New PB

Today I managed to beat my personal best on my 'new' bike for my 10.5 mile commute to work by over a
minute - under 37.5 min instead of 38.5 min set previously on my 'old' bike. Just a small
meaningless personal victory but I thought I'd share it with you anyway. Of course I know 37.5min
for 10.5 miles isn't that great, but considering the amount of other traffic, peds and traffic
lights you get in London is not easy to acheive - at least not for me! Anyway I drew some
satisfaction from a reasonably long stretch at over 30mph on the flat without the benefit of a
downhill (well, it was only a v e r y slight incline) or drafting (well, only other cars, not a bus
or anything like that) ;-). But what I want to know is, as new bikes are always supposed to be
faster than old bikes, why did it take so long (4 months) before I managed to do it ;-)?

Or could it be something to do with the fact that today, just for a change this morning, I tried
something new - I put my cycling jersey on over the top of my b*b tights, so the straps weren't
showing ;-)? I wondered whether this might avoid offending the PSF, but it was a bit itchy and even
more sweaty than usual so I don't think I'll do it again!

Rich

 

On Tue, 3 Feb 2004 20:04:31 -0000, "Richard Goodman"
<[email protected]> wrote:

Today I managed to beat my personal best on my 'new' bike for my 10.5 mile )commute to work by
ver a minute - under 37.5 min instead of 38.5 min set )previously on my 'old' bike. Just a small
:meaningless personal victory but )I thought I'd share it with you anyway. Of course I know 37.5min
:for 10.5 )miles isn't that great,

Why not ? !!!

)Or could it be something to do with the fact that today, just for a change )this morning, I
:tried something new - I put my cycling jersey on over the )top of my b*b tights, so the straps
:weren't showing ;-)? I wondered whether )this might avoid offending the PSF, but it was a bit itchy
:and even more )sweaty than usual so I don't think I'll do it again! )

I had a leisure ride of 11 miles and rated it as an hour. It has a couple and a half steep hills on
it. Times varied from 55-75 min, the hour being the norm though. I did a PB of 42 minutes wearing
socks, trainers, glasses and swimming trunks !
--
Comm again, Mike.

 

"pmailkeey" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Tue, 3 Feb 2004 20:04:31 -0000, "Richard Goodman" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Today I managed to beat my personal best on my 'new' bike for my 10.5
mile
> commute to work by over a minute - under 37.5 min instead of 38.5 min
set
> previously on my 'old' bike. Just a small meaningless personal victory
but
> I thought I'd share it with you anyway. Of course I know 37.5min for
10.5
> miles isn't that great,
>
> Why not ? !!!
>
> )Or could it be something to do with the fact that today, just for a
change
> this morning, I tried something new - I put my cycling jersey on over
the
> top of my b*b tights, so the straps weren't showing ;-)? I wondered
whether
> this might avoid offending the PSF, but it was a bit itchy and even more )sweaty than usual so I
> :don't think I'll do it again! )
>
> I had a leisure ride of 11 miles and rated it as an hour. It has a couple and a half steep hills
> on it. Times varied from 55-75 min, the hour being the norm though. I did a PB of 42 minutes
> wearing socks, trainers, glasses and swimming trunks !
> --
> Comm again, Mike.

Did anyone get a photo!! ;-)

 

"pmailkeey" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Tue, 3 Feb 2004 20:04:31 -0000, "Richard Goodman" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Today I managed to beat my personal best on my 'new' bike for my 10.5
mile
> commute to work by over a minute - under 37.5 min instead of 38.5 min
set
> previously on my 'old' bike. Just a small meaningless personal victory
but
> I thought I'd share it with you anyway. Of course I know 37.5min for
10.5
> miles isn't that great,
>
> Why not ? !!!
>

Thanks. It does give a warm comfortable feeling when you get a reply, so you can feel that your
message hasn't flopped completely failing to elicit a single response ;-).

> )Or could it be something to do with the fact that today, just for a
change
> this morning, I tried something new - I put my cycling jersey on over
the
> top of my b*b tights, so the straps weren't showing ;-)? I wondered
whether
> this might avoid offending the PSF, but it was a bit itchy and even more )sweaty than usual so I
> :don't think I'll do it again! )
>
> I had a leisure ride of 11 miles and rated it as an hour. It has a couple and a half steep hills
> on it. Times varied from 55-75 min, the hour being the norm though. I did a PB of 42 minutes
> wearing socks, trainers, glasses and swimming trunks !

Hmm so was it the attire that made the difference do you think? ... wonder if the PSF has anything
against swimming trunks on bikes ;-).

Still, it does go to show you can mention PSF and b*bs in a message and _not_ attract a response, if
you bury the remark at the end of (boring?) messages about PB's ;-). Maybe she's not so all-seeing
after all! Or do her objections only apply to the short variety rather than the tight variety .

Rich

 

"Richard Goodman" <[email protected]> writes:

> Or could it be something to do with the fact that today, just for a change this morning, I tried
> something new - I put my cycling jersey on over the top of my b*b tights, so the straps weren't
> showing ;-)? I wondered whether this might avoid offending the PSF, but it was a bit itchy and
> even more sweaty than usual so I don't think I'll do it again!

I *always* put my jersey on over my bibtights. I thought everyone did? It is a bit odd having to
hitch up the straps through your jersey, but then I suspect the female half of the population are
already well used to this...

--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/ There's nae Gods, an there's
precious few heroes but there's plenty on the dole in th Land o th Leal; And it's time now, tae
sweep the future clear o th lies o a past that we know wis never real.

 

On Fri, 06 Feb 2004 16:35:05 GMT, in
<[email protected]>, Simon Brooke
<[email protected]> wrote:

>I *always* put my jersey on over my bibtights. I thought everyone did? It is a bit odd having to
>hitch up the straps through your jersey, but then I suspect the female half of the population are
>already well used to this...

On a long ride with bibs underneath jersey it's much more difficult to have a wee ...
--
I remember when the internet was only in black & white. It only had a few pages but at least they
all worked. Email: Put only the word "richard" before the @ sign.

 

"Richard Goodman" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

> Or could it be something to do with the fact that today, just for a change this morning, I tried
> something new - I put my cycling jersey on over the top of my b*b tights, so the straps weren't
> showing ;-)?

That is as nature intended.

> I wondered whether this might avoid offending the PSF,

No. Apparently she can still detect the outline.

> ... but it was a bit itchy and even more sweaty than usual so I don't think I'll do it again!

You're supposed to use a wicking base layer under the straps.

--
Dave...

 

"Richard Bates" <[email protected]e.clara.co.uk> wrote in
message news:[email protected]...
> On Fri, 06 Feb 2004 16:35:05 GMT, in <[email protected]>, Simon
> Brooke <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >I *always* put my jersey on over my bibtights. I thought everyone did? It is a bit odd having to
> >hitch up the straps through your jersey, but then I suspect the female half of the population are
> >already well used to this...
>
> On a long ride with bibs underneath jersey it's much more difficult to have a wee ...

So true. So that's why the "how do you pee in b*bs" thread was started"? I was a bit puzzled by it,
but now I see why some people could have problems if they habitually wear the straps on the inside
;-). Takes more time to get the straps off that way - accidents could happen.....

Rich

 

On Fri, 6 Feb 2004 09:43:18 -0000, "\(t'other\) Dave"
<[email protected]> wrote:

)"pmailkeey" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]... )> I had a leisure ride of 11 miles and rated it as
:an hour. It has a )> couple and a half steep hills on it. Times varied from 55-75 min, the )> hour
:being the norm though. I did a PB of 42 minutes wearing socks, )> trainers, glasses and swimming
:trunks ! )> -- )> Comm again, Mike. ) )Did anyone get a photo!! );-)

Nope !
--
Comm again, Mike.

 

On Fri, 06 Feb 2004 14:27:01 GMT, "Richard Goodman"
<[email protected]> wrote:

"pmailkeey" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]... )> I had a leisure ride of 11 miles and rated it as
:an hour. It has a )> couple and a half steep hills on it. Times varied from 55-75 min, the )> hour
:being the norm though. I did a PB of 42 minutes wearing socks, )> trainers, glasses and swimming
:trunks ! ) )Hmm so was it the attire that made the difference do you think?

No - it was more likely the mood (AKA adrenalin flow) that pushed me on. I wish I could control that
- I rarely get energetic days - there was that one and one about 4 years ago where I was so hyper, I
had to slow down because I was making myself feel sick, not beccause of tiredness !

... wonder
if the PSF has anything against swimming trunks on bikes ;-).

PSF ?

)Still, it does go to show you can mention PSF and b*bs in a message and )_not_ attract a
:response, if you bury the remark at the end of (boring?) )messages about PB's ;-). Maybe she's not
:so all-seeing after all! Or do )her objections only apply to the short variety rather than the
:tight variety ).

????
--
Comm again, Mike.