Non-Lycra shorts & platform pedal shoes

[Velvet]

Simon Brooke wrote:

> in message <[email protected]>, Roos Eisma
> ('[email protected]') wrote:
>
>
>>[email protected] (dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers) writes:
>>
>>
>>>>And mine! I have to say, not ALL cycling shorts make blokes
>>>>quite that visible either... not that I've carried out a specific
>>>>study into this, you understand!!!!!!!!!!!
>>
>>>I do believe some research is called for, to check if these things are
>>>visible, and the *full extent* of the problem. Purely in the interests
>>>of science, of course.
>>
>>Followed by a campaign to promote visibility
>
>
> Surely it's transparency one should be promoting? I'm sure the
> Government is always keen to promote transparency...
>

I think whether transparency/visibility is a desirable attribute might
well depend on the wearer's physique to start with...

So I think any jpgs posted should encompass more than just the shorts
area, so we can make a balanced decision after weighing up all the
factors

--


Velvet

 

[dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers]

>I think whether transparency/visibility is a desirable attribute might
>well depend on the wearer's physique to start with...
>
>So I think any jpgs posted should encompass more than just the shorts
>area, so we can make a balanced decision after weighing up all the
>factors
>
>--
>
>
>Velvet

You are, of course, entirely correct. And indeed, lots of .jpgs should be
examined, working on the theory that the sample should be as large as possible
(ooh err...) to minimise error.

Cheers, helen s


--This is an invalid email address to avoid spam--
to get correct one remove fame & fortune
h*$el*$$e*nd**$o$ts**i*$*$m*m$o*n*s@$*a$o*l.c**$om$

--Due to financial crisis the light at the end of the tunnel is switched off--

 

[Velvet]

dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers wrote:

>>I think whether transparency/visibility is a desirable attribute might
>>well depend on the wearer's physique to start with...
>>
>>So I think any jpgs posted should encompass more than just the shorts
>>area, so we can make a balanced decision after weighing up all the
>>factors
>>
>>--
>>
>>
>>Velvet
>
>
> You are, of course, entirely correct. And indeed, lots of .jpgs should be
> examined, working on the theory that the sample should be as large as possible
> (ooh err...) to minimise error.
>
> Cheers, helen s

Absolutely. So come on then lads, get to it! ;-)

--


Velvet

 

[Steph Peters]

Velvet <[email protected]> of blueyonder wrote:
>Simon Brooke wrote:
>> in message <[email protected]>, Roos Eisma
>> ('[email protected]') wrote:
>>>[email protected] (dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers) writes:
>>>>>And mine! I have to say, not ALL cycling shorts make blokes
>>>>>quite that visible either... not that I've carried out a specific
>>>>>study into this, you understand!!!!!!!!!!!
>>>
>>>>I do believe some research is called for, to check if these things are
>>>>visible, and the *full extent* of the problem. Purely in the interests
>>>>of science, of course.
>>>
>>>Followed by a campaign to promote visibility
>>
>>
>> Surely it's transparency one should be promoting? I'm sure the
>> Government is always keen to promote transparency...
>>
>
>I think whether transparency/visibility is a desirable attribute might
>well depend on the wearer's physique to start with...
>
>So I think any jpgs posted should encompass more than just the shorts
>area, so we can make a balanced decision after weighing up all the
>factors

There's a local make cyclist who had a pair of yellow lycra shorts. I can
understand why they seemed a good idea on the rack in the shop - they were
highly visible. But also veeeery transparent when stretched - and he wore
them very stretched. Definitely left almost nothing to the imagination.
Unfortunately my imagination could do a lot better than reality on this one.
He's either stopped cycling where I do, or got rid of the yellow shorts, as
I haven't seen them this year.
--
The world is very different now. For man holds in his mortal hands the
power to abolish all forms of human poverty, and all forms of human life.
John F. Kennedy
Steph Peters delete invalid from [email protected]lid
Tatting, lace & stitching page <http://www.sandbenders.demon.co.uk/index.htm>

 

[Mark Thompson]

>> You are, of course, entirely correct. And indeed, lots of .jpgs
>> should be examined, working on the theory that the sample should be
>> as large as possible (ooh err...) to minimise error.

> Absolutely. So come on then lads, get to it! ;-)

You asked for it girls....

<URL:http://mysite.wanadoo-
members.co.uk/tomponet/cycling/Lycra/warning.htm>

http://tinyurl.com/5lrsn


***This has been posted before.*** If you've only just erased the
experience from your memory I apologise profusely.

Right, now I've come up with the goods it's your turn - us men want to see
the ladies in lycra!

 

[dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers]

>http://tinyurl.com/5lrsn

Not a cyclist amongst them!

Cheers, helen s


--This is an invalid email address to avoid spam--
to get correct one remove fame & fortune
h*$el*$$e*nd**$o$ts**i*$*$m*m$o*n*s@$*a$o*l.c**$om$

--Due to financial crisis the light at the end of the tunnel is switched off--

 

[Mark Thompson]

>>http://tinyurl.com/5lrsn
>
> Not a cyclist amongst them!

I thought the chap wearing the cycle helmet could be a likely contender

 

[Jon Senior]

Lardychap [email protected] opined the following...
> As a small attempt to commiserate with him, don't judge him too
> badly. You can't expect him to be on top form. I would try to hide if
> you spent an hour hour sticking me between a 12 stone lump a hard
> saddle whilst vibrating it over rough roads...
>
> Sheesh. You lot can be so fussy...

And it might have been cold... <coughs, mumbles>

Jon

 

[Jon Senior]

dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers [email protected]omcom opined the
following...
> >http://tinyurl.com/5lrsn
>
> Not a cyclist amongst them!

There was... he was propping up a bar! I would suggest paying more
attention to the headwear, but I guess you'd say you _were_ looking for
helmets!

Jon

 

[Lardychap]

Steph Peters <[email protected]> writes:

> There's a local make cyclist who had a pair of yellow lycra shorts. I can
> understand why they seemed a good idea on the rack in the shop - they were
> highly visible. But also veeeery transparent when stretched - and he wore
> them very stretched. Definitely left almost nothing to the imagination.
> Unfortunately my imagination could do a lot better than reality on this one.
> He's either stopped cycling where I do, or got rid of the yellow shorts, as
> I haven't seen them this year.

As a small attempt to commiserate with him, don't judge him too
badly. You can't expect him to be on top form. I would try to hide if
you spent an hour hour sticking me between a 12 stone lump a hard
saddle whilst vibrating it over rough roads...

Sheesh. You lot can be so fussy...

G

 

[davek]

Mark Thompson wrote:
> Right, now I've come up with the goods it's your turn - us men want to see
> the ladies in lycra!

While doing some research on American beers the other day, I came across
this website:
<URL:http://www.victorybeer.com>

d.

 

[dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers]

>There was... he was propping up a bar! I would suggest paying more
>attention to the headwear, but I guess you'd say you _were_ looking for
>helmets!

You are correct, there is a cyclist of sorts there. Obviously I was blinded by
the sheer size of the first picture on the page.

Cheers, helen s


--This is an invalid email address to avoid spam--
to get correct one remove fame & fortune
h*$el*$$e*nd**$o$ts**i*$*$m*m$o*n*s@$*a$o*l.c**$om$

--Due to financial crisis the light at the end of the tunnel is switched off--

 

[Jon Senior]

dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers [email protected]omcom opined the
following...
> You are correct, there is a cyclist of sorts there. Obviously I was blinded by
> the sheer size of the first picture on the page.

I thought that the over-the-shoulder thong (b*bthong?) was particularly
special. I hope that if I ever start to think that such clothing is a
good idea, someone will put me out of everyone else's misery!

Jon

 

[Velvet]

dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers wrote:
>>http://tinyurl.com/5lrsn
>
>
> Not a cyclist amongst them!
>
> Cheers, helen s
>
>
> --This is an invalid email address to avoid spam--
> to get correct one remove fame & fortune
> h*$el*$$e*nd**$o$ts**i*$*$m*m$o*n*s@$*a$o*l.c**$om$
>
> --Due to financial crisis the light at the end of the tunnel is switched off--
>
>
>

Yep - doesn't count!

Have another go ;-)

--


Velvet

 

[Roos Eisma]

davek <[email protected]> writes:

>Mark Thompson wrote:
>> Right, now I've come up with the goods it's your turn - us men want to see
>> the ladies in lycra!

>While doing some research on American beers the other day, I came across
>this website:
><URL:http://www.victorybeer.com>

For serious lycra studies I suggest getting into rowing
http://www.nlroei.nl/Fotoboek-album-267-1.html

Roos