never had a dog sneak up behind me without hearing it. Toenails (or even just pads) on the asphalt make plenty of noise (unless you've got Iron Maiden cranked up to earbleed volume on the Ipod, of course). k Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.habcycles.com Home of the $795 ti frame                       Date: 25 Feb 2007 21:15:06 From: Roger Zoul Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons k Hickey wrote: :: "Roger Zoul" <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com > wrote: :: ::: k Hickey wrote: ::::: "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net > wrote: ::::: ::::::: You can't rely ONLY on your hearing, obviously - but it's ::::::: ludicrous to think that there's no down side to eliminating one ::::::: source of input about your surroundings without taking ::::::: unnecessary risks. :::::: :::::: Compare it to being born blind, mute or deaf then. :::::: They excel at the senses they have to make up the difference. ::::: ::::: Thing is, where your hearing is most important is where it's ::::: going to alert you to a situation that you DON'T see (like the ::::: sound of dog tags jingling behind a line of parked cars). ::: ::: And what about the tagless dog that gets right on your ass that you ::: never heard or the one that lies in wait behind parked cars for you ::: to come by? ::: ::: Hearing is always going to be an iffy thing on a bike. It's ::: affected much more than sight just due to the nature of the ::: activity. Why depend on something you can't count on? ::: ::: On a bike, the thing you can do without most is hearing, compared ::: to sight. :: :: I've never had a dog sneak up behind me without hearing it. Toenails :: (or even just pads) on the asphalt make plenty of noise (unless :: you've got Iron Maiden cranked up to earbleed volume on the Ipod, of :: course). :: Just because you've never had it happen obviously means it can't, right? Never heard of a dog running on the ground, huh? dumbass.                       Date: 25 Feb 2007 19:50:00 From: Patrick Lamb Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On Sun, 25 Feb 2007 15:24:56 -0700, k Hickey <k@habcycles.com > wrote: >"Roger Zoul" <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com> wrote: > >>k Hickey wrote: >>:: "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net> wrote: >>:: Thing is, where your hearing is most important is where it's going to >>:: alert you to a situation that you DON'T see (like the sound of dog >>:: tags jingling behind a line of parked cars). >> >>And what about the tagless dog that gets right on your ass that you never >>heard or the one that lies in wait behind parked cars for you to come by? >> >>Hearing is always going to be an iffy thing on a bike. It's affected much >>more than sight just due to the nature of the activity. Why depend on >>something you can't count on? >> >>On a bike, the thing you can do without most is hearing, compared to sight. > >I've never had a dog sneak up behind me without hearing it. Toenails >(or even just pads) on the asphalt make plenty of noise (unless you've >got Iron Maiden cranked up to earbleed volume on the Ipod, of course). Agreed, and further, I've heard more dogs coming up from behind than I've noticed visually. The committed cycle-chasing dog is likely to find a way to hide until you've passed. Pat Email address works as is.                     Date: 25 Feb 2007 11:29:03 From: GaryG Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons "Roger Zoul" <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com > wrote in message news:12u3e9aca40nb3f@news.supernews.com... > k Hickey wrote: > :: "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net> wrote: > :: > :::: You can't rely ONLY on your hearing, obviously - but it's > :::: ludicrous to think that there's no down side to eliminating one > :::: source of input about your surroundings without taking unnecessary > :::: risks. > ::: > ::: Compare it to being born blind, mute or deaf then. > ::: They excel at the senses they have to make up the difference. > :: > :: Thing is, where your hearing is most important is where it's going to > :: alert you to a situation that you DON'T see (like the sound of dog > :: tags jingling behind a line of parked cars). > > And what about the tagless dog that gets right on your ass that you never > heard or the one that lies in wait behind parked cars for you to come by? > > Hearing is always going to be an iffy thing on a bike. It's affected much > more than sight just due to the nature of the activity. Why depend on > something you can't count on? > > On a bike, the thing you can do without most is hearing, compared to sight. > Hearing is an important component of "situational awareness" when cycling. Clearly, it's not as important a sense as sight, but it *is* an important sense nonetheless. Compromising one's situational awareness while riding a slow-moving vehicle in traffic, for the sake of some recreational music, seems ill-advised (at best). I'm sure that you (and other Pod-people) will cite how many miles you've ridden with your hearing compromised without accident. To which, I say, "Huh? What did you say?". GG                     Date: 25 Feb 2007 18:45:56 From: nash Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons "Roger Zoul" <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com > wrote in message news:12u3e9aca40nb3f@news.supernews.com... > k Hickey wrote: > :: "nash" <zwepytzkehillc9@jetable.net> wrote: > :: > :::: You can't rely ONLY on your hearing, obviously - but it's > :::: ludicrous to think that there's no down side to eliminating one > :::: source of input about your surroundings without taking unnecessary > :::: risks. > ::: > ::: Compare it to being born blind, mute or deaf then. > ::: They excel at the senses they have to make up the difference. > :: > :: Thing is, where your hearing is most important is where it's going to > :: alert you to a situation that you DON'T see (like the sound of dog > :: tags jingling behind a line of parked cars). > > And what about the tagless dog that gets right on your ass that you never > heard or the one that lies in wait behind parked cars for you to come by? > > Hearing is always going to be an iffy thing on a bike. It's affected much > more than sight just due to the nature of the activity. Why depend on > something you can't count on? > > On a bike, the thing you can do without most is hearing, compared to > sight. Right       Date: 23 Feb 2007 10:15:36 From: Bellsouth Ijit 2.0 Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons <jtaylor@NOSPAM.hfx.andara.com > wrote in message news:5g0ut29386u5t4jmmc2n1lh6qvfl2td840@4ax.com... > On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 09:41:47 -0500, "Roger Zoul" > <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com> wrote: > >>Kristian M Zoerhoff wrote: >>:: 1. Yesterday afternoon, I'm riding along, when I spot 5 teenagers >>:: walking along the other side of the road approaching me. >>:: >>:: "Hey, A**hole!" >>:: >>:: What the? I've no idea what prompted this. I should have ignored >>:: it, but was in a foul mood, so I pulled a Baka and confronted >>:: them, resulting in them backing down; no firearms, thankfully. >>:: >>:: >>:: 2. Today, riding down to my father-in-law's, I see a wrong-way >>:: rider coming at me, so I point across the road and shout "Other >>:: side." He shakes his head, and I repeat (yes, I hate wrong-way >>:: riding). He shakes it again, and forces me out into 45 mph >>:: traffic to go around him. He's got an iPod glued into both ears. >>:: OK, so maybe that just makes him a typical teenager, but it >>:: annoys me (too many iPod-addled joggers around here). >> >>Who is the moron here? You actually expected to educate a WWR while >>riding >>down the street, by shouting "Other side"? >> >>What does his having an iPod have to do with anything? >> > > Isn't it obvious? > > Only a moron would cycle with headphones. I hear when you buy an iPod and tell the salesperson that you are a cyclist, he gives you a free "Hit Me" sticker.   Date: 23 Feb 2007 02:28:26 From: Tom Keats Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons In article <45debacc$0$24750$4c368faf@roadrunner.com >, "Gooserider" <Gooserider@mouse-potato.com > writes: > > "Bellsouth Ijit 2.0" <bjit@bellsouth.net> wrote in message > news:45de5aa0$0$4914$4c368faf@roadrunner.com... >> >> "Kristian M Zoerhoff" <kristian.zoerhoff@gmail.com> wrote in message >> news:PkrDh.469$8x.445@newssvr14.news.prodigy.net... >>> 1. Yesterday afternoon, I'm riding along, when I spot 5 teenagers >>> walking along the other side of the road approaching me. >>> >>> "Hey, A**hole!" >>> >>> What the? I've no idea what prompted this. I should have ignored >>> it, but was in a foul mood, so I pulled a Baka and confronted >>> them, resulting in them backing down; no firearms, thankfully. >>> >>> >>> 2. Today, riding down to my father-in-law's, I see a wrong-way >>> rider coming at me, so I point across the road and shout "Other >>> side." He shakes his head, and I repeat (yes, I hate wrong-way >>> riding). He shakes it again, and forces me out into 45 mph >>> traffic to go around him. He's got an iPod glued into both ears. >>> OK, so maybe that just makes him a typical teenager, but it >>> annoys me (too many iPod-addled joggers around here). >>> >>> >>> Bring back the snow! >>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> __o Kristian Zoerhoff >>> _'\(,_ kristian.zoerhoff@gmail.com >>> (_)/ (_) >> >> >> No kidding. I love cold foul weather. A part of the reason being it >> keeps the wannabe badasses and tourists indoors. July 4th, Halloween, New >> Year's Eve, the first warm day in winter all bring out the scum-lemmings. > > I would trade all those "scuim-lemmings" for the guy who keeps passing me > too closely in his HYOOGE Nissan Titan truck. I'd trade your HYOOGE Nissan Titan truck for those inconsiderates who drive wide cars like a LeBaron or Emperial, and tow a little, narrow utility trailer behind it -- with all sorts of garden tool handles and 2x4's hanging over its right side! And the driver safely gets his car past you, but you still have this threatening array of bristling pikes emanating from the trailer, zooming in right at your face. cheers, Tom -- Nothing is safe from me. Above address is just a spam midden. I'm really at: tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca     Date: 28 Feb 2007 18:42:03 From: Gooserider Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons "Tom Keats" <tkeats2005@hotmail.com > wrote in message news:akfmre.a6g.ln@bud.garden.local... > In article <45debacc$0$24750$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>, > "Gooserider" <Gooserider@mouse-potato.com> writes: >> >> "Bellsouth Ijit 2.0" <bjit@bellsouth.net> wrote in message >> news:45de5aa0$0$4914$4c368faf@roadrunner.com... >>> >>> "Kristian M Zoerhoff" <kristian.zoerhoff@gmail.com> wrote in message >>> news:PkrDh.469$8x.445@newssvr14.news.prodigy.net... >>>> 1. Yesterday afternoon, I'm riding along, when I spot 5 teenagers >>>> walking along the other side of the road approaching me. >>>> >>>> "Hey, A**hole!" >>>> >>>> What the? I've no idea what prompted this. I should have ignored >>>> it, but was in a foul mood, so I pulled a Baka and confronted >>>> them, resulting in them backing down; no firearms, thankfully. >>>> >>>> >>>> 2. Today, riding down to my father-in-law's, I see a wrong-way >>>> rider coming at me, so I point across the road and shout "Other >>>> side." He shakes his head, and I repeat (yes, I hate wrong-way >>>> riding). He shakes it again, and forces me out into 45 mph >>>> traffic to go around him. He's got an iPod glued into both ears. >>>> OK, so maybe that just makes him a typical teenager, but it >>>> annoys me (too many iPod-addled joggers around here). >>>> >>>> >>>> Bring back the snow! >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> __o Kristian Zoerhoff >>>> _'\(,_ kristian.zoerhoff@gmail.com >>>> (_)/ (_) >>> >>> >>> No kidding. I love cold foul weather. A part of the reason being it >>> keeps the wannabe badasses and tourists indoors. July 4th, Halloween, >>> New >>> Year's Eve, the first warm day in winter all bring out the >>> scum-lemmings. >> >> I would trade all those "scuim-lemmings" for the guy who keeps passing me >> too closely in his HYOOGE Nissan Titan truck. > > I'd trade your HYOOGE Nissan Titan truck for those > inconsiderates who drive wide cars like a LeBaron > or Emperial, and tow a little, narrow utility trailer > behind it -- with all sorts of garden tool handles and > 2x4's hanging over its right side! And the driver safely > gets his car past you, but you still have this threatening > array of bristling pikes emanating from the trailer, zooming > in right at your face. > > I failed to mention that sometimes he's towing his offshore fishing boat.     Date: 23 Feb 2007 23:35:05 From: GaryG Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons "Tom Keats" <tkeats2005@hotmail.com > wrote in message news:akfmre.a6g.ln@bud.garden.local... > In article <45debacc$0$24750$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>, > "Gooserider" <Gooserider@mouse-potato.com> writes: > > > > "Bellsouth Ijit 2.0" <bjit@bellsouth.net> wrote in message > > news:45de5aa0$0$4914$4c368faf@roadrunner.com... > >> > >> "Kristian M Zoerhoff" <kristian.zoerhoff@gmail.com> wrote in message > >> news:PkrDh.469$8x.445@newssvr14.news.prodigy.net... > >>> 1. Yesterday afternoon, I'm riding along, when I spot 5 teenagers > >>> walking along the other side of the road approaching me. > >>> > >>> "Hey, A**hole!" > >>> > >>> What the? I've no idea what prompted this. I should have ignored > >>> it, but was in a foul mood, so I pulled a Baka and confronted > >>> them, resulting in them backing down; no firearms, thankfully. > >>> > >>> > >>> 2. Today, riding down to my father-in-law's, I see a wrong-way > >>> rider coming at me, so I point across the road and shout "Other > >>> side." He shakes his head, and I repeat (yes, I hate wrong-way > >>> riding). He shakes it again, and forces me out into 45 mph > >>> traffic to go around him. He's got an iPod glued into both ears. > >>> OK, so maybe that just makes him a typical teenager, but it > >>> annoys me (too many iPod-addled joggers around here). > >>> > >>> > >>> Bring back the snow! > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> > >>> __o Kristian Zoerhoff > >>> _'\(,_ kristian.zoerhoff@gmail.com > >>> (_)/ (_) > >> > >> > >> No kidding. I love cold foul weather. A part of the reason being it > >> keeps the wannabe badasses and tourists indoors. July 4th, Halloween, New > >> Year's Eve, the first warm day in winter all bring out the scum-lemmings. > > > > I would trade all those "scuim-lemmings" for the guy who keeps passing me > > too closely in his HYOOGE Nissan Titan truck. > > I'd trade your HYOOGE Nissan Titan truck for those > inconsiderates who drive wide cars like a LeBaron > or Emperial, and tow a little, narrow utility trailer > behind it -- with all sorts of garden tool handles and > 2x4's hanging over its right side! And the driver safely > gets his car past you, but you still have this threatening > array of bristling pikes emanating from the trailer, zooming > in right at your face. I'm still recovering from injuries sustained last Sunday, when a dumbass towing a trailer clipped me with the rear wheels of his trailer. At the time of the crash, I was taking the lane and riding 40 mph while approaching a blind left-hand corner! Thankfully, nothing's broken...well, other than my bike, my helmet, and all the clothing I was wearing (except for my cycling cap, socks and shoes). Full description of the accident, plus links to some gross pictures of my injuries are here: http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=270492 Be careful out there, everybody. ~_-* ...G/ \G http://www.CycliStats.com CycliStats - Software for Cyclists > > > cheers, > Tom > > -- > Nothing is safe from me. > Above address is just a spam midden. > I'm really at: tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca >       Date: 27 Feb 2007 00:53:29 From: Bellsouth Ijit 2.0 Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons "GaryG" <sorrynoemail@NOSPAMX.com > wrote in message news:QPRDh.2521$1X5.592@newsfe05.lga... > "Tom Keats" <tkeats2005@hotmail.com> wrote in message > news:akfmre.a6g.ln@bud.garden.local... >> In article <45debacc$0$24750$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>, >> "Gooserider" <Gooserider@mouse-potato.com> writes: >> > >> > "Bellsouth Ijit 2.0" <bjit@bellsouth.net> wrote in message >> > news:45de5aa0$0$4914$4c368faf@roadrunner.com... >> >> >> >> "Kristian M Zoerhoff" <kristian.zoerhoff@gmail.com> wrote in message >> >> news:PkrDh.469$8x.445@newssvr14.news.prodigy.net... >> >>> 1. Yesterday afternoon, I'm riding along, when I spot 5 teenagers >> >>> walking along the other side of the road approaching me. >> >>> >> >>> "Hey, A**hole!" >> >>> >> >>> What the? I've no idea what prompted this. I should have ignored >> >>> it, but was in a foul mood, so I pulled a Baka and confronted >> >>> them, resulting in them backing down; no firearms, thankfully. >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> 2. Today, riding down to my father-in-law's, I see a wrong-way >> >>> rider coming at me, so I point across the road and shout "Other >> >>> side." He shakes his head, and I repeat (yes, I hate wrong-way >> >>> riding). He shakes it again, and forces me out into 45 mph >> >>> traffic to go around him. He's got an iPod glued into both ears. >> >>> OK, so maybe that just makes him a typical teenager, but it >> >>> annoys me (too many iPod-addled joggers around here). >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> Bring back the snow! >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> -- >> >>> >> >>> __o Kristian Zoerhoff >> >>> _'\(,_ kristian.zoerhoff@gmail.com >> >>> (_)/ (_) >> >> >> >> >> >> No kidding. I love cold foul weather. A part of the reason being it >> >> keeps the wannabe badasses and tourists indoors. July 4th, Halloween, > New >> >> Year's Eve, the first warm day in winter all bring out the > scum-lemmings. >> > >> > I would trade all those "scuim-lemmings" for the guy who keeps passing > me >> > too closely in his HYOOGE Nissan Titan truck. >> >> I'd trade your HYOOGE Nissan Titan truck for those >> inconsiderates who drive wide cars like a LeBaron >> or Emperial, and tow a little, narrow utility trailer >> behind it -- with all sorts of garden tool handles and >> 2x4's hanging over its right side! And the driver safely >> gets his car past you, but you still have this threatening >> array of bristling pikes emanating from the trailer, zooming >> in right at your face. > > I'm still recovering from injuries sustained last Sunday, when a dumbass > towing a trailer clipped me with the rear wheels of his trailer. At the > time of the crash, I was taking the lane and riding 40 mph while > approaching > a blind left-hand corner! Thankfully, nothing's broken...well, other than > my bike, my helmet, and all the clothing I was wearing (except for my > cycling cap, socks and shoes). > > Full description of the accident, plus links to some gross pictures of my > injuries are here: > > http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=270492 > > Be careful out there, everybody. > > ~_-* > ...G/ \G > http://www.CycliStats.com > CycliStats - Software for Cyclists > >> >> >> cheers, >> Tom >> >> -- >> Nothing is safe from me. >> Above address is just a spam midden. >> I'm really at: tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca >> > > Shite, Gary. Hope you are doing better.         Date: 27 Feb 2007 05:39:58 From: Roger Zoul Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons :: "GaryG" <sorrynoemail@NOSPAMX.com > wrote in message ::: I'm still recovering from injuries sustained last Sunday, when a ::: dumbass towing a trailer clipped me with the rear wheels of his ::: trailer. At the time of the crash, I was taking the lane and ::: riding 40 mph while approaching ::: a blind left-hand corner! Thankfully, nothing's broken...well, ::: other than my bike, my helmet, and all the clothing I was wearing ::: (except for my cycling cap, socks and shoes). ::: ::: Full description of the accident, plus links to some gross pictures ::: of my injuries are here: ::: ::: http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=270492 ::: ::: Be careful out there, everybody. Putting our disagreement in this thread aside: I hope you are recovering quickly.           Date: 27 Feb 2007 06:07:13 From: GaryG Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons "Roger Zoul" <rogerzoul2@hotmail.com > wrote in message news:12u82k18k03nn61@news.supernews.com... > :: "GaryG" <sorrynoemail@NOSPAMX.com> wrote in message > > ::: I'm still recovering from injuries sustained last Sunday, when a > ::: dumbass towing a trailer clipped me with the rear wheels of his > ::: trailer. At the time of the crash, I was taking the lane and > ::: riding 40 mph while approaching > ::: a blind left-hand corner! Thankfully, nothing's broken...well, > ::: other than my bike, my helmet, and all the clothing I was wearing > ::: (except for my cycling cap, socks and shoes). > ::: > ::: Full description of the accident, plus links to some gross pictures > ::: of my injuries are here: > ::: > ::: http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=270492 > ::: > ::: Be careful out there, everybody. > > Putting our disagreement in this thread aside: I hope you are recovering > quickly. > Thanks. I'm getting to the "pissed off because I'm tired of hurting every time I change clothes" stage. I'm also tired because the road rash makes it hard to sleep comfortably. And I'm *really* getting tired of changing wound dressings every day. That said, I'm thankful because I am getting slowly better, and I know it could have been much, much worse. GG       Date: 24 Feb 2007 14:46:24 From: Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 23:35:05 -0800, "GaryG" <sorrynoemail@NOSPAMX.com > wrote: >"Tom Keats" <tkeats2005@hotmail.com> wrote in message >news:akfmre.a6g.ln@bud.garden.local... >> In article <45debacc$0$24750$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>, >> "Gooserider" <Gooserider@mouse-potato.com> writes: >> > >> > "Bellsouth Ijit 2.0" <bjit@bellsouth.net> wrote in message >> > news:45de5aa0$0$4914$4c368faf@roadrunner.com... >> >> >> >> "Kristian M Zoerhoff" <kristian.zoerhoff@gmail.com> wrote in message >> >> news:PkrDh.469$8x.445@newssvr14.news.prodigy.net... >> >>> 1. Yesterday afternoon, I'm riding along, when I spot 5 teenagers >> >>> walking along the other side of the road approaching me. >> >>> >> >>> "Hey, A**hole!" >> >>> >> >>> What the? I've no idea what prompted this. I should have ignored >> >>> it, but was in a foul mood, so I pulled a Baka and confronted >> >>> them, resulting in them backing down; no firearms, thankfully. >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> 2. Today, riding down to my father-in-law's, I see a wrong-way >> >>> rider coming at me, so I point across the road and shout "Other >> >>> side." He shakes his head, and I repeat (yes, I hate wrong-way >> >>> riding). He shakes it again, and forces me out into 45 mph >> >>> traffic to go around him. He's got an iPod glued into both ears. >> >>> OK, so maybe that just makes him a typical teenager, but it >> >>> annoys me (too many iPod-addled joggers around here). >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> Bring back the snow! >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> -- >> >>> >> >>> __o Kristian Zoerhoff >> >>> _'\(,_ kristian.zoerhoff@gmail.com >> >>> (_)/ (_) >> >> >> >> >> >> No kidding. I love cold foul weather. A part of the reason being it >> >> keeps the wannabe badasses and tourists indoors. July 4th, Halloween, >New >> >> Year's Eve, the first warm day in winter all bring out the >scum-lemmings. >> > >> > I would trade all those "scuim-lemmings" for the guy who keeps passing >me >> > too closely in his HYOOGE Nissan Titan truck. >> >> I'd trade your HYOOGE Nissan Titan truck for those >> inconsiderates who drive wide cars like a LeBaron >> or Emperial, and tow a little, narrow utility trailer >> behind it -- with all sorts of garden tool handles and >> 2x4's hanging over its right side! And the driver safely >> gets his car past you, but you still have this threatening >> array of bristling pikes emanating from the trailer, zooming >> in right at your face. > >I'm still recovering from injuries sustained last Sunday, when a dumbass >towing a trailer clipped me with the rear wheels of his trailer. At the >time of the crash, I was taking the lane and riding 40 mph while approaching >a blind left-hand corner! Thankfully, nothing's broken...well, other than >my bike, my helmet, and all the clothing I was wearing (except for my >cycling cap, socks and shoes). > >Full description of the accident, plus links to some gross pictures of my >injuries are here: > >http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=270492 > >Be careful out there, everybody. > Are you aware of the research that shows that drivers pass helmeted cyclists more closely than unhelmeted ones? You may well have been hit because of exactly this effect.         Date: 24 Feb 2007 19:00:39 From: nash Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons > Are you aware of the research that shows that drivers pass helmeted > cyclists more closely than unhelmeted ones? You may well have been > hit because of exactly this effect. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ha Ha Also, looking like a guy more than a girl does the same thing according to one researcher. forgot the name? Gee all that happened with no ipod. how could that be         Date: 24 Feb 2007 07:09:56 From: GaryG Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons <jtaylor@NOSPAM.hfx.andara.com > wrote in message news:svj0u21av1189mffg70n89s659u22vv44b@4ax.com... > On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 23:35:05 -0800, "GaryG" <sorrynoemail@NOSPAMX.com> > wrote: > > >"Tom Keats" <tkeats2005@hotmail.com> wrote in message > >news:akfmre.a6g.ln@bud.garden.local... > >> In article <45debacc$0$24750$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>, > >> "Gooserider" <Gooserider@mouse-potato.com> writes: > >> > > >> > "Bellsouth Ijit 2.0" <bjit@bellsouth.net> wrote in message > >> > news:45de5aa0$0$4914$4c368faf@roadrunner.com... > >> >> > >> >> "Kristian M Zoerhoff" <kristian.zoerhoff@gmail.com> wrote in message > >> >> news:PkrDh.469$8x.445@newssvr14.news.prodigy.net... > >> >>> 1. Yesterday afternoon, I'm riding along, when I spot 5 teenagers > >> >>> walking along the other side of the road approaching me. > >> >>> > >> >>> "Hey, A**hole!" > >> >>> > >> >>> What the? I've no idea what prompted this. I should have ignored > >> >>> it, but was in a foul mood, so I pulled a Baka and confronted > >> >>> them, resulting in them backing down; no firearms, thankfully. > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> 2. Today, riding down to my father-in-law's, I see a wrong-way > >> >>> rider coming at me, so I point across the road and shout "Other > >> >>> side." He shakes his head, and I repeat (yes, I hate wrong-way > >> >>> riding). He shakes it again, and forces me out into 45 mph > >> >>> traffic to go around him. He's got an iPod glued into both ears. > >> >>> OK, so maybe that just makes him a typical teenager, but it > >> >>> annoys me (too many iPod-addled joggers around here). > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> Bring back the snow! > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> -- > >> >>> > >> >>> __o Kristian Zoerhoff > >> >>> _'\(,_ kristian.zoerhoff@gmail.com > >> >>> (_)/ (_) > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> No kidding. I love cold foul weather. A part of the reason being it > >> >> keeps the wannabe badasses and tourists indoors. July 4th, Halloween, > >New > >> >> Year's Eve, the first warm day in winter all bring out the > >scum-lemmings. > >> > > >> > I would trade all those "scuim-lemmings" for the guy who keeps passing > >me > >> > too closely in his HYOOGE Nissan Titan truck. > >> > >> I'd trade your HYOOGE Nissan Titan truck for those > >> inconsiderates who drive wide cars like a LeBaron > >> or Emperial, and tow a little, narrow utility trailer > >> behind it -- with all sorts of garden tool handles and > >> 2x4's hanging over its right side! And the driver safely > >> gets his car past you, but you still have this threatening > >> array of bristling pikes emanating from the trailer, zooming > >> in right at your face. > > > >I'm still recovering from injuries sustained last Sunday, when a dumbass > >towing a trailer clipped me with the rear wheels of his trailer. At the > >time of the crash, I was taking the lane and riding 40 mph while approaching > >a blind left-hand corner! Thankfully, nothing's broken...well, other than > >my bike, my helmet, and all the clothing I was wearing (except for my > >cycling cap, socks and shoes). > > > >Full description of the accident, plus links to some gross pictures of my > >injuries are here: > > > >http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=270492 > > > >Be careful out there, everybody. > > > > Are you aware of the research that shows that drivers pass helmeted > cyclists more closely than unhelmeted ones? You may well have been > hit because of exactly this effect. I am aware of those studies, but highly doubt that had anything to do with my accident. Those studies were done in the context of "wide outer lanes" and "bike lanes" on straight roadways. I was taking the full lane at 40 mph on a narrow winding road in a canyon. The driver of the overtaking vehicle lacked experience towing a trailer and was a diabetic who had not taken his insulin that day (his blood sugar was reported to be 450). Regardless, the helmet did its job during the crash and protected my head from significant damage, and I'm thankful I was wearing it. GG           Date: 24 Feb 2007 09:21:11 From: Bill Sornson Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons GaryG wrote: > <jtaylor@NOSPAM.hfx.andara.com> wrote in message > news:svj0u21av1189mffg70n89s659u22vv44b@4ax.com... >> Are you aware of the research that shows that drivers pass helmeted >> cyclists more closely than unhelmeted ones? You may well have been >> hit because of exactly this effect. > I am aware of those studies, but highly doubt that had anything to do > with my accident. /Studies/ plural? I'm only aware of that one crack-potted (non-scientific) Brit wearing a weird wig as a "control". Funny if it weren't taken so seriously. From the first article hit: "We know helmets are useful in low-speed falls, and so definitely good for children, but whether they offer any real protection to somebody struck by a car is very controversial." Flailor and his ilk deny the first part of that quote, and use the second as a strawman. (Hardly anyone claims that a helmet will help if run over or hit directly by a vehicle; it WILL be useful in a fall caused by a glancing blow or over a hood, however.) > ... studies were done in the context of "wide outer lanes" and "bike > lanes" on straight roadways. I was taking the full lane at 40 mph on > a narrow winding road in a canyon. The driver of the overtaking > vehicle lacked experience towing a trailer and was a diabetic who had > not taken his insulin that day (his blood sugar was reported to be > 450). > > Regardless, the helmet did its job during the crash and protected my > head from significant damage, and I'm thankful I was wearing it. You'll get relentlessly flamed for that (or would in previous threads), but glad you weren't hurt worse due to the lid doing its job. Take care. Bill S.             Date: 24 Feb 2007 19:02:55 From: nash Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons Getting a new bike now? What is it going to be?             Date: 24 Feb 2007 17:36:14 From: Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On Sat, 24 Feb 2007 09:21:11 -0800, "Bill Sornson" <askme@ask.me > wrote: >GaryG wrote: >> <jtaylor@NOSPAM.hfx.andara.com> wrote in message >> news:svj0u21av1189mffg70n89s659u22vv44b@4ax.com... > >>> Are you aware of the research that shows that drivers pass helmeted >>> cyclists more closely than unhelmeted ones? You may well have been >>> hit because of exactly this effect. > >> I am aware of those studies, but highly doubt that had anything to do >> with my accident. > >/Studies/ plural? I'm only aware of that one crack-potted (non-scientific) >Brit wearing a weird wig as a "control". I see you still believe that insult is a complete rebuttal to fact.             Date: 24 Feb 2007 17:32:20 From: Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On Sat, 24 Feb 2007 09:21:11 -0800, "Bill Sornson" <askme@ask.me > wrote: > Hardly anyone claims that a helmet will help if run over or >hit directly by a vehicle The original poster claims exactly that.               Date: 25 Feb 2007 16:18:19 From: fluffy bunny Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons In article <2ot0u2tmonkcohdgn34ivev48i4jsccpc8@4ax.com >, jtaylor@NOSPAM.hfx.andara.com wrote: > On Sat, 24 Feb 2007 09:21:11 -0800, "Bill Sornson" <askme@ask.me> > wrote: > > > Hardly anyone claims that a helmet will help if run over or > >hit directly by a vehicle > > The original poster claims exactly that. The original poster claims exactly not-that. He was not run over, and was very precise about that. he was clipped. Details matter. .max                 Date: 25 Feb 2007 11:38:29 From: Bill Sornson Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons fluffy bunny wrote: > In article <2ot0u2tmonkcohdgn34ivev48i4jsccpc8@4ax.com>, > jtaylor@NOSPAM.hfx.andara.com wrote: > >> On Sat, 24 Feb 2007 09:21:11 -0800, "Bill Sornson" <askme@ask.me> >> wrote: >> >>> Hardly anyone claims that a helmet will help if run over or >>> hit directly by a vehicle >> >> The original poster claims exactly that. > > The original poster claims exactly not-that. He was not run over, and > was very precise about that. he was clipped. Details matter. Not to Flailor. (Thus his plonkitude status. Got tired of his lies, deceptions and disingenuousness.) Bill "he tops my list" S.                 Date: 25 Feb 2007 17:26:26 From: Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons On Sun, 25 Feb 2007 16:18:19 GMT, fluffy bunny <betatron@earthlink.net > wrote: >In article <2ot0u2tmonkcohdgn34ivev48i4jsccpc8@4ax.com>, > jtaylor@NOSPAM.hfx.andara.com wrote: > >> On Sat, 24 Feb 2007 09:21:11 -0800, "Bill Sornson" <askme@ask.me> >> wrote: >> >> > Hardly anyone claims that a helmet will help if run over or >> >hit directly by a vehicle >> >> The original poster claims exactly that. > >The original poster claims exactly not-that. He was not run over, and >was very precise about that. he was clipped. That's very selective reading - how is "being hit" not being hit?   Date: 22 Feb 2007 22:07:53 From: Bellsouth Ijit 2.0 Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons "Kristian M Zoerhoff" <kristian.zoerhoff@gmail.com > wrote in message news:PkrDh.469$8x.445@newssvr14.news.prodigy.net... > 1. Yesterday afternoon, I'm riding along, when I spot 5 teenagers > walking along the other side of the road approaching me. > > "Hey, A**hole!" > > What the? I've no idea what prompted this. I should have ignored > it, but was in a foul mood, so I pulled a Baka and confronted > them, resulting in them backing down; no firearms, thankfully. > > > 2. Today, riding down to my father-in-law's, I see a wrong-way > rider coming at me, so I point across the road and shout "Other > side." He shakes his head, and I repeat (yes, I hate wrong-way > riding). He shakes it again, and forces me out into 45 mph > traffic to go around him. He's got an iPod glued into both ears. > OK, so maybe that just makes him a typical teenager, but it > annoys me (too many iPod-addled joggers around here). > > > Bring back the snow! > > > -- > > __o Kristian Zoerhoff > _'\(,_ kristian.zoerhoff@gmail.com > (_)/ (_) No kidding. I love cold foul weather. A part of the reason being it keeps the wannabe badasses and tourists indoors. July 4th, Halloween, New Year's Eve, the first warm day in winter all bring out the scum-lemmings.     Date: 23 Feb 2007 04:58:45 From: Gooserider Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons "Bellsouth Ijit 2.0" <bjit@bellsouth.net > wrote in message news:45de5aa0$0$4914$4c368faf@roadrunner.com... > > "Kristian M Zoerhoff" <kristian.zoerhoff@gmail.com> wrote in message > news:PkrDh.469$8x.445@newssvr14.news.prodigy.net... >> 1. Yesterday afternoon, I'm riding along, when I spot 5 teenagers >> walking along the other side of the road approaching me. >> >> "Hey, A**hole!" >> >> What the? I've no idea what prompted this. I should have ignored >> it, but was in a foul mood, so I pulled a Baka and confronted >> them, resulting in them backing down; no firearms, thankfully. >> >> >> 2. Today, riding down to my father-in-law's, I see a wrong-way >> rider coming at me, so I point across the road and shout "Other >> side." He shakes his head, and I repeat (yes, I hate wrong-way >> riding). He shakes it again, and forces me out into 45 mph >> traffic to go around him. He's got an iPod glued into both ears. >> OK, so maybe that just makes him a typical teenager, but it >> annoys me (too many iPod-addled joggers around here). >> >> >> Bring back the snow! >> >> >> -- >> >> __o Kristian Zoerhoff >> _'\(,_ kristian.zoerhoff@gmail.com >> (_)/ (_) > > > No kidding. I love cold foul weather. A part of the reason being it > keeps the wannabe badasses and tourists indoors. July 4th, Halloween, New > Year's Eve, the first warm day in winter all bring out the scum-lemmings. I would trade all those "scuim-lemmings" for the guy who keeps passing me too closely in his HYOOGE Nissan Titan truck.   Date: 23 Feb 2007 01:50:17 From: Bill Baka Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons Kristian M Zoerhoff wrote: > 1. Yesterday afternoon, I'm riding along, when I spot 5 teenagers > walking along the other side of the road approaching me. > > "Hey, A**hole!" > > What the? I've no idea what prompted this. I should have ignored > it, but was in a foul mood, so I pulled a Baka and confronted > them, resulting in them backing down; no firearms, thankfully. That's what I did to 5 teenagers yesterday. I just rode through the middle and let them figure out to get out of the way. They did, although I heard a few "What the?" comments from behind. They weren't looking for trouble but were blocking my way and only moved when it became apparent that I wasn't stopping or going around. If that's pulling a Baka, then I guess I'm guilty of the creation of that reference. Living in fear or everything is NOT living. There seem to be some devout cowards on this group. I refuse to be in that group. I have been on the receiving end of a knife once, but the closest I have come to getting shot was (more than once) cops. At least twice, once because my car looked like the vehicle description of a robbery getaway car, and once for burning rubber and interrupting their donut break. The most dangerous encounters I have had were with cops who think the badge gives them the right to pull a gun on you, and maybe even shoot you, then claim he thought you were going for a gun. Bill Baka     Date: 23 Feb 2007 09:39:19 From: Roger Zoul Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons Bill Baka wrote: :: Kristian M Zoerhoff wrote: ::: 1. Yesterday afternoon, I'm riding along, when I spot 5 teenagers ::: walking along the other side of the road approaching me. ::: ::: "Hey, A**hole!" ::: ::: What the? I've no idea what prompted this. I should have ignored ::: it, but was in a foul mood, so I pulled a Baka and confronted ::: them, resulting in them backing down; no firearms, thankfully. :: :: That's what I did to 5 teenagers yesterday. I just rode through the :: middle and let them figure out to get out of the way. Now, based on what you're written here, I'd say you were the moron here, bill. Why did you not simply ride around them? They did, :: although I heard a few "What the?" comments from behind. They :: weren't looking for trouble but were blocking my way and only moved :: when it became apparent that I wasn't stopping or going around. :: If that's pulling a Baka, then I guess I'm guilty of the creation of :: that reference. :: Living in fear or everything is NOT living. Learn the share the fucking road, bill. :: There seem to be some devout cowards on this group. :: I refuse to be in that group. :: I have been on the receiving end of a knife once, but the closest I :: have come to getting shot was (more than once) cops. At least twice, :: once because my car looked like the vehicle description of a robbery :: getaway car, and once for burning rubber and interrupting their :: donut break. The most dangerous encounters I have had were with cops :: who think the badge gives them the right to pull a gun on you, and :: maybe even shoot you, then claim he thought you were going for a gun. :: Bill Baka There's a thin line between coward and moron, apparently.       Date: 24 Feb 2007 02:08:00 From: Bill Baka Subject: Re: Warm weather bringing out the morons Roger Zoul wrote: > Bill Baka wrote: > :: Kristian M Zoerhoff wrote: > ::: 1. Yesterday afternoon, I'm riding along, when I spot 5 teenagers > ::: walking along the other side of the road approaching me. > ::: > ::: "Hey, A**hole!" > ::: > ::: What the? I've no idea what prompted this. I should have ignored > ::: it, but was in a foul mood, so I pulled a Baka and confronted > ::: them, resulting in them backing down; no firearms, thankfully. > :: > :: That's what I did to 5 teenagers yesterday. I just rode through the > :: middle and let them figure out to get out of the way. > > Now, based on what you're written here, I'd say you were the moron here, > bill. > Why did you not simply ride around them? Traffic, as in heavy traffic and no shoulders. > > They did, > :: although I heard a few "What the?" comments from behind. They > :: weren't looking for trouble but were blocking my way and only moved > :: when it became apparent that I wasn't stopping or going around. > :: If that's pulling a Baka, then I guess I'm guilty of the creation of > :: that reference. > :: Living in fear or everything is NOT living. > > Learn the share the fucking road, bill. Not with semi's and rush hour traffic. I do share and they didn't. Of course they could have been standing in the weeds where I can't ride or they could have single filed on the edge of the pavement, which is what they did. > > :: There seem to be some devout cowards on this group. > :: I refuse to be in that group. > :: I have been on the receiving end of a knife once, but the closest I > :: have come to getting shot was (more than once) cops. At least twice, > :: once because my car looked like the vehicle description of a robbery > :: getaway car, and once for burning rubber and interrupting their > :: donut break. The most dangerous encounters I have had were with cops > :: who think the badge gives them the right to pull a gun on you, and > :: maybe even shoot you, then claim he thought you were going for a gun. > :: Bill Baka > > There's a thin line between coward and moron, apparently. Then why are you straddling the line with one foot in each category. Damned wimp. Bill Baka > >