Thoughts on Stuff

I keep saving links for articles I want to read, and I keep getting further and further behind on my writing.

So here are a few I think you’ll benefit from, or at least enjoy.

– How does the geometry of your bike affect the way it handles?

Here’s another great article from Cycling Tips to help you figure that out.

When you start looking at bikes, going through the steps of sizing and fitting, you’ll want to have at least a basic understanding of this stuff. You’ll be a lot happier with the bike you choose.

Here are a couple of Bikezilla articles on bike fitting and sizing that might help you understand the above linked article better.

Bike Fit and Sizing: Road Bikes

Bike Fit and Sizing: CX and MTB

–The difficulties of doping controls, and possible solutions, from The Science of Sport.

Jonathan Vaughters proposed a system internal to teams where ALL available drug tests are used, even those short of 100% reliability.

But for failures of the “unreliable” tests, riders are not suspended, but merely removed from competition until blood levels are normalized.

I’d suggest a similar program enacted by UCI, but with a standard 30 day removal prior to re-evaluation, even in the case of drugs that are out of one’s system in just a few days, with no possibility to stall via appeal.

Vaughters if freakin’ brilliant.

– Bike Radar found a blog for a local bike shop (LBS) that is easily the coolest use of a blog for marketing ever.

21st Avenue Bicycles, in Portland, Oregon

Here is their direct link.

– For those of you seeking uber cool professional cycling secrets, here’s why they sometimes ride the tips of their saddles.

– And one more from Cycling Tips.

Rain Riding.

Read on down to the comments for some interesting tips.

How Should Jonathan Vaughters and AIGCP Deal with UCI Regarding Radio Ban?

UPDATE*

Here’s a great article from “The Back of the Peloton”, regarding Jonathan Vaughters and AIGCP’s fight with UCI over race radios.

Great article, but wrong.

– The Short:

Back of the Peloton (don’t you love how blog writers aren’t really people, we’re the name of our blog?) thinks that JV and the teams’ union, AIGCP, should soften things up and use humor to diffuse the struggle vs UCI. He believes that UCI, having no sense of humor, will be so charmingly disarmed that they, in turn, will soften their stance and negotiate with JV and the teams that he represents.

– Or not. Here are the comments I left below the article, at somewhat greater length. Some of this I’ve mentioned before.

What teams (and riders) should do is to organize in truth. Then they should strike in earnest; refuse to ride ANY races until UCI agrees to meet with teams and riders and hammer out a compromise on radios.

People say that riders are instantly replaceable and that if the elite peloton refuses to ride that in the merest passing of a moment new riders will step in to fill the void. Really?

Do you think that ASO wants 200 2nd and 3rd division riders struggling to make their way through the rigors of France for three weeks? An all out rider strike would be a disaster for ASO and the Tour and other major races, like the Monuments.

It’d be like replacing all the top level teams in any sport with farm teams and players. Would fans show up in large numbers and support the game enthusiastically? Not so much.

UCI and Pat McQuaid ARE bullies. Bullies only understand one thing: your rock hard fist in their face.

Until now teams and riders have offered only girlie slaps. It’s like inviting the bully to torment you further.

I’ve asked JV a couple of times, via Twitter, if teams and riders are willing to escalate to a full blown strike. So far he’s refused to comment.

While his silence is frustrating, I understand it.

Once it’s out there, yea or nay, a can of worms is opened and those lil wigglers aren’t going back in the can easily.

UCI’s refusal to even have a sit down with representatives for teams and riders shows a complete lack of respect for both.

UCI had many options when it came to banning radios and my guess is that if they’d been less heavy handed and more reasonable, even the fact that they failed to consult with teams and riders would have been overlooked.

If, say, they’d eliminated any relay of tactics via radios, but put in place a system to use radios to convey safety and mechanical details to everyone concerned.

Of course, UCI and ASO did attempt a “let’s see” kind of test, removing radios from just 2 stages in last years Tour de France. Teams and riders responded to this test, this compromise, by throwing tantrums.

I suspect that if teams and riders had reacted in a less hostile and childish manner then, that UCI may have been a little more open to a parley at some point along the way.

Or not. UCI has all the power and they’ve demonstrated time and again that they are unwilling to share that power unless forced damned near at gunpoint to do so.

So maybe even if teams and riders had shown a bit of maturity and ignored the goading of lame duck rider Lance Armstrong to behave like a bunch of preschool children, things would still be exactly where they are now. We’ll never know.

However that may have turned out, that fact is that we’re now in a place where UCI is the bully on the block, mercilessly stealing the lunch money of all the other kiddies.

The only way teams and riders will ever get to keep their lunch money, is to beat the living hell out of the bully.

The only way to do that is to strike, not just here and there at minor races and not just until UCI threatens to come in and take their bus fare, too. It has to be a sustained effort, including all races, even the biggest, most important races and even vs other bullies, like ASO (especially ASO).

Until then JV, his teams and their riders can plan on spending a lot of afternoons crying to mommy that meanie Pat McQuaid shoved them against their lockers, punched them in the face and stole their pocket full of change again.

*UPDATE (Paraphrased, because I don’t have permission to use the full response):

Back of the Peloton responds by saying that there are a couple problems with my theory.

1. If teams strike, they’re likely to lose sponsors.

2. Because they aren’t formally unionized there is no insurance to pay riders in case of a work stoppage.

His response is actually better than that, so please follow the link to the article and read it.

My response:

As I said, “organize in truth”, become formally unionized.

I’d bet that many, not all, but probably a majority, of sponsors would back teams in this.

If teams and riders are hoping for a pain free solution, they’re dreaming. It isn’t going to happen.

UCI will continue to crush the life out of them until either their is no life left or until the pain becomes great enough that the the ugliness of a real strike, with the loss of pay, the loss of some sponsors (possibly even major sponsors) and the loss of some riders and possibly teams is acceptable.

UCI is not going to simply handover a portion of its power. It’ll have to be taken by force and it’s not going to be pretty.

An alternative is to formally unionize and have the ability and honest intent to strike, but for UCI to see how much worse things will be if things are allowed to deteriorate to that point, and capitulate for the good of the sport. But what are the odds of UCI putting the good of the sport before its own desire to maintain unlimited and unchecked power? My guess is zip.

What I would like most is for UCI to be entirely disbanded and a new organization to be built from the ground up, and simultaneously teams and riders formally unionize and the three entities (cycling’s controlling body and both unions) work together all the way up.

But that’s even less likely than UCI advancing any interest other than self interest.

Is AFLD Playing Obstructionist in Lance Armstrong Case?

In a recent LeMonde interview with Bruno Genevois, President of AFLD (That’s “LeMonde” as in the magazine, not “Lemond” as in the first American to ever win the Tour de France. A mistake yours truly made. DOH!), you’ll find the following:

LeMonde: “Another current case concerns a former Tour winner Lance Armstrong . End of 2010, the U.S. court has met with your predecessor. He pledged that the AFLD to produce to the urine samples of Tour 1999 to investigate the effect if they contained traces of erythropoietin (EPO). Did you?”

Genevois: “Every citizen must answer to justice when approached by her. I promise that in time the AFLD comply with the Convention on Mutual Assistance Franco-American. But for now, the procedure of international rogatory commission has only just begun.”

Is that an indication that AFLD is playing the role of obstructionist in the U.S. government’s case against Lance Armstrong?

Already it’s been months and still, according to Genevois, the process is “only just begun”.

Why does he say that “in time the AFLD (will) comply”?, rather than that the ARE complying, but that the process is lengthy, detailed and difficult (or some such)?

It almost seems like a typical case of the French going out of their way to stick a thumb in America’s eye for no reason other than spite.

Almost, and that may be an element, but what other reason might AFLD, not known for it’s integrity, have for stalling in giving Lance Armstrong’s 1999 samples over to the USFDA and Jeff Novitzky?

With UCI’s long suspected internal corruption at risk of being exposed as fact should Lance Armstrong go down in flames, is UCI applying pressure to AFLD to stall in the transfer of evidence, and maybe even “lose” some of it?

Has there already been another payment by Lance Armstrong to UCI as thanks for their support in this matter? Or would the danger of exposure be enough for Pat “Dick” McQuaid to approach AFLD to make a deal?

AFLD has been marginalized by UCI and ASO, and they were not allowed to test riders during last year’s Tour de France. Now AFLD struggles to regain UCI’s good graces so that they might no longer be marginalized, and regain the esteem and wealth associated with being responsible for running (or at least participating in) the doping controls at the world’s most prestigious cycling event.

Their hatred of America plus the manipulation by UCI is powerful motivation to obstruct the transfer of evidence.

I asked my Twitter followers their opinion on this:

SFC750 aka aka Massimo Jaboffo said:

” Not sure (yet)… might be too early to tell & all sorts of international law type ‘o stuff about evidence-procedure involved…”

I think the wording of Genevois’ statement makes that unlikely, but it’s a great point and still plausible.

When Lance Armstrong Burns

Lance Armstrong soon will burn and his glorious screams will be heard throughout heaven and hell.

The feds know exactly how to prove to a conclusive legal standard, not merely a sporting standard, that Lance Armstrong doped: retest his samples.

They’ll start with his 1999 samples, because those have already shown that he’s used EPO. Then they’ll begin to methodically retest every sample they can get their slimy hands on.

Lance knows.

And Lance is powerless to stop it.

Lance’s minions think of him as their Christ.

Right now he’s in the gardens at Gethsemane. Soon he’ll be betrayed. Soon he’ll be denied.

Soon, those who once cried out to him with adoration will instead call out demanding his crucifixion.

Lance is not an honorable guy. He isn’t going to wait until the bitter end and go down fighting.

He’s gonna start maneuvering for the best possible outcome.

He’ll call Jeff Novitsky, secretly, and ask for immunity.

And be denied, because there is no bigger fish to fry. Not for Novitsky, at least.

So Lance will get desperate, finally realizing that the world he’s worked so feverishly to control, has become entirely uncontrollable.

Floyd Landis told us that Lance doesn’t have friends, because he distrusts everyone, must control everyone.

How long before that ring of friends / not friends begin slinking away from his side, hoping that if they walk into the light that they will not be consumed by the flames licking ever closer to Lance?

How long after that before they sing Lance’s dirge to the world, offering up the details of their saving grace, the true tale of Lance Armstrong and the frightening depths of his evil?

How long before Lance begins flinging those friends / not friends into the surrounding fire, hoping that his cooperation might yet earn him leniency?

How long before the inner circle begins to disintegrate? Before Johan Bruyneel and those who served Lance so faithfully at UCI are offered up as a sacrificial lambs? Before Bill Stapleton sees and understands the benefit of accepting the offered silver pieces in return for betraying Lance with a kiss? Before Jim Ochiwitz flees the crowd, denying thrice his discipleship?

How long before Jeff Novitsky personally drives the nails through Lance’s wrists and ankles?

Really, not very long. Once the 1999 samples are retested and again prove that Lance used EPO, and then the second round of retesting begins, things will crumble on Lance and Johan and Bill and Jim and Lance’s benefactors at UCI, at an ever increasing rate.

Lance, there is no longer any salvation for you.

And the world will rejoice as you burn.

Jonathan Vaughters: Connecting the Dots

The Short:

Jonathan “The Poet” Vaughters feels wrongly and unfairly judged by “new media”. He also feels that they, and the average Joe on the streets, are unqualified to make such judgments.

This digs at The Poet’s emotions, often leaving him “infuriated, saddened and hurt”.

He believes that people who are not in-the-know improperly “connect the dots” regarding his history and his current situations and actions.

The Long:

I can believe all of that. As I’ve mentioned before, The Poet is a guy who is personally connected to his riders as human beings. He truly cares about them. A guy who can invest himself that way, and do it so openly, isn’t gonna be the kind of guy who has criticisms roll off of his back as if it were the protective shell of a tortoise. Criticisms, especially personal criticisms, cut a guy like that, they draw blood, they hurt. Sometimes they hurt a lot.

But Jonathan kind of buys some of that pain, kind of earns it via past and present actions and inactions, and through his refusal to openly address some crucial issues, issues that the “real journalists” of cycling lack the professionalism and courage to properly investigate.

For instance, very recently JV tweeted that he doesn’t ever read forums, save for one thread about a “leak” from Garmin.

So pointing that out as a source of pain comes across as disingenuous, at a minimum.

See, that’s the kind of thing that it’s reasonable to connect some dots on. It’s reasonable to look at those two bits of information and say, “Hmmmmm, they just don’t seem to add up”.

And there are lots of things, lots of times, when it’s reasonable to do that.

It’s reasonable to know that JV laughed about an improperly passed on story concerning Johan Bruyneel dumping a bag of Floyd Landis’ blood down a toilette as punishment for riding a time trial “too hard” and think, “Ok, JV is intimately aware that there IS doping in the peloton, and of specific individuals involved in that doping.”

It’s reasonable to say, “Ok, JV was on Lance Armstrong’s team in 1999, the same year as Lance Armstrong’s retested samples show EPO use.” and then think “It’s likely that JV was fully aware of the US Postal’s doping practices and that he continues to protect Lance, Johan Bruyneel, the UCI and the entire corrupt system from that time with his silence.”

It’s reasonable to note, though JV resents it, that the infamous Dr Luis Garcia del Moral served U.S. Postal during the 1999 season and then wonder, “Did the good Dr work his doping magic on Vaughters during that time?”

It’s reasonable to then say, “It’s possible that JV continues to protect Lance, Johan, Dr del Moral, UCI, etc, for any of several reasons: He’s still personally connected with the doping lifestyle; He’s unwilling to risk being exposed himself: He’s afraid of Lance Armstrong, like so many other people seem to be; . . .”

It’s reasonable to know that JV counseled Floyd Landis to “tell them it’s none of their business” should anyone ask him for names, dates, times and places where doping occurred, and then think, “Yes, it’s very possible that JV is covering things up himself.”

You might look at JV’s occasional excellence as a climber: He held the record for ascending Mount Ventoux until it was broken by Iban Mayo; Iban Mayo is a confirmed doper, failing a doping control for EPO.

Then it would be reasonable to think, “If only a guy pumped full of juice could touch JV’s record, then it seems reasonable that JV was likewise a consumer of EPO and maybe autologous blood transfusions.”

That becomes more reasonable when you take Vaughter’s confession into account.

It’s reasonable to say, “If JV knew about U.S. Postal’s doping, if he’s always protected Lance and continues to do so, if his own sporadically exceptional climbing performances indicate that he himself was likely guilty of doping, too, then maybe his whole “Team Clean” schtick is just that, a schtick, empty words, an attempt to pull the wool over our eyes.”

Continue to put your trust in “real journalists” Jonathan. They’re your best hope for keeping the past buried.

Or maybe you’d like to join in being reasonable with us, JV?

Why not just lay it all out on the table? Make a public statement regarding all of that, and do it without prevaricating and without ambiguity.

Shoot, write a book and get rich off of it if you want to.

I’ll give you a starter list of questions to address, since “real journalists” are too busy kissing your ass to present them:

– Were you aware of any U.S. Postal rider doping, at any time, for any reason, while you were a member of U.S. Postal or afterward?

– Did you ever witness, or were you ever aware of Lance Armstrong using performance enhancing drugs?

– Were you ever aware of Dr del Moral or any person or persons associated with him, helping any rider to dope, regardless of the extent of that aid?

– How were doping supplies obtained? From who? At what cost? How were they disposed of? Again, by who? How was all this paid for?? These apply not only on U.S. Postal, but to any team you were a part of on any level and while fulling any function, duty or office?

– What was Johan Bruyneel’s involvement with U.S. Postal’s doping program?

– Were you ever aware of UCI turning a blind eye to U.S. Postal’s doping, or to doping within the peloton in general?

– Were you ever aware of any rider on any team you rode for doping?

– Did you ever use performance enhancing drugs (I know you’ve admitted this, but you did it in a kind of left-handed way and only in the foreign press).

– Why have you not been as honorable and courageous in exposing doping within the peloton to the appropriate authorities as Xavier Tondo has been?

That’s an ok first round.

These are things that “real journalists” should be asking you, but won’t. Which is the reason for your adoration for cycling’s “real journalists”.

I don’t believe for a heartbeat that you posses the courage or principles to answer even these questions openly, truthfully and in a simple, straight-forward manner.

NOTE: But we’ll see. In a 23 Feb 11 Twitter discussion JV invited me to contact him formally for an interview. I submitted that request Saturday, 26 Feb 11. Now we’ll wait to see if I’ll be required to eat crow, or if I’m proven correct. I’m hoping to be proven wrong, and I’ve bought a large supply of condiments to make the crow more palatable. END NOTE

But I do believe it to be the only way that you’ll ever be rid of the horrible unfairness and injustice of “new media’s” poisonous and unfounded speculations.

2011 Tour de France Wild Card Selections Used Punitively vs UCI

Christian Prudhomme is ASO’s director of the Tour de France. That makes him a pretty powerful guy.

He’s just admitted that his selections for the four 2011 Tour de France wild card teams was purely a punitive action, done as revenge for UCI granting ProTeam status to just a single French squad.

Thusly does he justify his inclusion of five shitty French teams in the overall selection process.

But, says he, if only UCI will be reasonable in the future and grant shitty French teams a larger portion of the coveted 18 ProTeam licenses, all will be well and he would then be able to consider lowly Australian, Columbian and Kenyan teams, or just any ole team that’s actually deserving of an invitation.

Prudhomme is unconcerned with French worthiness to ride le Tour. They simply deserve all consideration in all venues and under all circumstances, at any time and anywhere in the world, merely for having the good sense to be born French. The fact that they suck should have no bearing on anything at all, ever.

The UCI has been slapped down by ASO in the past, until they’re little more than ASO’s bitches. I was really shocked that they had the guts to include only a single French team in the ProTeam licensing (though I don’t believe that even that one team deserves it, so even that single selection is a cop out).

You can bet that in coming years UCI will cave in on this.

But how should this year’s wild card selections be viewed?

Should le Tour drop in prestige, not only this year for permanently?

Even with such a heavy weighting to the French, they have no chance whatsoever of winning the overall. The race is still months away and already they’re relegated to chasing stage wins, and due to their mass of numbers they’re likely to pull a few off.

With nearly a full third of all the teams and riders in le Tour not really deserving the selection (due do their Frenchness, which translates directly to a perfect Suckitude Rating), and the overall field heavily watered down, does le Tour really deserve its place as the grandest of all the Grand Tours?

It IS kind of sad that the guys representing the national pride of the host country are the very guys who don’t deserve to be in the race.

May it’s time to elevate the Giro d’Italia to the #1 spot? They seem to have a lot more passion and dedication to the sport itself and they race this year is easily a match in quality for le Tour.

Maybe ASO and French arrogance tell us that it’s time for le Tour to take its rightful place behind the Giro.

If ASO wants le Tour to become a 2nd division national showcase, maybe the race should be reduced to an HC level event and eliminated as a Grand Tour entirely.

Or should we think, “this just makes things simpler for the few teams with real contenders”?

Or maybe we should we think, instead, that ASO met it’s obligation to include the 18 ProTeam squads, so the what happens with the other four is really meaningless?

Bikezilla Profile: Harry

This is the first in a series about the people I meet who, to me at least, define “Bikezilla”.

Those of you who’ve followed Bikezilla on WordPress are familiar with the bane of my riding existence, Badass Old Lady (BOL) and know that I’d really like to do a profile on her (assuming that I can speak through my trembling and that I’m not too ashamed to even look her in the eyes after I pee myself).

But there’s another profile that I’ve really wanted to do; partly because this guy doesn’t fill me with the shrieking fears of Hell, partly because he’s totally badass and amazing.

I met Harry about 3 1/2 years ago, maybe even just a little further back than that, and because we both love cycling in our own personal ways.

Harry owned a pair of bikes when I met him.

His favorite was his steel framed road bike (I think a Schwinn), that he rides during the summer (yes, I’m aware of mixing tenses, but I feel totally justified, so, blah).

The other was a Trek, a trail bike (meaning a mountain bike style frame, but lighter, with 700c tires instead of 26″).

The Trek was at least ten years old and last spring the Trek gave up the ghost.

Harry, as you can guess from his bike selection, isn’t a wealthy guy. So this was a blow for him.

But whoever’s out there watching over everything seems to like Harry on some level.

Just when he needed it he met a guy who was moving out of state and who had multiple bikes. But the guy could only take one of them with him.

He was leaving the next day and for whatever reason offered to sell Harry a beautiful Specialized hybrid (trail bike) for . . . $25! Dude, talk about a steal.

This bike is an upgrade from the Trek in every way. It’s lighter, it has a newer, lighter and better component group, it has better aesthetics. It’s a dream bike for Harry’s winter riding (except that I think maybe some tires with heavier tread might serve him well).

None of this, so far, is especially amazing.

What really blows me away about Harry is that he rides all year long, in ANY weather. You might think, “come on, not really ANY weather” and you’d be wrong.

The only limit Harry has is that he stops taking the trail bike / hybrid out if the non-windchill temp drops below -40F.

Right, 40 degrees below zero before wind-chill.

Harry is 64 years old.

That’s some Bikezilla freakin’ shiite that’ll put even BOL to shame, right there.

But, shhhhhhh, please don’t tell her I said that. I’m afraid of what she might do the next time we cross paths on the trail.

I’ve said to him, “You know you could die in weather like that?”.

His only answer is a shrug.

Riding in 20F is pushing MY limits. I won’t even attempt to hang with Harry.

Thankfully, the temps in Illinois seldom dip that low, though 0F is pretty common come January and February, most years.

Harry has a cousine who is 99 years old and still lives on her own and takes care of herself. I guess “amazing” is just in his genes.

He came here from his home in Clinton, Iowa to go to Tool and Die School, and after school he went into the Army and took himself a little visit to Vietnam.

When he came back he moved back to Chicago on his mom’s advice, because there were more opportunities the fit his interests up here.

So he’s been commuting around Chicago since 1970. He’s such an unassuming guy that you’d never look at him and think “badass”, but he is.

Now he’s studying herbal medicine and yoga, soon to be certified in each. Then his plans are to move back home to Clinton, Iowa, close to his family, and open up his on homeopathic medicine shop and yoga school.

Harry, I know you said you’d be stopping by in the next few days. I’d love it if you’d use the comments section to give us some more details about your life and your cycling.

Good luck, Harry. I’ll miss you when you head back home.

Harry

Stuff Beginners Should Know (But Almost Never Do): General Tips

– Ego vs Brain

Don’t let your ego rule your riding.

Most of us can’t afford the best and “coolest” equipment. Don’t even worry about it.

What you need to hunt down is the most practical equipment you can afford and f**k what the guys on the highend bikes tell you is “cool”.

Do you know what I’ve noticed from the “cool” cycling crowd? There’s a lot of really weak, really bad, really selfish and thoughtless guys riding on and with all that expensive stuff.

All of them? No. But I’d guess it’s about 50 / 50. That’s a pretty high Jerk Ratio.

If that isn’t bad enough, just look at “cool guy” fashion: socks damned near to your knees.

Hey, cool guys, that look is equally stupid on you as it is on the guy who walks around Walmart in his sandals.

– Hydration Pack

Road, MTB or CX, wear your hydration pack on every long ride.

Those of you who read Bikezilla regularly, already know that I think your hydration pack should come with you for cold weather riding.

But it really should come with you on longer warm weather rides, too.

This is another “cool guy” violation, because cool guys live in constant fear that they may look the least bit unfashionable and, omg, hydration packs just are NOT pretty.

But smart always trumps cool or pretty. Always.

Unless you spend upwards of $100 to by a jersey with a built in hydration pack. Spending $100 or more for a hydration pack automatically elevates in to the coolusphere — or the dumbusphere, depending on your view.

Don’t worry, cool guys, no one will ever notice that giant hump on your back or the blue / green tubing sticking out of your shirt because there’s a hydration pack between layers.

No, what you need is a functional pack with a generous bladder, and screw whether or not it’s built right into your shirt.

My water bottles are 24 oz each. My larger hydration pack is 1.5 liters (or it was till I accidentally opened the seam with hot water prior to a snow ride. DOH).

That’s roughly 96 ounces of water. On a hot summer ride I’ll finish all of it between 50 and 60 miles out.

I recommend a 2 liter bladder, minimum.

The hydration pack has the advantage of being slightly insulated. You can freeze it over night before your ride and benefit from the cold / cool water during the ride. While you wait for it to thaw enough to drink, you still have you’r water bottles.

I don’t recommend insulated water bottles. The insulation is gonna reduce carry capacity by about 4 oz per bottle. Considering how pathetic that insulation is and how fast your bottles are gonna melt and warm up anyway, it isn’t worth the cost or the loss of fluids.

– Pain Reliever

Take pain reliever prior to and after longer rides.

I take just plain, regular strength aspirin.

It helps more than you can imagine, with butt AND leg pain.

– Tire Pressure

Check and adjust your tire pressure before EVERY ride.

You can avoid 90% of flats just by maintaining proper tire pressure.

Chances are that the minipump you have on your bike will not adequately inflate your tires.

You need a full size pump with a reliable gauge.

So if you do flat during a ride and you have to inflate with your minipump, assume that you’re riding under-pressured and be careful.

Even a light washout can cause a flat when you ride bellow the recommended PSI.

Though the tires and tubes on my CX are identical front and back, my back tire always seems to lose pressure faster, even after changing both tires and tubes.

The front will lose 5 – 10 lbs the first day. The back will lose 10 – 15.

That doesn’t actually have anything to do with this tip. I’m just babbling.

– Mountain Bike shoes / pedals > Road shoes / pedals

This is another cool guy no-no.

For basic riding, especially if you like to relax and enjoy the ride and spend any time at all off the bike, you’ll soooooo appreciate using mountain bike (MTB) shoes and pedals over road shoes and pedals. Yes, I mean even on your road bike.

If you aren’t racing, I mean racing of any kind, you’ll get a lot more benefit from the comfort and ability to walk without looking like a duck, which you get from wearing MTB style shoes.

Of course, if you’re wearing the MTB shoes, you’ll have to use the matching pedals. I have a preference in pedals, but I’ll leave that for another time.

However, if you do ANY racing at all, even just friendly sprints during club rides, you’ll want to go with road shoes and pedals. You’ll really lose something if you don’t.

– Vitamin B12

This may be a really great thing. It may help you feel more energetic.

But mega-dosing will ruin your ride in a big, messy way.

I used to take a multi B, then stop and pick up an energy drink with a lot of B12, AND get a couple of sports drinks that were also high in B12.

I was getting some nasty intestinal action and couldn’t figure out why. I’d spend my rides racing from portapotty location to portapotty location, squirting my guts out at each stop.

Until I figured out that it was the ultra-high doses of B12 screwing with my guts and my butt.

I still load up on B12, but I’ll take the multi B OR the B12 loaded energy drink OR the B12 loaded sports drinks, not all of them together.

My guts and my behind-parts thank me.

– Lip Balm

Carry lip balm.

Not the wax kind that you screw up out of the tube, but the liquid or soft wax kind that you squeeze out.

I really like the Blistex cream lip balm. If I can’t find that it’ll be Carmex.

Why?

It’ll sooth both ends.

You’ll especially appreciate it on those days that you stupidly overload on B12.

With that in mind, you might also consider carrying a tube of triple antibiotic pain relief cream. Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!

– 3X Cranks vs 2X Cranks

The gears up front are called your “crankset” (“chainset”, for my UK readers).

Having three gears (3X, or a triple) up front gives you a lot more versatility than if you have two gears (2X or a double) up front.

Now a lot of people think, “But the pros don’t use a 3X”, and they’re right. The pros don’t even use compact (the smaller gear is even smaller than on a standard “double” crankset) cranks unless they’re doing some really heavy climbing.

But you aren’t a pro. You aren’t even close. You don’t even resemble a pro except in your own head during moments when you’re pushing yourself to your limits and your feverish fantasies of living inside Lance Armstrong’s body spur you on to your greatest efforts.

The cool guys? They aren’t pros either. Most of them also are nothing even resembling a professional. But they think that they are.

Thus cools guys stupidly shun triple cranksets for doubles. Or they’ll go with a compact and pretend that no one notices that they’ve sissied out in a major way. We notice, guys, and we laugh at you.

But really, this is just another way that cool guys put their egos ahead of their brains.

Don’t be a cool guy. You really just look like a dumbass when you try.

Honestly, you have no idea how much harder it is to ride a double than a triple until you make the switch.

You’re gonna suffer a lot more as a newbie if you jump right to a double, or even a compact crankset.

A lot more.

That triple crankset is a new rider’s bestest best buddy, and it’s still pretty sweet for all but very strong riders.

I promise, you won’t regret starting out with that triple, and like I said, smart always trumps cool. Always.

– Big Gear Riding

At first you’ll find yourself riding a lot of the time, in fact almost all of it, in your smaller / smallest gear.

That’s cool. Well, at first it’s cool.

But eventually you’ll want to get stronger and ride faster.

That requires you to ride in your bigger / biggest gear. A lot.

I mean like all the time.

Don’t “build up to it”. Just do it. You’ll waste months and years “building up to it” and never get there. Never.

But when you do ride that big gear, if you reach your limits (and you will) and you’re on the edge of bonking (having no energy), don’t hesitate to drop it on down to that small gear until you’ve recovered. There’s no shame in easing up.

Remember, you are NOT a professional. There’s no need to push yourself beyond your ability. No matter how hard you ride you won’t be taking home the Yellow Jersey (the leader’s / overall winner’s jersey at the Tour de France).

In closing I’d just like to say:

I’d still do Lance Armstrong’ mom.

Alberto Contador and Riccardo Ricco: Two Peas in a Pod

Riccardo Ricco is still in the ICU, suffering heart and lung problems as a result of his botched transfusion, using blood that had sat in his fridge for nearly a month (per Floyd Landis’ instructions).

Alberto Contador thinks that he’s been saved from a ban from professional cycling and the loss of his ’10 Tour de France title, after the Royal Spanish Cycling Federation (RFEC -his national federation) cleared him of any wrong doing.

We all know that the Alberto Contador soap opera isn’t over. In the end WADA will appeal the decision and CAS will toss him for 2 yrs and strip him of his title. No “maybes”.

If there is a Witch Hunter in cycling, it is WADA. WADA does not care about its own integrity. It cares only to exercise its power and to punish. It will stoop to any means at its disposal, honest or dishonest, to nail even an accidental offender to the cross (except in the case of UCI cover ups, which WADA must be complicit in).

CAS has a history of two things: utterly unqualified judges, and allowing no leniency or reprieve (regardless of facts or UCI and WADA errors) for those brought before it.

Add to that the fact that Alberto Contador has no exonerating evidence, only conjecture that he couldn’t possibly have doped intentionally, and there is no hope for our wee pistolero. Though it would seem that he has an excellent chance of riding the entire ’11 season prior to the hammer coming down.

The rules say zero tolerance for clenbuterol, and there will be none. There’s no wiggle room, short of a blatant show of superstar favoritism by UCI. They’d have to prove to the world that they’re every bit as corrupt, deviant, self-serving, untrustworthy and conflicted as we already believe they are.

Alberto had a shot at a one year suspension, but he walked away from it. WADA won’t be seeking a one year ban when they take Alberto before CAS, because there really is no evidence beyond his own word and speculation that his ingestion of clenbuterol was accidental.

Without that evidence, CAS has no grounds for reducing the ban to one year.

If you dope you know the possible risks, including the risk of serious organ damage and even death, and the potential to be caught and suspended along with the loss of certain of your victories. Knowing those odds, you go forward and you make an informed and active choice to gamble. If you lose your wager, then you shouldn’t be surprised that you have to honor your debt.

Jonathan Vaughters, Lance Armstrong and Real Journalists

Jonathan “The Poet” Vaughters remarked via Twitter that he’s released information regarding the Matt White / Trent Lowe / Dr del Moral issue to “real journalists”, and that they found said information lacking of enough interest to follow up. Meaning that they simply believe that his word is inviolate, he is The Speaker of Truth and therefore beyond doubting, beyond questioning and there’s no reason whatsoever to follow up on anything that he says.

I call bullshit, Jonathan.

What The Poet refers to as “real journalists” comes down to places like Cycling News, VeloNews, PEZ Cycling News and Oz Cycling and others like them.

Without these sites, following professional cycling in a timely manner would be damned near impossible. They perform a needed, valuable and much appreciated service and it doesn’t cost us, the fans, a damned cent.

But they aren’t “real journalists”. Yeah, sure, they like to pretend that they are. Maybe some of them even spent some time in journalism school.

And if you want the bare bones, who, what, where, why, when and how, mostly you’ll do ok by sticking with these guys.

Is that all it takes to be a “real journalist”? Really? I don’t believe that and I’d bet that The Poet doesn’t really believe it, either.

I have two issues with the notion that those sites, and cycling news sites in general, are “real journalists”. I’ll cover the lesser issue first.

The biggest knock on blogs, even serious blogs, is that they’re anywhere from poorly edited to entirely unedited junk.

“Real news sites” are well edited, more highly polished and so more pleasant to read. Regardless of the value of the content, things like proper spelling, grammar and punctuation go a long way toward making a site seem more credible.

I’m not here to defend or refute any of that. There is, in fact, some truth to all of it. So it’s not entirely unfair.

The problem is that the above “real news websites” are renowned for either a lack of editing or for incompetent editing; Spelling, grammar and punctuation errors abound.

In fact, most serious bloggers do a far better job of editing than any cycling “real news site” does.

But the real issue with the notion that cycling news people are “real journalists” is that they’re all, every last one of them, flaming, gutless pussies.

For instance, last year Oz Cycling caught Lance Armstrong on tape, shoulder-checking an old man into a fence, then turning around and flipping the poor guy off.

Not one “real news site” asked Lance so much as a single question about it.

When I asked Oz Cycling why they failed to pursue the story, they said that Lance was their friend and that they saw no reason to anger or irritate him.

Really? How about you’re SUPPOSED to be a fookin’ NEWS agency! I mean, you at least pretend to be.

How about it’s your JOB to ask the hard, ugly questions, even if that offends, irritates or angers the subject!

But it can’t be pushed off on Oz Cycling, because Cycling News, VeloNews and PEZ were all spineless biatches, too. NONE of them had the guts or the professional integrity to confront Lance about the incident.

Cycling News, Velo News, PEZ, and all the others, they’re all afraid to ask questions that matter.

They’re terrified that The Poet or Lance or someone else will get snippy and not talk to them for a while.

So, when Jonathan Vaughters is clearly not entirely honest about the White / Lowe / del Moral story, and even flip flops on his answer three times, no big deal. JV is The Speaker of Truth. Let it go.

THAT’S why JV likes his “real journalists”. They don’t ask hard questions. They’re “go along to get along” guys. No rocking the boat, please.

By talking to “real journalists” JV doesn’t have to worry about any deeper probing, any uncomfortable questions, any ugly revelations coming out.

JV likes “real journalists” because they’re easy, because they’re fearful, because they’re gutless, because he can count on them not doing their job.

Real journalists get a piece of information, like JV’s White / Lowe / del Moral tale, and they don’t just accept it as the end all.

They speculate, they notice what’s said and what’s not said, they pick out inconsistencies and errors, they probe, they research, they investigate, they go back and ask follow up questions, they call bullshit.

Why? Because that’s their job. That’s what real journalists do.

JV, in your quest to deliver your various and sundry thoughts to the “real jouralists”, have you considered starting with someone like Paul Kimmage?

I didn’t think so.