Doping and Helmets

Rik Van Diesel said:

Did the UCI mandate requiring helmet use improve the safety and

welfare

Quoted message said:

of the riders more than the regulations they have imposed around
doping. Or is it just as bogus as the "drug" rules.

<snip>

Dumbass -

It's been clear for a long time now. Those who don't wear helmets are
the most likely to be dopers. Not only is it correlative, the two may
be mutually causal, a symbiotic relationship.

R. Chung proved the relationship in one of his analyses, building on
the more superficial analyses of D. Connelly. Hopefully, Mr. Chung will
post the results here again.

In article <[email hidden]>, Rik

Van Diesel said:

Did the UCI mandate requiring helmet use improve the safety and welfare
of the riders more than the regulations they have imposed around
doping. Or is it just as bogus as the "drug" rules. After all they
claim their number one concern is rider safety and now mandate helmet
usage during races, but not when the riders are off training or riding
to a race (just look at the photos). Why not mandate that the racer
must wear their helmets when training and let the riders dope, or give
the riders a choice. You safety factor is x, so you can dope or race
without a helmet, but not both.

If a guy dies during a bike race it's worse for the sport-more bad
publicity. Drug rules aren't about safety. The team doctors are
supposed to take care of the safe use of drugs and orange juice and
British breakfast foods and dangerous stuff like that. Drug rules are
about cheating and what is fair. Like not being allowed to use a bike
that's too light because it's not fair to the teams that don't have the
money for luxury items like $3000 wheelsets. At least the UCI hasn't
gone crazy and eliminated these things from masters racing.

-WG

In article <[email hidden]>,

warren said:

In article <[email hidden]>, Rik

Van Diesel said:

Did the UCI mandate requiring helmet use improve the safety and welfare
of the riders more than the regulations they have imposed around
doping. Or is it just as bogus as the "drug" rules. After all they
claim their number one concern is rider safety and now mandate helmet
usage during races, but not when the riders are off training or riding
to a race (just look at the photos). Why not mandate that the racer
must wear their helmets when training and let the riders dope, or give
the riders a choice. You safety factor is x, so you can dope or race
without a helmet, but not both.

If a guy dies during a bike race it's worse for the sport-more bad
publicity. Drug rules aren't about safety. The team doctors are
supposed to take care of the safe use of drugs and orange juice and
British breakfast foods and dangerous stuff like that. Drug rules are
about cheating and what is fair. Like not being allowed to use a bike
that's too light because it's not fair to the teams that don't have the
money for luxury items like $3000 wheelsets. At least the UCI hasn't
gone crazy and eliminated these things from masters racing.

-WG

It's good to know that the UCI has some perspective in these kinds of
issues. They know that banning masters from having $3000 wheelsets and like
items would do major damage to the worldwide economy.

--
tanx,
Howard

A billion + 2 followups...

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?

"Kurgan Gringioni" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Rik Van Diesel said:

Did the UCI mandate requiring helmet use improve the safety and

welfare

Quoted message said:

of the riders more than the regulations they have imposed around
doping. Or is it just as bogus as the "drug" rules.

<snip>

Dumbass -

It's been clear for a long time now. Those who don't wear helmets are
the most likely to be dopers. Not only is it correlative, the two may
be mutually causal, a symbiotic relationship.

R. Chung proved the relationship in one of his analyses, building on
the more superficial analyses of D. Connelly. Hopefully, Mr. Chung will
post the results here again.

Dumbass, it's a lot more complicated than that.

bleached hair -> EPO
bad tattoos -> nandrolone
evil goatees -> cocaine

"Rik Van Diesel" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Did the UCI mandate requiring helmet use improve the safety and welfare
of the riders more than the regulations they have imposed around
doping. Or is it just as bogus as the "drug" rules. After all they
claim their number one concern is rider safety and now mandate helmet
usage during races, but not when the riders are off training or riding
to a race (just look at the photos). Why not mandate that the racer
must wear their helmets when training and let the riders dope, or give
the riders a choice. You safety factor is x, so you can dope or race
without a helmet, but not both.

RVD

I believe that the helmet rule, like most things, is purely about money and
doesn't have much to do with rider safety. No sponsor wanted to have
pictures, or videos, of a rider dead from a head injury in their team kit
without a helmet. Remember Kivilev? In the publics mind if the rider dies
wearing a helmet it goes down as a tragic, but unavoidable accident. If he
dies without a helmet it become reckless. I know that when I was involved
in sponsorship decisions one of the decision points was thinking about what
was the worst thing that could happen and how our brand would be affected.

warren said:

If a guy dies during a bike race it's worse for the sport-more bad
publicity. Drug rules aren't about safety. The team doctors are
supposed to take care of the safe use of drugs and orange juice and
British breakfast foods and dangerous stuff like that.

According to what I read on rbr its New Zealand breakfast foods that
require mandatory UN sanctions.

Kurgan Gringioni said:

Dumbass -

It's been clear for a long time now. Those who don't wear helmets are
the most likely to be dopers. Not only is it correlative, the two may
be mutually causal, a symbiotic relationship.

R. Chung proved the relationship in one of his analyses, building on
the more superficial analyses of D. Connelly. Hopefully, Mr. Chung will
post the results here again.

http://anonymous.coward.free.fr/temp/fat-stevie2.png

"Donald Munro" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

warren said:

If a guy dies during a bike race it's worse for the sport-more bad
publicity. Drug rules aren't about safety. The team doctors are
supposed to take care of the safe use of drugs and orange juice and
British breakfast foods and dangerous stuff like that.

According to what I read on rbr its New Zealand breakfast foods that
require mandatory UN sanctions.

No doubt I'll be called un-Australian by our PM for this, but Vegemite is
actually an Australian "food product", notwithstanding the fact that it's
owned by Kraft. I never liked it. I'll probably be prevented from
re-entering the country now.

Boring fact: After 16 years of being called Vegemite, the company changed
its name to Parwill in 1928 in an attempt to boost sales. It was being
marketed as a rival to the equally horrible British product Marmite. There
was an ad slogan that went "If Marmite...then Parwill". It was changed back
to Vegemite in 1935.

Jeff

1. During race, racer tend to ride in big field at full speed while taking
chance one normally would not take on training.
2. During race, organizer is responsible for rule and safety, on training,
you are, is call personal freedom.

As a example of argument, F1 racer all wear full fireproof suit, helmet and
5pt harness during race, bring back your argument, shouldn't everyone/racer
wear/use the same racing outfield when driving their Audi for a milk run?

"Rik Van Diesel" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Did the UCI mandate requiring helmet use improve the safety and welfare
of the riders more than the regulations they have imposed around
doping. Or is it just as bogus as the "drug" rules. After all they
claim their number one concern is rider safety and now mandate helmet
usage during races, but not when the riders are off training or riding
to a race (just look at the photos). Why not mandate that the racer
must wear their helmets when training and let the riders dope, or give
the riders a choice. You safety factor is x, so you can dope or race
without a helmet, but not both.

RVD

Robert Chung said:

Kurgan Gringioni said:

Dumbass -

It's been clear for a long time now. Those who don't wear helmets are
the most likely to be dopers. Not only is it correlative, the two may
be mutually causal, a symbiotic relationship.

R. Chung proved the relationship in one of his analyses, building on
the more superficial analyses of D. Connelly. Hopefully, Mr. Chung will
post the results here again.

http://anonymous.coward.free.fr/temp/fat-stevie2.png

I like this one:

http://anonymous.coward.free.fr/temp/fat-vote-regression.gif

Jeff Jones said:

"Donald Munro" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

warren said:

If a guy dies during a bike race it's worse for the sport-more bad
publicity. Drug rules aren't about safety. The team doctors are
supposed to take care of the safe use of drugs and orange juice and
British breakfast foods and dangerous stuff like that.

According to what I read on rbr its New Zealand breakfast foods that
require mandatory UN sanctions.

No doubt I'll be called un-Australian by our PM for this, but Vegemite is
actually an Australian "food product", notwithstanding the fact that it's
owned by Kraft. I never liked it. I'll probably be prevented from
re-entering the country now.

Boring fact: After 16 years of being called Vegemite, the company changed
its name to Parwill in 1928 in an attempt to boost sales. It was being
marketed as a rival to the equally horrible British product Marmite. There
was an ad slogan that went "If Marmite...then Parwill". It was changed back
to Vegemite in 1935.

Jeff

I bet I could win a contest to make something that looks and smells more
like vomit than vomit itself. A few tablespoonfuls of Vegemite and a
cup of orange juice in the blender. Try that for a post-ride recovery
drink.

Jeff Jones said:

Quoted message said:

Boring fact: After 16 years of being called Vegemite, the company changed
its name to Parwill in 1928 in an attempt to boost sales. It was being
marketed as a rival to the equally horrible British product Marmite. There
was an ad slogan that went "If Marmite...then Parwill". It was changed back
to Vegemite in 1935.

gym gravity said:

I bet I could win a contest to make something that looks and smells more
like vomit than vomit itself. A few tablespoonfuls of Vegemite and a
cup of orange juice in the blender. Try that for a post-ride recovery
drink.

Sounds like an ideal appetite suppressing diet shake for fat masters.

gym gravity said:

Robert Chung said:

Kurgan Gringioni said:

Dumbass -

It's been clear for a long time now. Those who don't wear helmets are
the most likely to be dopers. Not only is it correlative, the two may
be mutually causal, a symbiotic relationship.

R. Chung proved the relationship in one of his analyses, building on
the more superficial analyses of D. Connelly. Hopefully, Mr. Chung
will post the results here again.

http://anonymous.coward.free.fr/temp/fat-stevie2.png

I like this one:

http://anonymous.coward.free.fr/temp/fat-vote-regression.gif

In honor of tonight's debate:
http://anonymous.coward.free.fr/polls/pollbias.html

"gym gravity" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I bet I could win a contest to make something that looks and smells more
like vomit than vomit itself. A few tablespoonfuls of Vegemite and a
cup of orange juice in the blender. Try that for a post-ride recovery
drink.

You are a very bad man.