Cycling, It's Fashion on Bikes

Often people joke that 90% of cycling is fashion, but the truth of the matter is it's only a "joke" because 90% is probably a low ball number. Don't believe me? Have you ever noticed how many go out of their way to look like professional cyclists? Ever noticed how many pro team jersey's and sometimes full kits you see on fat, out of shape dudes with deep wallets and shallow aerobic capacity? If not, take a look around. People who ride bikes want to look good. Or, they ding bells and shout "on your left."

The SRAM Tour of the Gila starts today and once again our good friends Lance and Levi have decided it's a great training race where they can go beat up on the domestic pros. This is a tangent, but this year Garmin has sent a few boys themselves, three actually, because that's all the archaic UCI rule allows for, so maybe Levi will actually have some competition, I'm hoping so at least. Either way, it's GREAT, in much larger font than that, when these guys race stateside. It does so much for the sport. No sarcasm intended. No really, none! But, you're probably wondering, what does this have to do with fashion? While we(I) may type in circles here at TeamLandall, we(I) often, at least have some unifying theme.

Because of that stupid rule I mentioned above the boys from RadioShack and Garmin aren't allowed to race as RadioShack and Garmin. Last year Levi, Lance and Chris (yes, I am on a first name basis with them, duh!) raced as "Team Mellow Johnny's" after Lance's famed and overpriced bike shop (I mean really. I paid $12 for a water bottle and the logo wore off in like a month). This year, they're doing the same and the Garmin boys are racing as "DZ Nuts" after Zabriske's chamois cream company.

Again, the fashion, I'm getting to it! A picture was released on twitter this morning that showed the kits that the Mellow Johnny's crew will be sporting during their brief stay in the Land of Enchantment and they are bad ass. And to prove that, I've provided you with this picture.



I'm not going to lie. I'm pretty much always a fan of retro and so is everybody else, because it's awesome. Ever been to a baseball game on throw back day? The game can be the most boring life less thing ever and just seeing dudes in uniforms made to look like they're from the 40s makes up for it! Remember when the Pistons changed to those ugly teal uniforms with the horse logo? No, well, don't worry, because after a season or two, they went back to the good old tried and true.



Ridiculous!



Much Better!

Back to cycling. When fashion plays such a huge part in recognizability (I'm coining that) you'd think teams would do a better job of making kits that look good. When RadioShack released their new kits for this year I was more than a little disappointed. Lance had bikes custom painted by world famous artists for the Tour de France last year. Shepard Fairey, of Obama's Hope Campaign fame, is apparently Lance's buddy and this is what they settle on?



I mean, it's a bit plain. If RadioShack or "The Shack" as they seem to be referring to themselves, wanted to get in this cycling game to revolutionize their image, while shortening their name so they're "cool in the streets," why didn't they insist on some sort of old school retro jersey to begin with? Nobody in their right mind likes the standard RadioShack kit better than the retro one only being used at the Tour of the Gila. Everybody knows that making your logo look retro makes you look progressive and ahead of your time. It doesn't make any sense but I'm not opening that point up for debate. RadioShack missed out on a great chance to capitalize on their cool*. (*I'm not actually sure they are cool. I actually thought they had gone out of business before this sponsorship was announced.)

But really, without the marriage of cycling and fashion you'd have a bunch of dudes with hairy legs, gym socks and hi-vis yellow performance jersey's cluttering up the road. While I really think RadioShack dropped the ball, they at least did better than these guys. Who without a doubt have the ugliest kit I've ever seen. There isn't a single nice thing to say about it. It makes the "Venom" kit from Rock Racing two years ago look good, which is saying a lot! I can only assume the guy in the middle of these two is the designer. Just like parents of a really ugly child, only they could love something this hideous.



Since I have some experience in kit design I think I come to this from a place of exponential expertise. The B Sample Racing kit was and probably will be the best looking kit I've ever worn and yes, it was designed by yours truly. I'll admit I completely ripped off the original Rock Racing design but by the time these were made nobody was even able to remember those kits. If I had to do it again I'd decrease the center logo a bit so you could see more of the white bursts that go directly horizontal. Still, even with that discrepancy, it's a thing of beauty! See for yourself:



If I ever get the opportunity to design another kit I want to stick with the retro theme and have something that pays tribute to the greatest baseball uniform every adorned. From 1975-1993 the Houston Astro's fans were lucky enough to get to gaze on these beauties. Hopefully, one day, fans of TeamLandall will get the same opportunity. Fingers crossed!

Really Vino?

Yesterday, this happened:



Alexandre Vinokourov won Liege-Bastogne-Leige, one of cycling's five monuments. I didn't see the race because I live in America and went to ride instead of watching it in Flemish or some other foreign language and to be honest, with this result I'm sort of glad. I don't really know what the think. Here's a guy that rode out of his mind only to test positive for blood doping, deny it, do the two year suspension, come back from his suspension and immediately start winning races. The first couple races he won weren't big ones by any means, mostly time trials, but now he wins Leige in a totally dominating performance? I think you're more than a bit gullible if you look at that result and don't at least wonder how clean it is.

In recent history there's been a handful of guys that mattered that got busted and return to the sport. David Millar, Tyler Hamilton, Ivan Basso, Michael Rasmussen, Floyd Landis, Ricardo Ricco and Alexandre Vinokourov. This list isn't exhaustive, but it is telling. Let's take a look at each of these cases.

Upon David Millar's (admitted to doping after being busted) return he rode for Saunier-Duval and basically did nothing spectacular. He had consistently lack luster results in time trials and to my knowledge, didn't win anything. Then, he signed on with Garmin and now, in his third year with them, he's won some races.

Tyler Hamilton (has always denied it with some pretty creative claims), he didn't win anything.

Ivan Basso (says he "considered" but never actually doped), still win-less to my knowledge though always "a threat." Whatever that means.

Michael Rasmussen (denies) is riding for basically a high level amateur team based in Italy. He's not going to any big races and either it's because the races he's riding are too small for anyone to care to report results or he's not winning because basically his name has been silent since his comeback.

Floyd Landis (denies, with solid evidence that the testing procedures were f'd up) just scored a second at the UCI Battenkill but that's hardly a big result for a guy that won the Tour de France in 2006.

Ricardo Ricco (he was basically sweating CERA so who cares), seems to be winning just like the days of old. Out sprinted Vino and Basso at Trentino last week for a summit finish.

Vino (denies, but actually eluded to admitting in a press conference), see above.

So what does this mean? It's hard to tell. Does this mean that Landis', Hamilton's and Rasmussen's seemingly mediocre performances within the first couple of years of returning prove they were doping before? Seems likely. Does it mean that it's impossible to win when coming back from a suspension? Not if you believe that Ricco and Vino are riding clean. But, it something about that just doesn't make any sense.

In the reports I've read Vino more or less fended off a solid chase effort by Valverde, Evans and Gilbert. There's no shortage of horsepower in those three guys and Evans alone is at least as good of a time trialist as Vino. In theory, one guy shouldn't be able to stay away from three guys working together, you know, in theory. If you're clean now, and you're a couple years older than you were then, but you're still able to put in that kind of ride coming off contesting the overall at Trentino, why'd you need to dope in the first place? Suddenly now, with you maturity and time to reflect you've gained the confidence in your own abilities to not try to hedge the bet just a little? Maybe the dope isn't that effective to begin with? Maybe he's clean, maybe he's not, but it just doesn't make much sense on the surface.

He was booed as he crossed the finish line and really, who can blame anyone that doesn't believe in his performance? He hasn't really given us a whole lot of reason to.

Hains Point, Like a Crit, Only Sketchier

If you live in the DC area, ride a bike and have ever considered shaving your legs, then Thursday nights mean you go to Hains Point for sprint night. If you are unfamiliar with Hains Point I've included this map to help this diatribe make a bit more sense.


View Hains Point in a larger map

You'll notice that Hains Point is basically a triangle. I've color coded the route for how it usually behaves. The blue line begins after the arbitrary sprint line when in most cases people sit up, soft pedal and let it regroup, doesn't always happen. The red line is when people drop the proverbial hammer and decide to not only ride fast, but try and run into every parked car, pedestrian, slower cyclist, dog, cat, child and tour bus until reaching that sprint line. Then, as you'd guess, the process repeats.

Last night I decided that I'd go give the good old Hains Point ride another chance. If speed work is really as important as people make it out to be there's really not many rides in the area where top end speed is going to be hit as frequently as here. The reason why I've started to skip Hains Point in recent weeks is because as you'd probably guess from my description of the red line above, it's basically the sketchiest shit on the planet. As if getting 50 or so super ego driven cyclist together and painting a line on the road that means absolutely nothing wouldn't make things dangerous enough, Hains Point is essentially where everyone in DC who is trying to get fitter goes. And for the very reason that Hains Point is attractive for all of these various fitness seekers, low traffic and one way street, it's basically now made it more dangerous than if we did this ride in the middle of the mall. That doesn't make any sense you might say. Oh no? Allow me to give some examples that I witnessed from just last night before deciding my life was more valuable than an imaginary green jersey ripped to shreds and stuck to road rash.

What might come as a surprise to you, is the biggest hazard at Hains Point (controlling for the fact that a bunch of cyclist are riding well above the speed limit just inches from each other) isn't traffic. Traffic is relatively light and when their are cars, the group is moving so much faster than they are, they generally get out of the way. There are actually two hazards and their percentage of danger is probably hard to calculate, first, pedestrians, who I'd like to classify as walkers, runners and tourists, second, other people on bikes.

The pedestrians at Hains Point literally come in all shapes and sizes but one thing they have in common is no interest in getting out of the way. I guess because it's a touristy area with light traffic people forget that it's still a road and just walk across it at will. There aren't really sidewalks so apparently to joggers, running both with and against the flow, the best place to run is in the middle of the road. It's nothing for a group of 5 or 6 power walkers, "power" being used loosely, to walk six wide taking an entire lane and refusing to move. All of these obstacles are encountered every single lap and depending on who's at the front of the group, the reaction and subsequent avoidance can be smooth or a poetic sequence of brake grabbing, swerving, sprinting back up to speed, swerve again, fight for a wheel, grab some brakes, swerve, sprint, curse, brakes, swerve, repeat, all the way around.

Last night on the second lap there was a gentleman training for the next Rocky film running up the dashed white line in the middle of the road shadow boxing the air as he went. The group was 2 to 3 wide at this point and I was right on the white line. I saw the Rocky impressionist and said to the guy trying to fight me for the wheel in front that we're gonna need to move and he ignored me. I got a bit closer and said it again, ignored. Our arms are now touching and he still isn't moving to the inside to create space. I weigh my options which are to lean on this guy and force him in, which could create an insane over reaction by him and everybody causing a massive pile up, or at the last second, swerve out of the group around the boxer and create pass manic, I chose that, panic and cursing ensue. One guy yells at me for not calling it out and I point to my friend who wouldn't move in and that seems to settle the debate. When I told Jill this story she did not feel my same amount of annoyance since there actually wasn't an accident, but this could have ended very, very badly. Glad it didn't. Oh, I then went on to win that sprint. Where's my green jersey? (Jill thought this should be the story I lead with, not the boxer I almost ran over from behind.)

More and more people seem to be riding bikes these days. Great for the bike industry, bad for people on bikes. Why would I say such a thing? Because there's only so many places to go where a ride of this nature can take place safely and coincidentally it's the same place everybody who has a bike wants to go to ride as well. I couldn't tell you how many pairs or groups of 3 or 4 on hybrids all cruise around at 12mph side by side, but not shoulder to shoulder, effectively blocking the lane. There are far more people on bikes than pedestrians but just like the pedestrians, most of them think the lack of traffic equals a free reign to ride on whatever piece of the two lanes they feel like. Last night, after the third lap and avoiding at least one disaster per lap I decided I'd had enough. When I soft pedaled by the parking lot I saw a group of at least 100 bikes in a big group being given instructions by one guy. From the looks for the group and bikes straight lines were not going to be ridden. I have no idea what that group did to effect the fast group, but I'm certainly glad I wasn't there to find out.

When I lived in Oakland and used to do the Port Ride on Tuesdays I would marvel at how sketchy it was with all the squirrels that would show up. But, at least at the port, the only people out there were bikes and the occasional semi on a 4 lane wide road. There's a solid number of squirrels at Hains Point which would naturally give one cause for concern, but in order to be safe you've got to not only watch for squirrels but pedestrians, outside bikes and an erratic group, for me, it's too much. Going down in the obvious inevitable pile up that is going to happen at Hains Point is not worth any amount of top end speed work gained. I think winning a sprint against guys who go there every week proves that. Last night was the last time I'll be participating in that ride. Hains Point Sprints, nice knowing you, but I'm out.

Random Musings of No Consequence

Even the title of this post doesn't make any sense. Everything has a consequence and I'm not even sure I am "musing" or know how to "muse."

--

As I'm "watching" (it's actually reading) live updates on VeloNews of La Fleche Wallonne and CPelkey, the guy doing the updating, mentions Contador seemingly every chance he gets I start to wonder if there will ever be another rider like Eddy Merckx who could win every race he ever showed up to? And, I almost immediately answer my own question but with a caveat; no, but maybe.

Even a guy like Contador can't win all the time. Contador isn't going to ever win Paris-Roubaix and maybe because he just won't ever race it. It's a different age of racing where people are much more specialized.

Here's an MAT style analogy I definitely would have gotten correct:

Eddy Merckx : Cycling :: LaBron James : Basketball

LaBron can basically play every position on the floor and in a lot of cases better than the guys who are actually, 4s or 5s. Want to put a small guy on him to disrupt his ability to drive, fine, he shoots over the guy. Want to put a big guy on him to take away the outside jumper, fine, he drives past. He's really a defensive match up nightmare and I'm obviously not the first person to point this out. LaBron James isn't a 2 or 3 or anything, he plays the position of basketball player and that makes him phenomal.

Much in the same way Eddy Merckx wasn't a classics rider or a stage racer. He won practically everything he ever entered and instead of riding the first week of the classics and then taking a break he basically raced every time there was a starting line. I'm pretty sure Eddy Merckx would turn himself inside out at the local 5k if he decided he wanted to win the thing. And, he probably would.

Today, guys specialize. That's just how it is. You know why Lance Armstrong could win 7 Tour de Frances in a row, because it was the only race that he went to with a real objective. If Eddy Merckx had focused solely on the Tour he'd probably have won it at least a few more than 5.

To answer my own question, no, nobody will ever be a rider like Eddy Merckx, unless of course there is, and won't that be fun!

--

If you're a fan of bike racing then you're a fan of Phil Ligget. I dare anyone to try and justify a single reason as to not love the way this guy commentates a race. The same VeloNews coverage posted some "Ligget-isms" and they are each awesome, funny and true. If you don't know what he's referring to, allow me:

"And so, the first pedal has been turned in anger," - They've started trying.

"The elastic has snapped" - When chasing a guy/break and you realize you're not going to make it and you sit up/give up.

"And the heads of state have come to the fore" - important riders are now showing themselves.

"Are they on the road to stardom? Or are they lambs to the slaughter?" - gutsy dudes on long breaks and it looks like they just might make it. Win a long break, you're a star, get caught, well, you feel like you're that lamb.

"He climbs like an angel" - apparently angels are very good at riding bikes up big mountains.

"The little man with the big heart" - Think Thomas Voeckler circa 2004 Tour de France.

"He's dancing on his pedals in a most immodest way" - Attacking on a steep climb.

"He's suffering like he never suffered before" - Ouch.

"He's wearing the mask of pain" - You can tell that he's hurting.

"Once you pull on that golden fleece, You become two men" - Referring to a rider to keeps the yellow jersey in the Tour despite all odds that say he should lose it. It can make you ride above your own limits to keep it for one more day.

"He turns around to look, But he's not going to see any riders back there.
Not even with glasses on because they're all far, far behind him." - I've actually never heard him say this. Doesn't mean he hasn't.

There are so many more.

--

Lastly, saw on Twitter that Bob Roll is going to be in Waldorf, MD at a bike shop on Friday night at 8:30p telling stories. I obviously got excited, but this event has confirmed just how awesome my girlfriend is. She has no idea who Bob Roll is but immediately insisted that we go. Probably because of the ridiculous five year old grin and maybe the jumping up and down with excitement that suddenly came over me. Hopefully she finds him entertaining and his stories will make sense to someone that isn't a self described bike geek. She's the best! You should all be jealous.

I'm Pretty Sure What You're Riding Isn't Actually a Bike

As a cyclist of questionable skill but lots of "knowledge" it's only natural that I become somewhat snobbish and annoyed by other people riding what by definition is a "bicycle" but by real world standards needs a new describer invented almost immediately. Let's take a quick look at what I'm talking about.

Unlike some guys who ride a bike I'm not really anti the hipster-fixie crowd. I often find their bikes really pretty, full of matching colors and thought out decoration schemes. I also find most hipsters on fixies to be better bike handlers than a lot of guys I ride with so they've got that going for them. I will say that riding a bike with no brakes is pretty stupid, but in most cases they do have an extra layer of protection in the form of an almost grown in mustache.

One group I can't even start to wrap my head around are the idiots who decided a regular double triangle bike just wasn't good enough for them. Maybe they're short and couldn't see over their fellow freak shows while riding the wrong way up one way city streets. Maybe they found a bunch of old bikes at a yard sale, did some drugs with a guy who was an "artist" who happened to own a welder and decided that they could fix their vision issues by stacking two bikes on each other and achieve unrivaled panoramic views of oncoming angry traffic. If you've never seen a tall bike in person, consider yourself lucky, but, here at teamLandall we believe in visual reinforcement, so I found a perfect example in about 2 seconds using a google search.



I never really noticed this until the other day when I saw a guy on a tall bike using the old foot-jammed-on-the-rear-tire-braking tactic. As you can probably guess this is a marginally effective method for controlling speed and I can only imagine the likely hood of broken bones from bailing out on an out of control tall bike is at least 4xs as likely as your average out of control fixie. But, if you look closely, you'll notice our friend in this picture also prefers his tall bike, sans brake. How can I tell? First, take a look at the handle bars which are turned up in such a way to make his position more relaxed and comfortable, no brake levers. "Yes," you might say, "but my bike as a kid didn't have brake levers but a coaster brake on the rear wheel." Great observation, except you see that derailleur turned in almost a vertical position to redirect his 38' long chain? If there's coaster brakes that thing's getting ripped off first time he applies them. But why be bothered with a mechanism to help control speed when you're enjoying your ride at least 6' off the ground? I can't think of any rational reasons. I'm sure you're having the same struggle.

I'd like, for just once, to have one of these clowns explain to me why they'd want to ride a bike that requires some sort of complimentary object just to get on the thing and then why they enjoy having to time all the lights so they aren't forced to get on and off? I once saw a guy in Portland (city of weird bike culture) remove a stilt looking object that was fashioned to the non drive side of the bike. He used this stilt at stop lights to tripod himself up. Once he got rolling again he re secured the stilt to the bike. I'm not gonna lie, all things considered, and ignoring the fact that he was still riding a tall bike, this was pretty impressive. But I still disapprove. Obviously.

These bikes are a product of some dumb urban bike culture that I will never understand. Am I the only one that silently (and sometimes, most of the time, not so silently) hopes that the person riding one falls over every time I see one in the city? I doubt it.

Next up, folding bikes.



I remember the first time I saw one of these and couldn't decide if the design was genius or ridiculous. I'm still stuck. Every time I see one I can't help but imagine my junk getting smashed into that back leg of the triangle where the seat is fixed. It seems like a pretty efficient design if you don't mind the occasional junk bashing. As someone who races cyclo-cross and getting about 75% of my remounts wrong, I can tell you, that shit hurts. On a side note, moms should not stand with their young kids at spots on the course where remounts are being attempted. Unless they want their kid learning a bunch of new vocabulary. You're call. It sort of looks like it's trying to pay homage to the first bikes with the gigantic front wheel and tiny little back wheel. Or, maybe that's just me trying to give this thing some sort of justification. But, even with junk smashing, from a design perspective, it's got to be stronger than one of these things, which are a lot more common:



A lot of people point out that they like these bikes because you can take them on the train during rush hour. I agree, that is a nifty feature, except most people use these bikes for commuting and thus avoid the train during rush hour. But, maybe not? I think my favorite part of seeing these bikes on my way to work is really the people riding them. If you ever wondered who keeps the companies that make reflective gear and hi-vis yellow clothing in business, look no further than the guy with a folding bike. One morning I thought I was interrupting some weird race as there was a pace line of these dudes at least 6 guys deep. I was more than a little nervous passing them because you never know how 6 guys in hi-vis yellow and cranking along in their 65x23 are going to feel being passed buy a guy on a "normal" bike. Have you ever noticed how big the front chain ring is? I'm pretty sure when Magnus Backstedt attempted to break the hour record and used some ungodly large gear (I can't find a picture or video) he must have borrowed the chain ring from one of these things.

Maybe I'm just a traditionalist but doesn't it make these people nervous that all the stress points on the bike are so far away from where they're making contact? In essence these things have a steer tube and seat post of like 3'. Any 5th grader learning about fulcrums can tell you that given a long enough lever a baby could produce enough torque to turn over an elephant. I'm sure they test these things and they're "safe" but it'd make me nervous having that much tubing flex and absorbing shock as I roll over every bump. I guess I've never heard of those things snapping in half, but I don't really roll in circles where people are riding these bikes.

Almost daily I see a guy on probably the weirdest two wheeled machine that gains forward momentum through pedaling (I know, needs work). I tried so hard to find a picture of his exact set up but couldn't. To be honest, I don't even know what to call it. The best I could do is this, which, doesn't do it justice, but it's a start and I'll of course elaborate.



The one I pass all the time has a gigantic front wind shield but the cloth fairing piece is way bigger than this picture. This guys barely covers the tubing on his super cool recumbent, but the guy I pass barely has ground clearance. He's cruising the low rider version of a recumbent with weird cloth fairing. At first I thought this was a shield from the cold, which, on one ride into work, I was a bit jealous of this guys self created micro-environment. But, the other day, it was about 80 degrees and I saw him again, which, who knows, maybe he's got that thing equipped with AC? All I know, is this thing looks like he's from some other planet or at least trying to get there. I can't for the life of me figure out what the advantage is, but can't help but think how funny it'd be if a bee were to make it's way into his little cocoon and then do what trapped bees do. I'd like to watch that go down while I'm behind at a safe distance so when he careens out of control, I can call 911 and tell them to bring the jaws of life. Or, at least a good pair of scissors. I'm sort of surprised I can't find whatever it is this thing is called online because the guy around here has two different covers (there can't possibly be two different dudes riding these things!?), one in blue and one in black with hi-vis yellow zebra stripes. Having the hi-vis yellow is obviously key because nobody is likely to notice a seemingly rolling space ship. I mean without that, he's practically camouflaged.

I'm just going to leave out any sort of criticism over the fact that this guy, when it's boiled down, is riding a recumbent. My thoughts on recumbents are long and confused. I'll spare you.

I didn't realize it until just now but it appears, after looking back over this little blurb that it's really just about visability. We started with our urban bike culture weirdo welding two bikes and connecting every chain he could steal off bikes locked up to parking meters, to an old guy (I'm guessing here. It's impossible to tell who's pedaling the space ship since he's entirely closed in.) who'd prefer a more relaxed position but realizing he's now inches from the ground, looked for ways to increase his visibility by imitating space travel.

The other day I was riding with a guy who went on quite a rant about how he wanted to respect everybody on a bike. I believe the quote was something like, "Hey man, we're all on bikes. If you're on a Pinerello with a 45 degree stem facing up. That's fine. We're both on bikes." I know what he was getting at and I agree that cycling/cyclist (myself included) should do a better job of being more welcoming of new riders because we all started out somewhere. But, in some cases, you just gotta draw the line somewhere.

Stay Classy PG County

Have you ever noticed that when you sit around in a group and one person mentions a bad incident with a cop it doesn't take long for every single person in the group to share a similar story or at least express their distrust in general law enforcement? Have you ever sat back and wondered why that is? Why the guys/gals that are paid with tax dollars are pretty much disliked as a whole by the general population? Is it because everybody has something to hide and they're nervous the cops are going to find it? Not usually. It's because of incidents like the one at the University of Maryland where a kid gets clearly beaten by multiple cops because he wandered too close and they were probably frustrated that their night off turned into riot control. And, as if beating this kid senseless with billy clubs wasn't bad enough, the officers then lie on the police report (which are filed under the penalty of perjury) by saying this kid assaulted them (which is a felony) and that his injuries were sustained because he was kicked by the horse (try finding that in the video). AND, as if that wasn't bad enough, to attempt to hide the abuse and kill the paper trail they forced the kid to refuse medical attention because if he went to the hospital they'd have to file another report saying why he needed the medical attention in the first place. He was instructed that if he refused the hospital visit he'd be let go, if not, he'd spend the entire weekend in jail.

I know that every cop doesn't behave in this fashion. Doesn't lash out at some drunk kid because he's an easy target and then to cover their own asses try and pin a felony assault charge on him. But too many do, and luckily for this kid, it was caught on video and now hopefully he can sue everyone involved for as much as humanly possible. Too many incidents like this occur that don't get caught on tape and that's why when you're in that previously mentioned group it's so easy for everyone to go on and on about their experiences with police. It's too often an abuse of power by people who finally have a chance to show you just how tough or powerful they are. I feel sorry for the good cops out there who know are going to be looked at with the suspicious eyes as if it were them in the video beating this kid for no reason. But, like they say, one bad apple spoils the bunch.

Seriously, watch the video and see if you can see this kid do anything other than put his hands up and seemingly try and back away from the horse and cops until he backs into the wall. He doesn't even try to defend himself, he just curls up in a ball and takes the beating. I hope all the cops involved have assault with deadly weapon charges filed against them, sentenced to the same jail time this kid would have received and then upon their release from jail, forced to struggle to find gainful employment because of their record, just like this kid would have had to do if this video hadn't emerged.

Pave of Old Town

Sunday morning I needed to go out and spin the legs for a few hours. I had a time restriction so I couldn't really go on any of the medium-long routes that I would usually ride but that left me without a real plan of where I should go. Since it was Paris-Roubaix day after all I decided to head into Old Town and seek out some cobbles. I knew about Prince St. because it's marked and there's signs that don't allow trucks on it. What I ended up finding in addition to Prince St were three alleys that were all cobbled with their own unique personalities. Here's the pictures and my take on each.



Prince St. It's a standard block long and is on a slight hill. Traffic is one way down the hill but I rode it twice, both times, up. Since there's essentially no traffic on this road, it wasn't an issue. It's hard to tell by the pictures but the stones that make up this road are not laid in any sort of pattern and they aren't uniform in height or size. They very in size from pebbles filling in gaps to rocks larger than softballs. Riding up this street definitely sucked. Racing it would be a nightmare as you sort of have to just let your front wheel bounce and find it's way. To the couple taking your engagement photos as I bounced my way up this street, sorry I ruined your obviously awkward moment. Hopefully you had many more as a stranger with a camera kept directing you to kiss. To the lady watering her flowers on the sidewalk, thanks for not even looking up to acknowledge some idiot was riding his bike the wrong way up your street. I'm guessing your lack of reaction means I'm not the first one you've seen.



We'll call this sector 2 as I'm pretty sure it doesn't have a name. I found this alley and decided to give it a go. It's far less maintained than any of the others with grass, roots and a water system run off up towards the top. Obviously that middle brick section would have been smoothest but if I was looking for smooth rides I wouldn't have gone on this little adventure. I rode this alley three times, twice on the left and once on the right. The right side was a lot smoother. Overall suck factor was pretty high.



You can see that this alley which is relatively smooth leads to the 4th section above it. Even though these were "smooth" and put together like a puzzle they still vibrated you quite a bit. These you could basically ride just like a regular road, it was just a bumpy, teeth chattering road. Suck factor was pretty minimal. The cook from one of the restaurants that use this alley was not amused with my riding past while he was enjoying his smoke break.



This last section came just across the street from the previous. I wanted to link them up at full speed but there was the occasional car so I had to at least slow down enough to make sure it was clear. The stones in this section were a lot like Prince St and less like the previous alley, except there were big sections that were just missing and had been filled in with sand. As you bounced off a big stone and hit a sand section big enough for your tire to roll through your speed would plummet and then you'd be bouncing across the next section and a much lower speed. Carrying speed all the way through was almost impossible and I felt like at the top I was using a lot of body english to try and pick some sort of line, but I don't think I was really dictating where the bike was headed much. I rode this section twice and the first time I startled a couple runners who were stretching in a parking lot about 3/4 of the way up. They exchanged suspicious looks. The second time they wondered out loud what was wrong with me. Which is weird, because you know, they were running.

Those were the only sections I could find that were long enough to bother riding. There are a couple of other half alleys that are laid with bricks but I figured they weren't worth the effort. I saw a picture that I thought was taken in old town of a cobbled climb however, I couldn't find it. I'm sure the pave of Paris-Roubaix can't be compared to the stones in Old Town, but, it was fun none the less.

Paris-Roubaix. Sitting in for 2nd.

I should start by saying I don't want to take anything away from Fabian Cancellara. To make his move like that with 60k to go is ballsy beyond belief. So much can go wrong at Roubaix and to put the hammer down with so many more kilometers to race was an impressive show of force. Cancellara did exactly what he knew he needed to do, he attacked and went solo just like I'm sure he had planned. He did what every bike racer has to do to win a race, he risked losing it. Well done and congratulations.

Now, here's my beef with the rest of the field, except Boonen.

Remember when Texas was driving the ball down the field pretty much at will against Alabama in the BCS title game and then that big gigantic Alabama guy laid that seemingly normal hit on Colt McCoy but when Colt got up you could clearly see his arm was hanging in an awkward position. Remember when they sent the freshman Garret Gilbert out and he looked scared and nervous and remember how for the rest of the game, you just sort of felt like regardless of the outcome this wasn't the game you were hoping for. All my personal feelings of being a huge Longhorns fan aside I felt like the game had just been taken away. That happens, it's football, and guys get hurt. But when you remove a big star and all the hype and anticipation just instantly dissipate, you can't help but feel a little bland, no matter the outcome.

For me, yesterday's Paris-Roubaix gave me the exact same feeling but for different reasons. There were clearly two guys in that race on a different level than everybody else, Cancellara and Boonen. If I you didn't know who I was talking about before I wrote that, you didn't watch the race. At 60k to go Cancellara attacks, I screamed out loud to no one, "there he goes," and when the camera pans back all you see are a bunch of other guys looking around seeing who's going to be the one to burn all their matches to try and bring him back. I'm not totally convinced that that move was the one that Cancellara was even trying to make stick. If you remember about 10k before that Boonen jumped out just to see who still had some juice but didn't really put the hammer down. I think Cancellara was doing the same thing, looked over his shoulder, saw a bunch of already defeated faces and then decided to give it a go. The only reaction at all was from Boonen, who very un-wisely had dropped back about 8 wheels to take a drink and a bit of a break. He quickly moved out of line, pedaled a couple times really hard and then realized that nobody else was even flinching and that there's no way he'd bring back Cancellara solo. The race was over, right there, 60k from the line because a bunch of other guys just gave up, they all decided then and there that racing for 2nd wasn't quite so bad.

If you watched you saw Boonen on several occasions go to the front, put in a massive effort, pull off only to see that nobody was pulling through to keep up the chase. He'd wave his hand and it looked like everybody was drawing figurative circles in the dirt because they were embarrassed of their tactics and couldn't look him in the eye. The tactics for the "best of the rest" out of that group became very obvious; very fast; make Boonen do as much work as possible and when he seems to be tired, we'll attack him too. If everybody in that chase group had already resigned to racing for 2nd, it was a brilliant tactic by all of them and since Boonen lost a sprint for 4th to Roger Hammond, he clearly took the bait and did 90% of the work trying desperately to race himself back into a chance for the actual win. It was a goal that did him in and eventually left him with his worst finish at Roubaix since he became "Tom Boonen."

At some point Flecha and Hushovd attacked the group and built up about a minute lead over the Boonen group. Everybody in the world watching this duo knew what each man needed to do to place 2nd on the day. For Flecha he needed to attack Hushovd far enough out to break him so he didn't carry him to the line. Hushovd needed to do enough work to keep Flecha happy and then jump him on the track with 200 meters go. I kept wondering why Flecha hadn't attacked? It was so obvious that it was his only chance. But there they were, on the velodrome with Flecha leading it out. Even Paul Sherwan or maybe it was Phil Ligget, basically said that Hushovd would wait till the last minute so as not to embarrass Flecha in the sprint. Flecha's legs aren't my legs so I have no idea how he was feeling, but it just seems like he missed a bunch of chances for 2nd place by not attacking Hushovd repeatedly starting at 15k out.

Big George once again missed a decisive split. His twitter account reports that he didn't have the legs he had at Flanders and I guess that's how it goes. I was certainly cheering and hoping that he'd have some magic at Roubaix. It would have been great to see him in one of those final groups.

So, I guess that's it. That's my humble, completely useless take on the 2010 Paris-Roubaix. It's always a great race and yesterday's edition was no different. I just can't help but feeling like there were only 2 guys that really wanted to win and everybody else gave up that goal when they saw the red Swiss flag on the back of Fabian Cancellara accelerate. Even though nobody cared to respond, what a great move and an insane display of power to ride solo for 60k.

Guilty Before Proven Anything

VeloNews reports that BMC has suspended former World Road Race Champ Alessandro Ballan since his name has now appeared to be linked to the latest doping raid of some Italian pharmacist. This bothers me for a few reasons and of course, I'm going to tell you about them.

On the side of innocence:

In the article there's a statement from BMC that says the suspension isn't an accusation of guilt, but due to UCI and team guidelines, it's the proper course of action. How is this not an accusation of guilt? To me it's the exact same thing when a girl cries rape and she isn't sure that she was actually raped . Whether the guy did it or not, now he's a rapist and Ballan, with no actual evidence, is now a doper. I'm not saying that Ballan did or did not dope, what the hell do I know about his case except that he's been suspended for something he's been "allegedly" tied to. VeloNews now lets it's readers comment on the bottom of all it's stories. Most of the time these comments are exactly what you expect from people who comment on news stories, they're dumb, but there's one regarding this case that I think makes a lot of sense and brings up a good point.

madisonwi writes, "at what point is "allegedly" equate guilty? based on this type of reactionary policy with regards to doping would the texan still have 7 tour victories? or would he have been suspended by the team for the comments made by the french press of his alleged "doping" during his tour reign. not that i want to give dopers a free pass, but this system is starting to destroy a sport, or game if you will, that i am very fond of."

If you're familiar with the Armstrong dominance of the Tour de France you know that there wasn't a single season that some news story didn't link him to doping. There was the Ferrari scandal, who by the way was found guilty of providing cyclists with EPO. There's the case of the soigneur who testified in court that she had been instructed to drive great distances to pick up unmarked packages and bring them back to the team. There was and still is no shortage of people who accuse Armstrong of doping and claim to have evidence, but he's never been suspended or withheld from competition while they investigate. Why does Ballan have to sit out arguably the most important race of his season but Lance never did?

Let's assume he's guilty:

There are a lot of cyclist who seem to get busted when various Doctors keep fantastic records of who they're supplying illegal products too. From the Doctor's side I can't say I blame them. They get no prize money when a guy they've supplied dope to wins, but they get all the jail time if they get caught for dealing. The only bargaining chip they have is to supply names of the people they've been juicing. But, what I don't understand, is why any of these cyclists would readily allow their name to be put into some log, or in the case of Operation Puerto, some ridiculously easy to decipher code name? If it's me, and I'm going to make the decision to dope and I have to go find someone to provide me this stuff, it's sure as hell not going to be me that he's selling it to. I'm going to get some friend who I've known for a long time and he's going to be the go between. In exchange, he gets a cut of my salary as a pro and any extra prize money that comes a long with it. My name isn't showing up anywhere! Maybe these cyclist need to watch the Wire and treat their dope buying like dope selling where you use a clean name as a front for everything. It's always seemed so simple, yet, there they are, cyclists names written down on logs and in diaries and even in balance sheets.

I know this makes me sound like a proponent of doping and I'm not. I'd love to believe that the sport is totally clean but I'm also not an idiot. There are still plenty of guys in the peloton so juiced it's coming out of their pores. That's the nature of a sport where you can't test for something if you don't know it exists. EPO was around for decades before scientist finally figured out a way to test for it. If you don't think there's some modern day form of EPO flowing through the veins of dirty cyclists that the labs haven't even heard of, you're naive. It's just the way it goes. But that's what makes it a soap opera because the plot is predictable yet entertaining. New drug gets invented, new guy uses it, new guy wins a bunch of races, test is created, new guy gets busted, everyone is outraged, guy swears he had no idea, proclaims his innocence, gets suspended, maybe comes back, maybe doesn't. Meanwhile, just like when you sing in rounds, you can start the process all over again at "test is created." It's a cycle and it's not going away, but there still needs to be some sort of accountability for throwing guys out of races just because their name popped up on some dirty Dr.'s record. Doesn't he actually have to test positive to be positive? Isn't that why they have crews of people all over the globe showing up at cyclist's houses at 5am to take hair, blood and urine samples. The system is set up to try and catch them off guard and I have no problem with that, but I just think you actually need to catch them before you suspend them.

Vote for Me!!

Cyclocross Racer

Landall P.

Prilosec OTC is looking to sponsor people doing what they love in exchange for some brand ambassadorship. There's not much that I love more than Cyclocross and there's nothing I hate more than heartburn (see how good I am at this already). I've been approved, but now I need votes, and that's where all of you come in. Tell your friends, tell your co-workers, sign your dog up and then vote twice. They haven't indicated how many votes I need so we'll set the goal at 10 ja-billion. This would really be awesome if it could all work out. I'll be sure to thank you specifically when I win the World Championships in Louisville in 2013.


Follow the link and VOTE!

I got yelled at!

As reported I have recently started commuting by bicycle. Over the last three weeks I have ridden to work everyday that it hasn't rained. Surprisingly I really like it. I've tried this before and could never really get into it for a lot of logistical reasons. But, now that I'm so much more mature and laid back about details (not really!) I'm making it work and making the best of things like, ironing my shirt only to have it re-wrinkled in my back pack. Oh well...

So far one of the major downsides to riding to work are the other people that also ride to work. I'd like to take a second to discuss the three types of riders that I find annoying.

I use my ride to work as a nice and easy spin. I don't have a computer on my bike but I can't imagine I ever break 15mph unless it's downhill, but not everyone on the bike to work circuit uses this same approach. On my commute I am kitted up. Not because I want to show people how cool I look in my fancy lycra duds but because those are the clothes I ride in and my work clothes would get way too sweaty. Because of this, I seem to be a target for all those people who use their bike commute as a daily world championship to an arbitrary finish line that they always beat me to. On almost a daily basis I get passed by some middle aged guy who has bought every piece of reflective gear possible but not chain lube. And inevitably, in the drops he will give me "the look" as he mashes along in his 52x25 (52 is the big ring on a triple. Take that for bike humor!). I have no interest in chasing this guy and I'm actually really proud of myself for reaching this mature state in my cycling career where I can let that guy go. I can only assume that this guy sees me in my kit and something inside of him wants to show me he's still got it. Trouble is, I'm pretty sure this guy has never had it, and if he had to find it, he couldn't. But, if beating me up the Mt. Vernon Trail on your way to work makes you feel good, then in the wise words of Bill Walton, "Throw it down big man."

Another type of commuter is the guy who doesn't want to blow by me as if I'm his minute man at the World Time Trial Championships, instead he's the guy that wants to sit on my wheel as we weave through families and walkers and joggers and dogs and then, inevitably on a downhill portion, attack as if I've just lead you out for a sprint finish. First, get off my wheel on the trail. There is no where to go if I need to hit the brakes because some kid has decided to lay down in the middle. Second, when I look over my shoulder and you look like you're on the rivet at 15mph, your helmet is cocked to the side, your leg hair is flowing, I heard your chain from 100' back and your right pedal cage is scrapping the ground at 6 o'clock because you still can't get your foot in it, you don't exactly strike me as a person I want that close to me on a bike. Don't be offended if I yell at you to get off my wheel. My commute to and from work is not a race. I am not riding hard enough that any sort of draft you're getting is actually helping you and, even if it was, we're not on a group ride, I don't know you, and I'd prefer not to get taken out by you.

The third type and probably most prevalent are the guys with helmet mirrors, bar mirrors, bells, horns, whistles and a voice well trained in the art of shouting "on your left." I hardly, if ever, say "on your left." You want to know why? Because in almost all cases I find that it does absolutely nothing to make my attempt to pass you any safer. Here's what generally happens when someone yells "on your left" to either a cyclist or a walker/runner.

Cyclist: "On your left!"
Other Person: Looks over left shoulder and swerves that direction.
Cyclist: Has to also swerve to avoid the swerver. And let's face it. Most of these people aren't skilled bike handlers so any swerving is a whisper away from losing skin.

Because of this, I assess the passing situation as I approach it. If it's obvious that I can fit I just go. There's no need to call out or ding your bell or blow your whistle or toot your horn for every single person on the trail. You aren't storming the beach at Normandy or warning the town of Godzilla. You're passing another person that you're going faster than. This act shouldn't take longer than a second or two and if it does, maybe the pass isn't necessary.

Speaking of which, this morning I got yelled as I went to pass a guy who was passing another guy so at the height of this maneuver we were not even three wide. There was no oncoming traffic and the trail could easily hold 4 across if needed. The guy I was passing of course used his bell and alerted the rider in front of him that he was passing, to which the rider in front swerved to the left as he looked. As soon as this ship was righted I just calmly made my way past both of them. The bell ringer, obviously offended by my silent tactic starts shouting at me for not warning him and continues to lecture me as I continue on my way. I am sorry if I ruined your morning by not creating a scene while I passed you. I'll try harder next time, maybe a bull horn will make you happy.

Mel Gibson Would Not Approve

For most of America yesterday was a very important day, Easter. To little kids it's the day that you get to run around and find hidden eggs made of chocolate or filled with prizes. To adults it could mean a couple things from the day you hide those eggs, one of the two days a year you bother to go to church and convince yourself you'll be better in the future, or, it's a day that really means nothing and you carry on as usual. Generally for me it's the later, but yesterday Jill and I made a great trip down to Richmond to hang out with my brother. It was certainly a great time and no pastels were worn for the occasion.

It seems to me, as an admitted outsider, that churches (especially protestant ones) are going more and more extreme in their special holiday services. I understand that attendance will jump by like 200% on both Christmas and Easter and that each is a special occasion, according to your doctrine. I guess it's only appropriate to do something a little extra to try and encourage those C&Es to come back the following the week, which, inevitably they won't.

There's that crazy church down in Dallas that does the weird haunted house where they depict abortions and drug over doses and selling your soul to the devil to scare kids into believing. Obviously this is a terrible way to go about completing your mission, but they keep at it, and lots of souls are temporarily saved. I've gone to a living nativity scene at Christmas where you drive your car through a giant church parking lot that has been converted to some sort of down town Jerusalem complete with farm animals, people playing parts of beggars, roman soldiers and other stuff. I'm not sure what I was supposed to take away from that other than it was sort of creepy and when I offered to actually buy the bread one lady was holding because I was hungry, she wouldn't sell it to me. This was confusing because she was playing the part of a baker. What else were they going to do with all that fresh baked bread?

This morning, I was clicking through some pictures on facebook and came across one that literally made my jaw drop. I don't know what church this is, but they have decided the best way to observe their Easter holiday was to have a fake crucifixion right there on church property. Again, I'm not totally sure what you're supposed to take away from this. It's sort of like that scene in Religious in the crazy amusement park where fake Jesus carries the cross through the tourist and people start crying. Maybe that's what this church is trying to accomplish, to conjure up some sort of emotional connection to the story by having some dudes they actually know on fake crosses being fake killed? I do know that one of the comments on this photo was something along the lines of, "Thanks for capturing this. What a powerful service!" Apparently, to at least that person, it had some sort of impact.

But, for me, it would have to go further. I'd need the guy playing Jesus to sleep in a cave for 3 days and then magically escape, round up his followers, give them some sort of crazy inspiring motivational speech and then ascend to heaven in a bright light while still living never to be seen again. I mean, that's the rest of the story right? It doesn't just end with a miraculous coming back to life, it ends with a magic ascent to a magical kingdom in the sky. Why aren't they trying to recreate that piece? Oh, that's right, it's so obvious... I also kind of wonder if they made the guy drink vinegar out of a sponge. I always thought that was the worst part when I was a kid.

Speaking of magically coming back to life, has anybody ever really considered the aspect of the story where Mary discovers the empty tomb and freaks out? It just seems to me that instead of freaking out she'd just assume the body was moved and confer with the cemetery management. Put the story in modern context, let's say you go visit someone at the hospital and when you show up to the room you were told they were in and they're not there, is your first instinct to sprint out of the hospital in some sort of panic, or would you go to the nurses desk and ask for some clarification?

And, as Jon Stewart would say, you're moment of zen:

Douche Bag of the Universe

Chances are, by now, you've heard the story. The above pictured asshole, Fred Phelps, and his likely inbreed family headed off to disrupt the funeral service of a US soldier killed in battle. If not, here it is.

My interest isn't in the story isn't the court case or the ruling. though I find myself feeling like the appropriate action by the soldier's father wasn't to sue, but to walk across the street and knock that SOB out. I'm pretty sure no one would blame him and everybody would be on his side. Sometimes self policing is the way to go.

My actual interest in this story is with Mr. Phelps and his "church." You have to put "church" in quotations because really it's nothing more than his brainwashed family members. Their reason for protest is they believe that God hates America because of America's tolerance of homosexuality and thus anything negative that happens to Americans is a direct message from God. They believe that we're all at fault because two dudes or chicks or whatever find each other attractive. I find it hard to believe this guy is actually serious, but, it's obvious he is, so I wanted to take a second to point out a couple of things that jump out at me.

First, the idea that God hates America for being so "tolerant" of homosexuality is pretty ridiculous. Let's take God out of the equation and just look at this idea of America being "tolerant" of homosexuality. I guess we might be splitting hairs here but I'm not so sure that I can give Mr. Phelps the benefit of the doubt on the idea of tolerance. In my humble opinion America is still by and large very anti homosexuality. Why do I think that? Because in order for America to act in a manner the gives homosexuals the same rights as heterosexuals more than six, that's right SIX, states would be performing same sex marriages. Three more states "recognize" but do not perform same sex marriage. So, let's just say that 9 states (DC is included) are leading the way, that's 17.6% of the states believe that people, regardless of sexual orientation, deserve the same rights as everybody else paying taxes. Real F'in progressive! But, I suppose if Mr. Phelps defines "tolerant" as the rest of the population isn't walking around with rifles and blowing gay people's heads off just for breathing, then yeah, I guess I can't argue with him there, America, land of the free and home of the tolerant! The tragedy is that America for the most part is so damn tolerant that we let people like this idiot run around, brain wash his kids and grand kids and their kids and so on, so that this ridiculous line of thinking will continue and this level of un-justifiable hatred will continue.

My other issue with this lunatic is that he calls himself and his family a "church." If you've read enough of the bible it's easy to see that if you pick and chose the parts you want to pay attention to (like every doctrine does) God and Jesus are some pretty spiteful dudes. But, even with that, if you're a church, you're essentially a business, and you're not a business whose success is measured in profits and losses according to dollars and cents (I also realize this isn't entirely true but should be), but in how many people you recruit into your church and thus should be growing your numbers and saving souls for "the good side." As far as I can tell, and I can't prove this, but the church of Fred Phelps only grows when a new family member is born. That should tell you something. If the only people crazy enough to go around and picket the funeral of a dead soldier are your equally crazy relatives, maybe your church isn't exactly on the right path. Maybe you're insane, and you're so insane you can't see it. So insane, that maybe you need to be institutionalized. I also wonder if Mr. Phelps recalls the story of Saul from the bible. For those not in the know, Saul was a guy that went around killing Christians until a big shiny light popped up on the road, blinded him, he got a message from the big guy and suddenly he loved Jesus and Christians and changed his name to way most know him as, Paul. Maybe Mr. Phelps is just playing Saul hoping for a big shinny light? Problem is, that's a story, and he lives in reality, where his protests do nothing to help or promote any cause. Any other business with this kind of growth would have been forced to close shop a long time ago, but somehow, his manages to survive.

My own religious views aside I hope this guy has a moment where he wakes up one morning and realizes what an asshole he's been practically his entire life. Then I hope he gathers his big giant family in one room and apologizes for dragging them into this crazy lifestyle and they go out and do something positive with all this free time they seem to have. But, until then, Fred Phelps, you are a Douche Bag! Maybe the biggest Douche Bag walking the planet at this given moment.