Today's TT

"Simon Brooke" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

in message <[email hidden]>, Toby

Douglass (') said:

Quoted message said:

Personally I'd like to see all the aero aids banned by CTT to get
back to a level athletic playing field, but that would [censored] a lot
of people who've set PBs with them.

I'm not sure I agree with this particular case, because I'm thinking
the aero stuff is alright, but the general principle, that taking
athelete support to extremes essentially devalues the achievemnet and
the sport, that I totally agree with.

So that's another vote for all cycle sports to use Kirkpatrick Macmillan
originals, is it?

What do you reckon it should be a race of? Man or machine? Do you feel that
spending extra money on equipment should give you an advantage?

Do you think single class yacht racing is a bad thing?

cheers,
clive

in message <[email hidden]>, Clive George

(') said:

"Simon Brooke" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

in message <[email hidden]>, Toby

Douglass (') said:

[email hidden] wrote:
> Personally I'd like to see all the aero aids banned by CTT to get
> back to a level athletic playing field, but that would [censored] a
> lot of people who've set PBs with them.

I'm not sure I agree with this particular case, because I'm
thinking the aero stuff is alright, but the general principle, that
taking athelete support to extremes essentially devalues the
achievemnet and the sport, that I totally agree with.

So that's another vote for all cycle sports to use Kirkpatrick
Macmillan originals, is it?

What do you reckon it should be a race of? Man or machine? Do you feel
that spending extra money on equipment should give you an advantage?

Consider Obree vs Boardman. This was a race of man - as designer,
constructor and rider - vs team. Mike Burroughs and Lotus contributed
as much to Boardman breaking Obree's record as Boardman did. But when
Obree broke Boardman's record that was a solo victory, and he not only
beat Boardman, he beat Burroughs and Lotus as well.

A man is far more than an engine for pumping pedals. A man has
intelligence, skill, design flair, imagination. A man who can design a
radical new bike from scratch and ride it to victory is not less of a
man than a man who can merely pump muscles. The true test of a man is
not in the hour on the track: it's in the year leading up to the hour
on the track, choosing if not designing the kit, tuning it to
perfection, adapting it where necessary. Boardman was arguably
stronger, tougher, fitter - but Obree could negate and overturn that
advantage by being a better and more imaginative bike designer. That's
the measure of a great cyclist.

Quoted message said:

Do you think single class yacht racing is a bad thing?

Well yes. You get better and more interesting racing (as well as better
and more interesting boats) in classes like the International 14 and
the International Moth than you do in, for example, Finns. And for
exactly the same reason. Finns only test a person's ability to react to
the waves and the weather. 14s and Moths test a person's ability to
design, adapt, develop, and tune a boat in which they can react to
waves and weather, and that's a much fuller test of a man.

If you want my opinion of what the rules should be governing racing
cycles, they should be

(i) The machine is propelled only by the efforts of the rider.
(ii) Energy may not be stored (e.g. in a flywheel or battery) prior to
the start of the race.
(iii) The overall shape of the machine cannot be changed during the
course of the race - i.e. you can't deploy a 'sail' when going down
wind and then retract it again when going up wind.

And that's it. It would be really interesting to see some of the Battle
Mountain specials doing some Tour de France stages.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

to err is human, to lisp divine
;; attributed to Kim Philby, oddly enough.

in message <[email hidden]>, Clive George

(') said:

"Simon Brooke" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

in message <[email hidden]>, Toby

Douglass (') said:

[email hidden] wrote:
> Personally I'd like to see all the aero aids banned by CTT to get
> back to a level athletic playing field, but that would [censored] a
> lot of people who've set PBs with them.

I'm not sure I agree with this particular case, because I'm
thinking the aero stuff is alright, but the general principle, that
taking athelete support to extremes essentially devalues the
achievemnet and the sport, that I totally agree with.

So that's another vote for all cycle sports to use Kirkpatrick
Macmillan originals, is it?

What do you reckon it should be a race of? Man or machine? Do you feel
that spending extra money on equipment should give you an advantage?

Consider Obree vs Boardman. This was a race of man - as designer,
constructor and rider - vs team. Mike Burroughs and Lotus contributed
as much to Boardman breaking Obree's record as Boardman did. But when
Obree broke Boardman's record that was a solo victory, and he not only
beat Boardman, he beat Burroughs and Lotus as well.

A man is far more than an engine for pumping pedals. A man has
intelligence, skill, design flair, imagination. A man who can design a
radical new bike from scratch and ride it to victory is not less of a
man than a man who can merely pump muscles. The true test of a man is
not in the hour on the track: it's in the year leading up to the hour
on the track, choosing if not designing the kit, tuning it to
perfection, adapting it where necessary. Boardman was arguably
stronger, tougher, fitter - but Obree could negate and overturn that
advantage by being a better and more imaginative bike designer. That's
the measure of a great cyclist.

Quoted message said:

Do you think single class yacht racing is a bad thing?

Well yes. You get better and more interesting racing (as well as better
and more interesting boats) in classes like the International 14 and
the International Moth than you do in, for example, Finns. And for
exactly the same reason. Finns only test a person's ability to react to
the waves and the weather. 14s and Moths test a person's ability to
design, adapt, develop, and tune a boat in which they can react to
waves and weather, and that's a much fuller test of a man.

If you want my opinion of what the rules should be governing racing
cycles, they should be

(i) The machine is propelled only by the efforts of the rider.
(ii) Energy may not be stored (e.g. in a flywheel or battery) prior to
the start of the race.
(iii) The overall shape of the machine cannot be changed during the
course of the race - i.e. you can't deploy a 'sail' when going down
wind and then retract it again when going up wind.

And that's it. It would be really interesting to see some of the Battle
Mountain specials doing some Tour de France stages.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

to err is human, to lisp divine
;; attributed to Kim Philby, oddly enough.

Quoted message said:

Douglass (') said:

Quoted message said:

Personally I'd like to see all the aero aids banned by CTT to get
back to a level athletic playing field, but that would [censored] a lot
of people who've set PBs with them.

I'm not sure I agree with this particular case, because I'm thinking
the aero stuff is alright, but the general principle, that taking
athelete support to extremes essentially devalues the achievemnet and
the sport, that I totally agree with.

So that's another vote for all cycle sports to use Kirkpatrick Macmillan
originals, is it?

Consider aimbots. If a player in an on-line game is using an aimbot,
he's amazing. If we only considered performance, he'd be the best
player. But we don't - we look at the aimbot use and go "that's the
aimbot, not *you* - without the aimbot, you'd be average".

Clearly, we have a concept of the performance of the athlete and the
performance of his equipment.

With cycling kit, it seems to me that we all accept lighter bikes,
better equipment, smoother hubs, etc, all improve performance. But I
think the view taken here is that these aids permit the athletes to
*realise* their performance, rather than providing for them new levels
of performance (a la aimbot).

Similarly with on-line games, there are a range of aids which can be
employed - better mice, better keyboards, better network configuration,
all of which help realise the performance of the player.

The key issue, in my view, is the difference between *removing* factors
which *reduce* an athletes performance (friction, wind resistance, etc)
and *adding* factors which *enhance* an athletes performance (drafting
behind a lorry, EPO, etc).

The former is acceptable, the latter is not.

--
Toby

"Simon Brooke" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

A man is far more than an engine for pumping pedals. A man has
intelligence, skill, design flair, imagination. A man who can design a
radical new bike from scratch and ride it to victory is not less of a
man than a man who can merely pump muscles. The true test of a man is
not in the hour on the track: it's in the year leading up to the hour
on the track, choosing if not designing the kit, tuning it to
perfection, adapting it where necessary.

Bollocks. If you're going to be like that, the true test of the man is in
neither - it's in his whole life. We have chosen to view a tiny segment of
this - riding a bike. Not choosing, designing, but riding - we have already
made the decision to run under UCI rules at the time, otherwise we would be
seeing vastly different machines.

Quoted message said:

Boardman was arguably
stronger, tougher, fitter - but Obree could negate and overturn that
advantage by being a better and more imaginative bike designer. That's
the measure of a great cyclist.

The thing is, it's possible to hire somebody else to do the bike designing
for you. Who are we trying to compare - Obree and Boardman or Obree and
Burrows? (although we do know that Obree was a better bike designer for
Obree than Burrows was...)
The trouble is we don't know who was the stronger cyclist - you say
Boardman, but I've heard others say Obree. The different bikes have masked
their performances as men.

Now, I don't argue that all racing should be on UCI bikes. There is a space
for BHPC style racing, but it has to be recognised that it is a separate
discipline from UCI style racing. And UCI style racing is more about the man
than the machine, which is a good thing - it makes it more obvious who is
the better rider, not who can afford or who has the talent to design the
fastest bike.

cheers,
clive

in message <[email hidden]>, Clive George

(') said:

"Simon Brooke" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

A man is far more than an engine for pumping pedals. A man has
intelligence, skill, design flair, imagination. A man who can design
a radical new bike from scratch and ride it to victory is not less of
a man than a man who can merely pump muscles. The true test of a man
is not in the hour on the track: it's in the year leading up to the
hour on the track, choosing if not designing the kit, tuning it to
perfection, adapting it where necessary.

Bollocks. If you're going to be like that, the true test of the man is
in neither - it's in his whole life. We have chosen to view a tiny
segment of this - riding a bike. Not choosing, designing, but riding -
we have already made the decision to run under UCI rules at the time,
otherwise we would be seeing vastly different machines.

[...]

Quoted message said:

Now, I don't argue that all racing should be on UCI bikes. There is a
space for BHPC style racing, but it has to be recognised that it is a
separate discipline from UCI style racing. And UCI style racing is
more about the man than the machine,

If you'd like to say it's more about the muscles than the brain, I'd
agree with you.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
;; "If I were a Microsoft Public Relations person, I would probably
;; be sobbing on a desk right now" -- Rob Miller, editor, /.

in message <[email hidden]>, Toby

Douglass (') said:

Quoted message said:

Douglass (') said:

[email hidden] wrote:
> Personally I'd like to see all the aero aids banned by CTT to get
> back to a level athletic playing field, but that would [censored] a
> lot of people who've set PBs with them.

I'm not sure I agree with this particular case, because I'm
thinking the aero stuff is alright, but the general principle, that
taking athelete support to extremes essentially devalues the
achievemnet and the sport, that I totally agree with.

So that's another vote for all cycle sports to use Kirkpatrick
Macmillan originals, is it?

Consider aimbots. If a player in an on-line game is using an aimbot,
he's amazing. If we only considered performance, he'd be the best
player. But we don't - we look at the aimbot use and go "that's the
aimbot, not *you* - without the aimbot, you'd be average".

Clearly, we have a concept of the performance of the athlete and the
performance of his equipment.

With cycling kit, it seems to me that we all accept lighter bikes,
better equipment, smoother hubs, etc, all improve performance. But I
think the view taken here is that these aids permit the athletes to
*realise* their performance, rather than providing for them new levels
of performance (a la aimbot).

So what about recumbents? Low racers? Streamliners? The only thing that
powered Sam Whittingham to 84 kilometers in one hour was his own
muscles. The only thing that powered him to over 80 miles per hour over
a measured 200 metres was his own muscles. There's no engine in there,
no jet assist, no catapult launcher, no hill, no wind. In what sense is
this not 'realising' his performance? If it isn't his performance
that's being realised, whose is it?

It seems to me there are two logical positions and two only: the first
is to say that any technical development is verboten, and everyone must
race identical Kirkpatrick Macmillan originals (whether they fit or
not), or else you've got to accept that the Varna Diablo is just
another piece of what you call 'better equipment'. It isn't even a
hugely specialised bike - the same bike, as well as the same rider,
holds both the flying 200 metres and the hour records

Quoted message said:

The key issue, in my view, is the difference between *removing*
factors which *reduce* an athletes performance (friction, wind
resistance, etc) and *adding* factors which *enhance* an athletes
performance (drafting behind a lorry, EPO, etc).

Ah, there we're in complete agreement.

Quoted message said:

The former is acceptable, the latter is not.

By that argument, the Varna must be acceptable.

--
[email hidden] (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.

"Simon Brooke" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Now, I don't argue that all racing should be on UCI bikes. There is a
space for BHPC style racing, but it has to be recognised that it is a
separate discipline from UCI style racing. And UCI style racing is
more about the man than the machine,

If you'd like to say it's more about the muscles than the brain, I'd
agree with you.

Sure, I'll go with that. It's a lot easier to test muscles with a cycling
event than brain - if you invoke bike building, it's almost inevitably
somebody else's contribution. (and I agree that Obree was truly great
because he did both).

Here's an interesting question : who holds the 80mph record - Sam W or the
makers of his bike? Could another top rider have done better in the same
bike?

cheers,
clive

in message <[email hidden]>, Clive George

(') said:

"Simon Brooke" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Now, I don't argue that all racing should be on UCI bikes. There is
a space for BHPC style racing, but it has to be recognised that it
is a separate discipline from UCI style racing. And UCI style
racing is more about the man than the machine,

If you'd like to say it's more about the muscles than the brain, I'd
agree with you.

Sure, I'll go with that. It's a lot easier to test muscles with a
cycling event than brain - if you invoke bike building, it's almost
inevitably somebody else's contribution. (and I agree that Obree was
truly great because he did both).

Here's an interesting question : who holds the 80mph record - Sam W or
the makers of his bike?

Answer: Sam W. He _is_ the maker of the bike. This is his day job:
<URL:http://www.fortebikes.com/index.htm>

Quoted message said:

Could another top rider have done better in
the same bike?

Possibly.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; killing [afghan|iraqi] civilians is not 'justice'

Clive George said:

"Simon Brooke" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Now, I don't argue that all racing should be on UCI bikes. There is a
space for BHPC style racing, but it has to be recognised that it is a
separate discipline from UCI style racing. And UCI style racing is
more about the man than the machine,

If you'd like to say it's more about the muscles than the brain, I'd
agree with you.

Sure, I'll go with that. It's a lot easier to test muscles with a cycling
event than brain - if you invoke bike building, it's almost inevitably
somebody else's contribution. (and I agree that Obree was truly great
because he did both).

Here's an interesting question : who holds the 80mph record - Sam W or the
makers of his bike? Could another top rider have done better in the same
bike?

cheers,
clive

They seem to have solved this problem in sailing where the rules in
different dinghy classes allow varying degrees on design input. From one
design where you're not allowed to change anything to development classes
where design changes can be extremely radical.
--
Michael MacClancy
Random putdown - "A modest little person, with much to be modest about."-
Winston Churchill
www.macclancy.demon.co.uk
www.macclancy.co.uk

Toby Douglass said:

I don't match myself up against
other people, but, at the same time, I *do* expect myself to be one of
the best at whatever it is that I'm doing.

Those 2 statements are contradictory.

BugBear