"Cycling": A Novel by Greg Garrett - weird terminology

[Wle]

of course it;s not primarily about cycling. but the author
claims to be a regular cyclist.

and the main character rides by default kind of. his life is
kind of going nowhere, after a good start, he is stalled out
as a writer, can't get started on his 2nd book.

his relationships seem to amble indifferently.

the one constant thing he seems to do is bicycle.

he rides a mountain bike, 30-40 miles a day even in west
texas summers, even though by page 50 or so, he hasn't once
gotten off the road.

my technical question is terminology related.

the author has twice now referred to shifting to "higher and
higher gears" when going up hills.

obviously he means what i would call "lower gears" -
easier to pedal.

is there any way that his usage can be the right?

i mean, is there any place in the world where they reverse
the normal usage?

anyway, it is a pretty good book, but i wondered about
this..

wle.

 

[Luigi De Guzman]

On 11 Mar 2004 07:50:16 -0800, [email protected] (wle) wrote:

>of course it;s not primarily about cycling. but the author
>claims to be a regular cyclist.
>
>and the main character rides by default kind of. his life
>is kind of going nowhere, after a good start, he is stalled
>out as a writer, can't get started on his 2nd book.
>
>his relationships seem to amble indifferently.
>
>the one constant thing he seems to do is bicycle.
>
>he rides a mountain bike, 30-40 miles a day even in west
>texas summers, even though by page 50 or so, he hasn't once
>gotten off the road.
>
>my technical question is terminology related.
>
>the author has twice now referred to shifting to "higher
>and higher gears" when going up hills.
>
>obviously he means what i would call "lower gears" - easier
>to pedal.

No. the protagonist is obvioulsy so strong up the hill that
he can actually accelerate--and in order to maintain a
constant cadence, he upshifts.

Weaker mortals like myself can do this on very gentle
upgrades and false flats. Grimpeurs can do it up real hills.

-Luigi

 

[David Kerber]

In article
<[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
> of course it;s not primarily about cycling. but the author
> claims to be a regular cyclist.
>
> and the main character rides by default kind of. his
> life is kind of going nowhere, after a good start, he
> is stalled out as a writer, can't get started on his
> 2nd book.
>
> his relationships seem to amble indifferently.
>
> the one constant thing he seems to do is bicycle.
>
> he rides a mountain bike, 30-40 miles a day even in west
> texas summers, even though by page 50 or so, he hasn't
> once gotten off the road.
>
> my technical question is terminology related.
>
> the author has twice now referred to shifting to "higher
> and higher gears" when going up hills.
>
> obviously he means what i would call "lower gears" -
> easier to pedal.
>
> is there any way that his usage can be the right?
>
> i mean, is there any place in the world where they reverse
> the normal usage?

Maybe he just wants to see how tall of a gear he can push
up the hill?

--
Remove the ns_ from if replying by e-mail (but keep posts in
the newsgroups if possible).

 

[Wle]

> >
> > i mean, is there any place in the world where they
> > reverse the normal usage?
>
> Maybe he just wants to see how tall of a gear he can push
> up the hill?

ha ha.

well if one writes fiction, the characters can be as manly
as the author likes..

still i doubt that is what he meant, i just think he mistook
high for low.

anyway, i emailed the author, i will report his answer if
he answers.

wle.

 

[Zoot Katz]

11 Mar 2004 14:31:59 -0800,
<[email protected]>, [email protected]
(wle) wrote:

>> >
>> > i mean, is there any place in the world where they
>> > reverse the normal usage?
>>
>> Maybe he just wants to see how tall of a gear he can push
>> up the hill?
>
>ha ha.
>
>well if one writes fiction, the characters can be as manly
>as the author likes..
>
>still i doubt that is what he meant, i just think he
>mistook high for low.
>
>anyway, i emailed the author, i will report his answer if
>he answers.
>
>wle.
My guess it that he wasn't shifting into ever higher gears
during a single climb but that eventually through addtional
conditioning he was able to now pedal a taller gear on hills
that had previously had him grabbing for the granny.
--
zk

 

[David Kerber]

In article
<[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
> > >
> > > i mean, is there any place in the world where they
> > > reverse the normal usage?
> >
> > Maybe he just wants to see how tall of a gear he can
> > push up the hill?
>
> ha ha.
>
> well if one writes fiction, the characters can be as manly
> as the author likes..
>
> still i doubt that is what he meant, i just think he
> mistook high for low.

Probably.

> anyway, i emailed the author, i will report his answer if
> he answers.
>
> wle.

That would be interesting to hear.

--
Dave Kerber Fight spam: remove the ns_ from the return
address before replying!

REAL programmers write self-modifying code.

 

[Rick Onanian]

On 11 Mar 2004 07:50:16 -0800, [email protected] (wle) wrote:
>the author has twice now referred to shifting to "higher
>and higher gears" when going up hills.
>
>obviously he means what i would call "lower gears" - easier
>to pedal.
>
>is there any way that his usage can be the right?
>
>i mean, is there any place in the world where they reverse
>the normal usage?

Are you sure he was shifting to easier gears? Maybe he was
getting stronger and going faster.
--
Rick Onanian

 

[Mike Kruger]

"wle" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> the author has twice now referred to shifting to "higher
> and higher gears" when going up hills.
>
> obviously he means what i would call "lower gears" -
> easier to pedal.
>
> is there any way that his usage can be the right?
>
The usage isn't correct, but I have heard this usage from
people on bicycles before.

You have to remember that, in motor vehicles, many people
have never had to change gears. They have had automatic
transmissions all their lives. They may also have avoided
high school physics, or forgotten it.

I asked somebody about that once, and they replied that
they thought the hill-climbing gears were "higher" gears
because you had to pedal at a higher rate for the same
amount of speed. Then they admitted they were always
unclear on the subject.

 

[Wle]

> anyway, i emailed the author, i will report his answer if
> he answers.
>
well!

he already wrote back and said, yes i am right, it should be
'lower gears' - he will correct it in the paperback and
later editions. he was quite nice about it.

wle.

> wle.

 

[Whinds]

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] (wle) writes:

>
>my technical question is terminology related.
>
>the author has twice now referred to shifting to "higher
>and higher gears" when going up hills.
>
>obviously he means what i would call "lower gears" - easier
>to pedal.
>
>is there any way that his usage can be the right?
>
>i mean, is there any place in the world where they reverse
>the normal usage?
>
>anyway, it is a pretty good book, but i wondered
>about this..
>

Well when I started out I did the smallest hills in the
lowest gear and as I got better I shifted higher and higher.
Now, I look for bigger hills.<g