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.