Orientation of brakes

[mary]

I notice that my rear brake is controlled by my right hand. I am right
handed. If a person is left handed should that be switched since you have
(?) more strength in your dominant hand? I figure you want more strength for
the rear brake than the front. Or does it make any difference?

Tom

[Gearóid Ó Laoi, Garry Lee]

My bikes have the front brakes on different sides. It has never bothered me.

[Harris]

"mary" wrote:
> I notice that my rear brake is controlled by my right hand. I am right
> handed. If a person is left handed should that be switched since you have
> (?) more strength in your dominant hand? I figure you want more strength
for
> the rear brake than the front. Or does it make any difference?

See Sheldon Brown's article on this:
http://www.sheldonbrown.com/brakturn.html

Art Harris

[trg]

Actually, the front brake does most of the work, so all other things equal,
your stronger hand should control the front break.

Some other things to consider-
Does the traffic in your country drive on the left or right? Assuming
cyclists stay to the "slow" side of the traffic, they will want to use the
hand that is usually the rear brake to signal to traffic, leaving their
strong hand covering the front brake when they do so. So in the US, that
means Right brake front.

Are you a motorcyclist? Motorcycles have the front brake on the right (left
side is the clutch). Might be simpler to stick to that system to avaid
confusion.

Where are the shifters located on your bike? If they are STI type
(integrated with the brake levers), it matters less, but if you have to move
your hand away from the brake to use the shifters, you might want to be able
to cover the front brake with one hand while shifting with the other. Since
most shifting is done using the rear derailler rather than the front, if the
left hand controls the front brake, you'll have more stopping power if you
have to use it while shifting. This is especially noticable in stop and go
city riding. Of course I suppose you could change the orientation of your
shifters instead...

Well, I hope that answers your question ;-). It's really a matter of
personal preference. On my MTB with brifters (sti) and motorcycle I have the
front brake on the right, on my commuting/touring bike which has bar end
shifters I have the front controlled by the left. I'm about to buy a road
bike and will probably set it up with the front on the right.

A+

"mary" > a écrit dans le message de
...
> I notice that my rear brake is controlled by my right hand. I am right
> handed. If a person is left handed should that be switched since you have
> (?) more strength in your dominant hand? I figure you want more strength
for
> the rear brake than the front. Or does it make any difference?
>
> Tom
>
>


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.504 / Virus Database: 302 - Release Date: 24/07/2003

[Qui si parla Campagnolo]

Tom-<< I notice that my rear brake is controlled by my right hand. I am right
handed. If a person is left handed should that be switched since you have
(?) more strength in your dominant hand? >><BR><BR>

Most braking power comes from the front brake, not the rear. Ideally your
strongest hand should be attached to the strongest brake for best/fastest
braking.

Peter Chisholm
Vecchio's Bicicletteria
1833 Pearl St.
Boulder, CO, 80302
(303)440-3535
http://www.vecchios.com
"Ruote convenzionali costruite eccezionalmente bene"

[Robin Hubert]

"mary" > wrote in message
...
> I notice that my rear brake is controlled by my right hand. I am right
> handed. If a person is left handed should that be switched since you have
> (?) more strength in your dominant hand? I figure you want more strength
for
> the rear brake than the front. Or does it make any difference?
>

What does hand strength have to do with it? If it takes that much effort
you must have awful brakes. Also, if you really needed the strongest hand
on the most important brake, it'd be the front.



--
Robin Hubert >

[Chris Zacho The Wheelman]

(trg) Wrote:

>Actually, the front brake does most of the
>work, so all other things equal, your
>stronger hand should control the front break.
>Some other things to consider-
>Does the traffic in your country drive on
>the left or right? Assuming cyclists stay
>to the "slow" side of the traffic, they will
>want to use the hand that is usually the
>rear brake to signal to traffic, leaving
>their strong hand covering the front
>brake when they do so. So in the
>US, that means Right brake front.

I always wondered about this. I agree that 90% (if not more) of your
braking power is from the front, I agree that, logically, the strongest
hand should be the one to control this brake, but, in a country that
drives on the right, a bicyclist, signaling his or her intent to traffic
that he/she wishes to turn (some of us actually do this), that means
that the left hand must be removed from the bars.

Would you really want powerful braking when you have only one hand on
the bars?

Think about it.

May you have the wind at your back.
And a really low gear for the hills!
Chris

Chris'Z Corner
"The Website for the Common Bicyclist":
http://www.geocities.com/czcorner

[[email protected]]

In article >, "mary" <tombates@cit
y-net.com> writes:
>I notice that my rear brake is controlled by my right hand. I am right
>handed. If a person is left handed should that be switched since you have
>(?) more strength in your dominant hand? I figure you want more strength for
>the rear brake than the front. Or does it make any difference?

Some threads are eternal.... There is no law saying which brake lever controls
which brake. Some prefer one way, others the other. There are lots of
rationales for choosing one over the other. But you do not need more strength
for the rear brake. The front brake is far more important than the rear. But
you don't need more strength than your left hand (usually) can apply on the
front, either. Most people have enough strength in either hand to lift the
rear wheel when braking the front, which is as much braking as you can have.

In the old days, of downtube shifters, right-handed riders would have some
advantage with the front brake on the left, since the right hand usually did
the shifting of both levers, and it is good to have the important brake
available even when shifting. Now that is not an issue, either.

David L. Johnson
Department of Mathematics
Lehigh University

[Sam Huffman]

(Qui si parla Campagnolo) writes:

> Tom-<< I notice that my rear brake is controlled by my right hand. I am right
> handed. If a person is left handed should that be switched since you have
> (?) more strength in your dominant hand? >><BR><BR>
>
> Most braking power comes from the front brake, not the rear. Ideally your
> strongest hand should be attached to the strongest brake for best/fastest
> braking.

Sheldon posted about this a while back, with an anecdote that I though
exemplified why one should _not_ switch the brakes. In theory, yes, it makes
sense to have your strongest hand on the most powerful brake.

But his example was that he took a bike out for a test ride that did not have
its brakes switched. Because he was used to right-hand/front-brake, he was
nearly unable to stop in an emergency.

Even if it's less than ideal, it seems to me it's probably best to have one's
brakes set up the same as everyone else's to avoid this type of situation,
lest one's initial reaction when braking in an emergency be the incorrect one.

Sam

[Rick Onanian]

On 9 Aug 2003 21:40:51 -0400, > wrote:
> In the old days, of downtube shifters, right-handed riders would have
> some
> advantage with the front brake on the left, since the right hand usually
> did
> the shifting of both levers, and it is good to have the important brake
> available even when shifting. Now that is not an issue, either.

It's still easier to shift the more common rear
derailleur with the more skilled right hand while
leaving the more important front brake available
to the clumsy but still-strong-enough left hand.

So, for me, it's better with the left-hand front
brake. I've never wished I had more strength or
dexterity for my braking.

> David L. Johnson
> Department of Mathematics
> Lehigh University
--
Rick Onanian

[[email protected]]

>Sheldon posted about this a while back, with an anecdote that I though
>exemplified why one should _not_ switch the brakes. In theory, yes, it makes
>sense to have your strongest hand on the most powerful brake.
>
>But his example was that he took a bike out for a test ride that did not have
>its brakes switched. Because he was used to right-hand/front-brake, he was
>nearly unable to stop in an emergency.
>
>Even if it's less than ideal, it seems to me it's probably best to have one's
>brakes set up the same as everyone else's to avoid this type of situation,
>lest one's initial reaction when braking in an emergency be the incorrect one.

Only if you ride a lot of other people's bikes. Who does that? Set it up
like you want it, and be sure to set up all your bikes the same way. But your
emergencey reaction does not depend on your having the same arrangement as
everyone else. It depends on consistency in your equipment.


David L. Johnson
Department of Mathematics
Lehigh University

[[email protected]]

Rick Onanian writes:

>> In the old days, of downtube shifters, right-handed riders would
>> have some advantage with the front brake on the left, since the
>> right hand usually did the shifting of both levers, and it is good
>> to have the important brake available even when shifting. Now that
>> is not an issue, either.

> It's still easier to shift the more common rear derailleur with the
> more skilled right hand while leaving the more important front brake
> available to the clumsy but still-strong-enough left hand.

I see no conflict there. I seldom if ever shift while braking anyway.
In fact the act of shifting is so quick that it fits in equally well
before or after braking and is something I do with the left hand,
front and rear. Therefore, my front brake is on the same hand it was
on on my motorcycle that gave me the impetus to switch to pedals.
Besides, I am not encumbered by shift/brake levers. Shifting is on
the downtube where it doesn't conflict with anything unless you are
afraid to ride one handed, something of which I heard often before the
days of STI shifting.

That, in my estimation was the cause of these expensive and fragile
brake/shift levers. Lance didn't fare so well after he fell on his
left brake lever and had to ride an uncomfortably low gear to the top
of the climb when he realized the chainwheel would no longer shift
reliably after his spill. It was what caused him to freewheel forward
and end with both feet on the road after he got back on his bicycle.

> So, for me, it's better with the left-hand front brake. I've never
> wished I had more strength or dexterity for my braking.

The difference is that I still motorcycle downhill and I stand the
bike on its front wheel on many curves in the mountains with my right
hand: http://tinyurl.com/jq0s

Jobst Brandt

Palo Alto CA

[chris mayhew]

wrote in message >...

> brake/shift levers. Lance didn't fare so well after he fell on his
> left brake lever and had to ride an uncomfortably low gear to the top
> of the climb when he realized the chainwheel would no longer shift
> reliably after his spill. It was what caused him to freewheel forward
> and end with both feet on the road after he got back on his bicycle.
on this count you are incorrect. lance cracked the right chainstay on
his bike, which effected his shifting. supposedly the damage was done
by the rider behind him hitting him.

[chris mayhew]

wrote in message news:<QCYZa.10889

sorry, here's the link. took me a minute to find it.
http://www.velonews.com/tour2003/tech/articles/4647.0.html

[John Henderson]

On Tue, 12 Aug 2003 02:51:28 GMT,
wrote:

>
>That, in my estimation was the cause of these expensive and fragile
>brake/shift levers. Lance didn't fare so well after he fell on his
>left brake lever and had to ride an uncomfortably low gear to the top
>of the climb when he realized the chainwheel would no longer shift
>reliably after his spill. It was what caused him to freewheel forward
>and end with both feet on the road after he got back on his bicycle.

Lance Armstrong's climbing bikes use regular (non-STI) left brake
levers and a single downtube shifter for the front mech. It can be
seen in the stage photos below:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/tour.php?id=photos/2003/tour03/stage15/JD/stage_15(7)
http://www.cyclingnews.com/tour.php?id=photos/2003/tour03/stage15/JT/003lance_luz
http://www.cyclingnews.com/tour.php?id=photos/2003/tour03/stage15/olympia/ARMSTRONG49

Had the left lever been an STI model, the crash might have caused more
problems.


John Henderson, New York City, USA
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
"Let's roll!" -- Todd Beamer, 9/11/01
"After five and weekends" -- 711th SOS
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

[Rick Onanian]

On Tue, 12 Aug 2003 02:51:28 GMT, > wrote:
>> It's still easier to shift the more common rear derailleur with the
>> more skilled right hand while leaving the more important front brake
>> available to the clumsy but still-strong-enough left hand.
>
> I see no conflict there. I seldom if ever shift while braking anyway.

You've never been halfway through a shift when you suddenly
need to brake?

> That, in my estimation was the cause of these expensive and fragile
> brake/shift levers. Lance didn't fare so well after he fell on his

Another, maybe more important reason why left-front-brake
is good: With these expensive and fragile brake/shift levers,
there is often an inconvenient conflict when you want to
brake and shift in rapid succession.

> hand: http://tinyurl.com/jq0s

Beautiful photo. I hope I can get some pictures like that
during my upcoming Poconos vacation.

> Jobst Brandt
>
> Palo Alto CA
--
Rick Onanian

[[email protected]]

Chris Mayhew writes:

> sorry, here's the link. took me a minute to find it.
> http://www.velonews.com/tour2003/tech/articles/4647.0.html

That is worse than I thought. Now we have bicycles that don't
withstand a mild fall, one that merely tipped over onto the road
without striking an obstacle, and the frame broke. I've seen a lot of
pile-ups in criteriums and track races and no frame failures although
I'm sure some got bent while some wheels visibly crumpled. In this
fall not even a wheel was damaged, and the frame failed!

This should not improve the demand for TREK non-steel frames... but it
will. That's the way the tifosi react.

Jobst Brandt

Palo Alto CA

[bfd]

> wrote in message
...
> Chris Mayhew writes:
>
> > sorry, here's the link. took me a minute to find it.
> > http://www.velonews.com/tour2003/tech/articles/4647.0.html
>
> That is worse than I thought. Now we have bicycles that don't
> withstand a mild fall, one that merely tipped over onto the road
> without striking an obstacle, and the frame broke. I've seen a lot of
> pile-ups in criteriums and track races and no frame failures although
> I'm sure some got bent while some wheels visibly crumpled. In this
> fall not even a wheel was damaged, and the frame failed!
>
> This should not improve the demand for TREK non-steel frames... but it
> will. That's the way the tifosi react.
>
Yup, and the fact that its a full *145g* lighter than the 2003 version means
Trek is going to get the BIG bucks! I bet this new 2004 Trek 5900 Superlight
(gotta luv that name) with Shimano Dura Ace 10 is going to retail in the
$5000+ range! So, what are you waiting for? Get rid of that old steel bike
(you still riding steel?) and get in line NOW!

[Tom Ace]

Jobst Brandt wrote:

> You make it sound like motor racing. Shifting is not a rapid fire and
> often performed act in bicycling although with more and more gears,
> many riders believe they are operating a Ducati of the like as I see
> then shift their away from a traffic light as it turns green.

Maybe some people shift several times to avoid pushing hard
at a low cadence. Some of us don't have bulletproof knees.

In any case, you write as if there were something wrong with
enjoying the act of shifting.

Tom Ace

[[email protected]]

Tom Ace writes:

>> You make it sound like motor racing. Shifting is not a rapid fire
>> and often performed act in bicycling although with more and more
>> gears, many riders believe they are operating a Ducati of the like
>> as I see then shift their away from a traffic light as it turns
>> green.

> Maybe some people shift several times to avoid pushing hard at a low
> cadence. Some of us don't have bulletproof knees.

> In any case, you write as if there were something wrong with
> enjoying the act of shifting.

I think this has morphed into how to shift. The claim was that riders
shift so often that braking and shifting conflict. This is like the
claim that hand signals interfere with braking. This may be true for
speeds above 40mph but hand signals are easily and properly given
before braking for a left turn (I assume from the left lane and in
front of cars).

Jobst Brandt

Palo Alto CA

[Marten Hoffmann]

schreef ...
> On Tue, 12 Aug 2003 12:02:11 +0200, Marten Hoffmann
> > wrote:
> >> So, for me, it's better with the left-hand front
> >> brake. I've never wished I had more strength or
> >> dexterity for my braking.
> >
> > For me, a left-hand rear brake is safer because my right hand is often
> > busy with the dog leash ...... I've had this setup for years on my town
> > bike while the MTB and tandem have it the other way round. I never found
> > any difficulty in emergency stopping.
>
> I'm glad that works for you, but I'm curious as
> to how.
>
> Your rear brake provides stopping power when you're going
> fast and need an emergency stop, even while your dog is
> pulling? IME, the rear tire rarely provides sufficient
> traction to brake moderately, let alone in an emergency,
> and especially so if you've got a dog pulling you.

You're right there so it's always necessary to look out for the other
traffic and/or obstacles in the woods. I may add that I live in Holland
were cars are used to bicycles with or without children/trailers/dogs
and the like. With the dog I tend to ride more carefully than without
because indeed, making an emergency stop is hard(er).

The point is that when you need to brake with the front brake only *and*
you have a dog leash in your right hand, it's hard to control the bike
since your handlebar will turn with braking and you have to counteract
this turning with only your left hand. When the rear brake is on the
left handle, I can make the bike lose speed at quite a rate (Magura HS-
33 on a hybrid bike) although never as good as with a front brake, of
course. Shifting my weight backwards helps. I also ride forest trails
with the leashed dog and especially on sandy, gravelly tracks you don't
want front-braking only...... I've had it for a while on my new hybrid
bike and still have the scars to prove it :-(

> I stand by that point even if your dog is well behaved
> and doesn't pull.

You're correct. BTW the dog is not a "pulling" type but for the first
mile. After that it settles into a gentle trot somewhere between 16 and
19 km/h. But I try to always keep an eye open for my "surroundings" in
traffic: cars, playing children, other dogs etc.

> Unless you have a very small dog, with short legs, which
> can't keep up with you when you go fast, so you go slow
> and your rear brake is sufficient. I hate those dogs. <G>

The dog is of "medium height", some 16-18 inches high at the shoulders.
Once we clocked it at 47 km/h - going downhill and for a short distance
only, but still.....

--
Regards,
Marten

[Sheldon Brown]

Marten Hoffmann wrote:

> The point is that when you need to brake with the front brake only *and*
> you have a dog leash in your right hand, it's hard to control the bike
> since your handlebar will turn with braking and you have to counteract
> this turning with only your left hand. When the rear brake is on the
> left handle, I can make the bike lose speed at quite a rate (Magura HS-
> 33 on a hybrid bike) although never as good as with a front brake, of
> course. Shifting my weight backwards helps.

Braking with one hand off the bars always requires some compensation for
the forward weight shift applied against one side of the handlebar.

However, despite what many people imagine, it makes no difference to
this whether it is the front or the rear brake being applied one-handed.
The amount of this force is directly proportional to the braking
force, whichever brake supplies it.

Of course, since the front brake is capable of generating twice as much
decelleration as the rear, it is _possible_ to generate twice as much
force on the handlebar _if_ you choose to brake that hard. However, if
you are merely slowing down with a decelleration that is within the
capability of the rear brake, it doesn't matter which of the brakes you use.

Sheldon "http://sheldonbrown.com/brakturn.html" Brown
+--------------------------------------------------+
| I'm crazy about the music of Leos Janacek, |
| especially the Msa Glagolskaya and Sinfonietta |
| http://sheldonbrown.com/music.html |
+--------------------------------------------------+
Harris Cyclery, West Newton, Massachusetts
Phone 617-244-9772 FAX 617-244-1041
http://harriscyclery.com
Hard-to-find parts shipped Worldwide
http://captainbike.com http://sheldonbrown.com

[Rick Onanian]

On Wed, 13 Aug 2003 04:02:07 GMT, > wrote:
>>> I see no conflict there. I seldom if ever shift while braking
>>> anyway.
>
>> You've never been halfway through a shift when you suddenly need to
>> brake?
>
> Shifting takes fractions of a second. I am able to manage my riding
> to not split mechanical motions into the 1/100 second range.

I thought you said you preferred downtube shifters. I
may have thought wrong.

However, with downtube shifters, it's more than
a 1/100 second project to remove hand from shifter
and reach immediately for front brake in an emergency.

>> Another, maybe more important reason why left-front-brake is good:
>> With these expensive and fragile brake/shift levers, there is often
>> an inconvenient conflict when you want to brake and shift in rapid
>> succession.

Let me clarify: I am commonly annoyed when I go to shift and
find that it won't because I was just braking.

> You make it sound like motor racing. Shifting is not a rapid fire and
> often performed act in bicycling although with more and more gears,
> many riders believe they are operating a Ducati of the like as I see
> then shift their away from a traffic light as it turns green.

Well, what about downshifting after braking? Sometimes I
forget to downshift, or didn't know I was going to need
to slow down, so I must shift after braking; or I might
try to interrupt my braking momentarily to downshift
before reaching a stop sign. These operations often
result in a conflict where it doesn't shift.

However, it is better in these operations to have the
rear shifter and front brakes in opposite hands; and
shifting requires more dexterity than braking, so to
have the rear shifter in my right hand and front brake
in my left hand works well.

People who don't have those situations, I'm sure, don't
have those problems. BTW, I still like integrated brake
and shift levers, despite that minor issue.


As far as rapid fire, sequential shifting: It can be
useful at times, especially when a traffic light turns
green. In fact, this is probably the only time I do it.
I find that I keep up with the automotive traffic if I
pour uninterrupted power into the pedals and shift,
well, like I was riding a Ducati. I find that I _don't_
keep up if I leave it in one gear the whole time.

Maybe if I didn't have a 9-speed, I'd be okay, but it's
certainly easier to calmly rapid-fire shift shift shift
than it is to use a single gear as long as possible,
then shift four gears before being able to add power
again.

I'd be lying if I said that it wasn't also fun to do
that, but I'd do it whether it was fun or not.

Regardless of fun, on my other road bike, with a 6
speed wide ratio freewheel and downtube shifters, I
have no need to shift like that, and don't. I ride off
with the traffic, and shift once or twice, not 5 times
like I do on my 9 speed with it's one and two tooth
jumps and easy-access quick shifters.

> Jobst Brandt
>
> Palo Alto CA
--
Rick Onanian

[Rick Onanian]

On Wed, 13 Aug 2003 07:14:54 GMT, > wrote:
> I think this has morphed into how to shift. The claim was that riders
> shift so often that braking and shifting conflict. This is like the

No, that wasn't the claim at all. I claimed not that
I shift so often that it will coincedentally conflict
with braking, but rather, that I often find myself
needing or wanting to shift and brake nearly
simultaneously.

That is especially common when it's necessary to
downshift in order to be prepared to resume moving
after braking to a stop sign or red light. If you
never need to do this, you have extremely strong
legs and knees, and/or are always planning ahead
quite perfectly.

> claim that hand signals interfere with braking. This may be true for
> speeds above 40mph but hand signals are easily and properly given
> before braking for a left turn (I assume from the left lane and in
> front of cars).

Left turning is a whole other animal. We could
discuss methods for it, but suffice it to say
that I've found patterns that work for me.

> Jobst Brandt
>
> Palo Alto CA
--
Rick Onanian

[Mike S.]

"Rick Onanian" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 13 Aug 2003 07:14:54 GMT, > wrote:
> > I think this has morphed into how to shift. The claim was that riders
> > shift so often that braking and shifting conflict. This is like the
>
> No, that wasn't the claim at all. I claimed not that
> I shift so often that it will coincedentally conflict
> with braking, but rather, that I often find myself
> needing or wanting to shift and brake nearly
> simultaneously.
>
> That is especially common when it's necessary to
> downshift in order to be prepared to resume moving
> after braking to a stop sign or red light. If you
> never need to do this, you have extremely strong
> legs and knees, and/or are always planning ahead
> quite perfectly.
>
> > claim that hand signals interfere with braking. This may be true for
> > speeds above 40mph but hand signals are easily and properly given
> > before braking for a left turn (I assume from the left lane and in
> > front of cars).
>
> Left turning is a whole other animal. We could
> discuss methods for it, but suffice it to say
> that I've found patterns that work for me.
>
> > Jobst Brandt
> >
> > Palo Alto CA
> --
> Rick Onanian

[Ryan Cousineau]

In article et>,
"bfd" > wrote:

> Yup, and the fact that its a full *145g* lighter than the 2003 version means
> Trek is going to get the BIG bucks! I bet this new 2004 Trek 5900 Superlight
> (gotta luv that name) with Shimano Dura Ace 10 is going to retail in the
> $5000+ range! So, what are you waiting for? Get rid of that old steel bike
> (you still riding steel?) and get in line NOW!

Hey, I am the farthest thing from a weight weenie, but a 145g weight
reduction is nearly mythic by weight weenie standards. On a bike that
weighs about 6.8 kg, that's over 2% right there.

Pulling that sort of weight improvement on a mature design is reasonably
impressive. It shouldn't be enough to push OCLV riders to dump last
year's model, but at least the engineers should be impressed

Personally, I am still more than 145g above my goal weight, so I will
work on reducing the weight of and aerodynamic refinements to my belly.

--
Ryan Cousineau, http://www.sfu.ca/~rcousine
President, Fabrizio Mazzoleni Fan Club

[Marten Hoffmann]

schreef ...

> Sorry, but I still don't understand this. Braking with the front brake
> won't directly result in tending to turn the handlebar. What may happen is
> that if you brake strongly then the deceleration tends to push your body
> forward on the bike and you push against the handlebar.

You're right. My description was not correct.

> This would be
> equally true whether the deceleration is caused by braking with the front
> or the rear brake. The only difference is that the front brake works
> better so it can create greater deceleration - but you can certainly use it
> gently as well.

One can, but I feel I can control the steering better when applying the
rear brake with my left hand. I think it has something to do with the
steering being slightly impeded by the braking forces on the front
wheel. When using the rear brake, there is no braking influence on the
front wheel.

> I'd much rather have control of the brake that can stop me quickly even if
> that means I have to be careful not to lose control than to only control
> the brake that can stop me much more slowly.

I'd say: try it for yourself. I did and prefer the left hand/ rear brake
setup. Works for me and I'm still in one piece - as is the dog ;-)

--
Regards,
Marten