Watership Down 15th Jan

[MartinM]

Alan Holmes wrote:
> "David Martin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
> >
> > Alan Holmes wrote:
> >> I'm sorry, you have lost me there, what has 10 past 11 and 5 to 2 got to
> >> do
> >> with it?
> >
> > I'm presuming it wasn't a digital clock.
> >
> > very strong tailwind? Downhill all the way?
> >
> > Where was the house and which YH?
>
> You are not keeping up with this are you, the start was south ealing nad the
> hostel was stow-on-the-wold, see a previous post.
>
> And, BTW, the bike was a Raleigh, with a sturmey archer 3 speed gear fitted
> with a two gear derailier, and a hub dynamo, lowest gear 26 and highest 104.

I'm losing the will to live on this one

 

[Ambrose Nankivell]

MartinM wrote:
> Alan Holmes wrote:
>> You are not keeping up with this are you, the start was south ealing
>> nad the hostel was stow-on-the-wold, see a previous post.

Nothing like those South Ealing 'nads, eh?

>> And, BTW, the bike was a Raleigh, with a sturmey archer 3 speed gear
>> fitted with a two gear derailier, and a hub dynamo, lowest gear 26
>> and highest 104.
>
> I'm losing the will to live on this one

I can lose the will to live faster than you

--
Ambrose

 

[MartinM]

Ambrose Nankivell wrote:
> MartinM wrote:
> > Alan Holmes wrote:
> >> You are not keeping up with this are you, the start was south ealing
> >> nad the hostel was stow-on-the-wold, see a previous post.
>
> Nothing like those South Ealing 'nads, eh?
>
> >> And, BTW, the bike was a Raleigh, with a sturmey archer 3 speed gear
> >> fitted with a two gear derailier, and a hub dynamo, lowest gear 26
> >> and highest 104.
> >
> > I'm losing the will to live on this one
>
> I can lose the will to live faster than you

we lost the will to live much faster in the old days

 

[David Martin]

Alan Holmes wrote:
> "David Martin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
> >
> > Alan Holmes wrote:
> >> I'm sorry, you have lost me there, what has 10 past 11 and 5 to 2 got to
> >> do
> >> with it?
> >
> > I'm presuming it wasn't a digital clock.
> >
> > very strong tailwind? Downhill all the way?
> >
> > Where was the house and which YH?
>
> You are not keeping up with this are you, the start was south ealing nad the
> hostel was stow-on-the-wold, see a previous post.
>
> And, BTW, the bike was a Raleigh, with a sturmey archer 3 speed gear fitted
> with a two gear derailier, and a hub dynamo, lowest gear 26 and highest 104.

Hmm.. that gives an average cadence of just over 90 in top gear, with
luggage, over the chilterns.

Must have been one hell of a tailwind and a load of helium balloons.

...d

 

[Simon Brooke]

in message <[email protected]>, Alan Holmes
('[email protected]') wrote:

> "Simon Brooke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
>> in message <[email protected]>, Alan Holmes
>> ('[email protected]') wrote:
>>
>>> If you work out the distance from South Ealing to Stow-on-the-Wold,
>>> you will find it is very close to 84 miles.
>>
>> You do realise at what speed the very best cyclists in the world, when
>> being towed along in a peloton, can manage over that distance, don't
>> you? Hint: the Tour de France was won last year at an average of less
>> than 26mph. And that was a record.
>
> But were they riding a proper bike?
>
> And I'm sure that riders in the 30s did better than that.

No, the best speed during the 30s was less than 20mph, in 1939 (31.986
Km/h). I'm sure, of course, that you were a much better cyclist than
Silvere Maes, who won in that year, but what I want to know is, in that
case, why didn't you take part?

--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
;;Drivers in the UK kill more people every single year than
;; Al Qaeda have ever killed in any single year.

 

[Simon Brooke]

in message <[email protected]>, Alan Holmes
('[email protected]') wrote:

> You are not keeping up with this are you, the start was south ealing
> nad the hostel was stow-on-the-wold, see a previous post.
>
> And, BTW, the bike was a Raleigh, with a sturmey archer 3 speed gear
> fitted with a two gear derailier, and a hub dynamo, lowest gear 26 and
> highest 104.

Alan, you are either misremembering or a liar. Even the best racing
cyclists of the day, in competition, didn't achieve the speeds you claim
to have hit while 'going to a dance'. But it differently, if you had
gone to the Berlin Olympics in 1939, you could have brought back enough
gold medals to finance the British war effort.

FWIW, I 'remember', as a lad of about 22, riding from here to
Kirkcudbright, a distance of thirteen miles over some fairly hilly
terrain, in half an hour flat. Although I remember this perfectly
clearly I'm now quite confident my memory is wrong, because although
that isn't impossible for anyone I was never fit enough for it to be
possible for me.

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

;; may contain traces of nuts, bolts or washers.

 

[dkahn400]

Alan Holmes wrote:
> "dkahn400" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > - The equipment is much better now than it was in the 1930s.
>
> What equipment?

Just about all of it. Cycling is an equipment sport.

> > - The roads they ride on are better.
>
> You haven't ridden on the roads in East Berks!

The Tour de France does not visit East Berks.

> > - The race itself is over a much shorter distance now than it was then.
>
> Which means?

Average speeds are higher.

> > - The mechanical and technical support from the teams is better.
>
> How does this affect the way we cycle?

It increases the average speed of riders in the Tour because they get
going quicker after breakdowns, and can get extra food and drink more
quickly and easily.

> > - Sports science has made huge strides since the 1930s, resulting in
> > more effective training and nutrition for cyclists. Include in this
> > category new technologies such as heart rate monitors and power meters.
>
> But, I went to a dance in Carnforth, run by a friend, took me about 11 hours
> in total, that is, a ride starting at 10.00am arriving at the hostel at
> about 6.0pm, up the following day, start at 10.00 arriving at about 2.00pm
> with a break for lunch each day, total cycling about 11 hours, distance 260
> miles, I'll let you struggle with the arithmetic!
>
> Normal food for that period.

In 1950 the 12 hour time trial record was 259.23 miles. You apparently
covered the same distance and hour quicker than the current record
holder. He was racing flat out on a stripped-down bike. You were
touring with luggage. Can't you see why this seems improbable?

> Whoops, sorry you are talking about 'sports' I'm talking about ordinary
> cycling!

If you look back in the thread you'll see that I was specifically
talking about the Tour de France.

> > - Performance enhancing substances are now available that were not back
> > then. These include both the legal kind such as energy gels and
> > isotonic drinks, and the illegal kind such as erythropoietin (EPO).
> > Include in this category procedures such as blood doping.
>
> Yes, well, we didn't have drugs in those days ...

You most certainly did.

> ... and even if we did, most of
> the cyclists I knew would not have gone anywhere near them.

But professionals did. And like it or not pharmacology is one of the
reasons that Tour speeds have increased dramatically since the 1930s.

--
Dave...

 

[Jim Price]

David Martin wrote:
> Hmm.. that gives an average cadence of just over 90 in top gear, with
> luggage, over the chilterns.
>
> Must have been one hell of a tailwind and a load of helium balloons.

He is Lance Armstrong AICMFP (where FP = flying pig).

--
JimP
--
"We don't have a plan, so nothing can go wrong" - Spike Milligan

 

[Dave Larrington]

In article <[email protected]>, Simon
Brooke ([email protected]) wrote:

> Alan, you are either misremembering or a liar. Even the best racing
> cyclists of the day, in competition, didn't achieve the speeds you claim
> to have hit while 'going to a dance'. But it differently, if you had
> gone to the Berlin Olympics in 1939, you could have brought back enough
> gold medals to finance the British war effort.

<pedant>
If he'd gone to the Berlin Olympics in 1939, he couldn't have brought
back /any/ medals as he'd have been a year too late
</pedant>

Oh, wait, you're right. He'd have ridden so fast he'd have reached
Berlin twelve months before he left Ealing...

--
Dave Larrington - <http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/>
I am Wan, for I am pursued by the Army of Plums.

 

[Alan Braggins]

In article <[email protected]>, Alan Holmes wrote:
>
>You are not keeping up with this are you, the start was south ealing nad the
>hostel was stow-on-the-wold, see a previous post.
>
>And, BTW, the bike was a Raleigh, with a sturmey archer 3 speed gear fitted
>with a two gear derailier, and a hub dynamo, lowest gear 26 and highest 104.

<python>
Well, I say gears, really it were a different sized wheel for an ordinary,
and I had to undo the wheelnuts with my teeth because we couldn't afford
spanners, but it was gears to us.

And you tell that to kids today, and they won't believe you.
</python>

 

[davek]

Alan Holmes wrote:
> Out of interest, when going on a hostelling holiday one year, I left home at
> two o'clock, intending to get to the hostel at about 7 o'clock, when I
> arrived the hostel was not open, I asked someone waiting why the ostel was
> closed, and the anwser wasthat it was 4.50, when I checked the distance, it
> was 84 miles, which meant I had averaged 29.5 mph, and you should bear in
> mind that I had two loaded pannier bags and a full saddle bag, which made
> the bike almost impossible to lift as it was so heavy.

Well, my dad's got a Ferrari with a drum kit in the boot. And my uncle
is a trained ninja assassin and could break your neck with his little
finger if he wanted to.

d.

 

[davek]

Alan Holmes wrote:
> if they were to use
> a higher gear, they would travel much faster.

Yeah, until their knees snapped!

d.

 

[Mike K Smith]

Make that three years too late. The Olympics were held in 1936, not
1938.

 

[Alan Holmes]

"Simon Brooke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> in message <[email protected]>, Alan Holmes
> ('[email protected]') wrote:
>
>> "Simon Brooke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]
>>> in message <[email protected]>, Alan Holmes
>>> ('[email protected]') wrote:
>>>
>>>> If you work out the distance from South Ealing to Stow-on-the-Wold,
>>>> you will find it is very close to 84 miles.
>>>
>>> You do realise at what speed the very best cyclists in the world, when
>>> being towed along in a peloton, can manage over that distance, don't
>>> you? Hint: the Tour de France was won last year at an average of less
>>> than 26mph. And that was a record.
>>
>> But were they riding a proper bike?
>>
>> And I'm sure that riders in the 30s did better than that.
>
> No, the best speed during the 30s was less than 20mph, in 1939 (31.986
> Km/h). I'm sure, of course, that you were a much better cyclist than
> Silvere Maes, who won in that year, but what I want to know is, in that
> case, why didn't you take part?

I've never ever been interested in competions of ay sort.

Alan

>
> --
> [email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
> ;;Drivers in the UK kill more people every single year than
> ;; Al Qaeda have ever killed in any single year.

 

[davek]

Alan Holmes wrote:
>>- The race itself is over a much shorter distance now than it was then.
>
> Which means?

Which means riders nowadays don't have to face arriving at the top of
the Galibier at 3am.

d.

 

[MartinM]

Alan Holmes wrote:

> I've never ever been interested in competions of ay sort.

no, too slow for you

 

[davek]

dkahn400 wrote:
> But professionals did. And like it or not pharmacology is one of the
> reasons that Tour speeds have increased dramatically since the 1930s.

"You expect me to win this race on water?"

d.

 

[davek]

Simon Brooke wrote:
> I'm sure, of course, that you were a much better cyclist than
> Silvere Maes, who won in that year, but what I want to know is, in that
> case, why didn't you take part?

Was there a British team that year? If not, to be fair to Alan, it's
unlikely they would have invited him to take part.

Either that or the organisers were just scared he would show them all up.

d.

 

[davek]

MartinM wrote:
> OK see you there. I'll be the one waiting forlornly for 45 mins for a
> plate of beans on after everyone else has started back to Denmead.

NB don't go into any cafe if the waiter looks like a character out of
Little Britain.

d.

 

[Simon Brooke]

in message <[email protected]>, Mike
K Smith ('[email protected]') wrote:

> Make that three years too late. The Olympics were held in 1936, not
> 1938.

Actually I knew that. I've no idea why I mistyped it.

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

...but have you *seen* the size of the world wide spider?