Ganging Up On Poor Tyler

"B. Lafferty" wrote in message
Go to this site http://www.campyonly.com/retrobikes/gallery.html and
scroll
down to the A-D Super Licht that weight 19 1/5 pounds.



"John Forrest Tomlinson" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 16:46:25 GMT, "B. Lafferty"
wrote:

Machines in the 1980s were in the 17lb-18lb range.

That was not typical, most top-level racing bikes were heavier..


That's about a 48 cm frame. Difference in weight between a leather saddle
and a leather covered plastic one (circa 1978) _may_ offset the difference
in frame weight of a 14 cm larger frame, maybe not. That bike probably also
has an alloy freewheel which was a fairly impractical piece of equipment
except for hillclimbing.

Regardless, 19.5 lbs is 2.5 lbs. more than 17 lbs. Obvious yes, but you
couldn't make the distinction. There was nothing on the market that would
have knocked off 2.5 lbs. (1.13 kg) off a 48 cm bike when that bike was
produced. Did anyone ever produce a 62 cm frame out of Reynolds 753 tubing?

On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 07:48:20 +1000, "Jeff Jones"
jeff@cyclingnews-punt-com wrote:


"Phillip" wrote in message
. com...


I think the only way to eliminate doping is a leftime ban from all
aspects of the sport and the exclusion from all results and/or record
books from past seasons. Make it as if they never existed. No fame,
no money, just a walking the dog-no job doper that could be a tweaker
in your home town.

I understand your point but there's a slight logistical problem involved
here. Do you want to re-edit the cyclingnews archives? It should be a fairly
small job, as there are only just under 10 years of data. What about cycling
reference books? A thick black marker through all the dopers' names? Burn
'em? I think the time could be better invested.

Do we have to send videos back or will there we a mobile service to
come over and edit them while we wait?

JT

****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

"Carl Sundquist" wrote in message
...

"B. Lafferty" wrote in message
Go to this site http://www.campyonly.com/retrobikes/gallery.html and
scroll
down to the A-D Super Licht that weight 19 1/5 pounds.



"John Forrest Tomlinson" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 16:46:25 GMT, "B. Lafferty"
wrote:

Machines in the 1980s were in the 17lb-18lb range.

That was not typical, most top-level racing bikes were heavier..


That's about a 48 cm frame. Difference in weight between a leather saddle
and a leather covered plastic one (circa 1978) _may_ offset the difference
in frame weight of a 14 cm larger frame, maybe not. That bike probably
also
has an alloy freewheel which was a fairly impractical piece of equipment
except for hillclimbing.

The larger frame will be a bit heavier. A Brooks Professional leather
saddle weighs 560 grams. IIRC, the unicanitor was in the same range, if not
slightly lighter. The Ultima did not come stock with an alloy freewheel.
As I said, my Ultima weighed just under 20 pounds--19 pounds, 15 ounces to
be precise.


Regardless, 19.5 lbs is 2.5 lbs. more than 17 lbs. Obvious yes, but you
couldn't make the distinction. There was nothing on the market that would
have knocked off 2.5 lbs. (1.13 kg) off a 48 cm bike when that bike was
produced. Did anyone ever produce a 62 cm frame out of Reynolds 753
tubing?

We're not talking about an 18 or 19 pound machine in my size made of 753. I
noted that Ruperez's machine was 753 and a small frame. I would say from
rather foggy memory that it was around 18.5 pounds.
However, the answer to your question is yes. Follow this link to photos of a
large framed 1980 Raleigh Pro in 753 that weighs 19.4 pounds.
http://www.rydjor.com/bikecollection/1980ral.htm

Many of the machines made during that era out of tubing like Columbus SL and
club standard 531 did come in at 21 or 22 pounds. The Ultima was built with
Reynolds 531 SL--lighter than club and much lighter than 531 Touring.

From: "B. Lafferty"

Many of the machines made during that era out of tubing like Columbus SL and
club standard 531 did come in at 21 or 22 pounds. The Ultima was built with
Reynolds 531 SL--lighter than club and much lighter than 531 Touring.


My Benotto 7spd with bottle cages, clips&straps, and an old Selle Italia
saddle wieghs in at the 21/22 lb range.
Bill C

"B. Lafferty" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Carl Sundquist" wrote in message
...

"B. Lafferty" wrote in message
Go to this site http://www.campyonly.com/retrobikes/gallery.html and
scroll
down to the A-D Super Licht that weight 19 1/5 pounds.



"John Forrest Tomlinson" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 16:46:25 GMT, "B. Lafferty"
wrote:

Machines in the 1980s were in the 17lb-18lb range.

That was not typical, most top-level racing bikes were heavier..


That's about a 48 cm frame. Difference in weight between a leather
saddle
and a leather covered plastic one (circa 1978) _may_ offset the
difference
in frame weight of a 14 cm larger frame, maybe not. That bike probably
also
has an alloy freewheel which was a fairly impractical piece of equipment
except for hillclimbing.

The larger frame will be a bit heavier. A Brooks Professional leather
saddle weighs 560 grams. IIRC, the unicanitor was in the same range, if
not
slightly lighter. The Ultima did not come stock with an alloy freewheel.
As I said, my Ultima weighed just under 20 pounds--19 pounds, 15 ounces to
be precise.


Regardless, 19.5 lbs is 2.5 lbs. more than 17 lbs. Obvious yes, but you
couldn't make the distinction. There was nothing on the market that
would
have knocked off 2.5 lbs. (1.13 kg) off a 48 cm bike when that bike was
produced. Did anyone ever produce a 62 cm frame out of Reynolds 753
tubing?

We're not talking about an 18 or 19 pound machine in my size made of 753.
I
noted that Ruperez's machine was 753 and a small frame. I would say from
rather foggy memory that it was around 18.5 pounds.
However, the answer to your question is yes. Follow this link to photos of
a
large framed 1980 Raleigh Pro in 753 that weighs 19.4 pounds.
http://www.rydjor.com/bikecollection/1980ral.htm

Many of the machines made during that era out of tubing like Columbus SL
and
club standard 531 did come in at 21 or 22 pounds. The Ultima was built
with
Reynolds 531 SL--lighter than club and much lighter than 531 Touring.


I was going to drag this thread on ad nauseam, but decided it was too
nitpicky. It just didn't seem like there were any *raceworthy* bikes in the
80's weighing 17 lbs that I recall.

"B. Lafferty" wrote in message link.net...
"L. Seer" wrote in message
om...
Well, if he is suspended and officially deemed a doper, it's likely
that he's been doping the whole time, and doping significantly
enhanced those bigger pay-checks he's already received and gave him
the trophies he's won. It seems like there should be some kind of
penalty for doping offenses which involves past pay. Something stuck
in the UCI rules which says you are fined a large percentage of your
contracts from the previous four years (or something like that).
Otherwise, what do dopers risk by doping if they would never have made
much money in the first place? Heck, when they decided to dope, their
image certainly wasn't deemed to be as important as their future
contract values and/or the fame of winning some trophy. Maybe the UCI
or someone else will start to make these guys pay financially. The
small potential for shame and the loss of future income doesn't cut it
as a deterent given the slim chances of getting caught and the
enhanced contracts up to getting busted.

In theory an employer, sponsor or promoter who could prove fraud based on
the representation that a rider was clean when in fact the rider was not,
could recover. As a practical matter, such a legal action would be a time
consumng, probable wast of time. If the team or sponsor knew of the doping,
then there was no fraud.

Maybe if Tyler is suspended, somebody will figure out a way to make
him pay financially for the gains he has made.

The rider who comes in 2nd should be able to sue for damages as a result of fraud.

"Carl Sundquist" wrote in message
...
I was going to drag this thread on ad nauseam, but decided it was too
nitpicky. It just didn't seem like there were any *raceworthy* bikes in
the
80's weighing 17 lbs that I recall.

If you read back through the posts, you'll see that I agreed with JT that it
should have been 1 to 1.5 pounds heavier than the 17-18 I originally stated.
Where it took of on this tangent was the assertion that a 62cm A-D Ultima
could not weigh in the 19 pound range. Clearly an incorrect assertion.
There were many machines in the 1980s that were in the 19 lb range with some
of the smaller framed machines in the 18 lb range.
But thank you all for making me feel my age.

I should have mentioned that I have a Marin Treviso circa 1999 built with
Columbus Nemo and Record ergo. It weighs just over 20 pounds. The irony is
that with the advent if sti, ergo and clipless pedals, bicycle weights have
in some ways gone up. It's only in the last few years with the increased
use of carbon fiber that the weights have really come down again and quite
significantly.


"B. Lafferty" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Carl Sundquist" wrote in message
...
I was going to drag this thread on ad nauseam, but decided it was too
nitpicky. It just didn't seem like there were any *raceworthy* bikes in
the
80's weighing 17 lbs that I recall.

If you read back through the posts, you'll see that I agreed with JT that
it should have been 1 to 1.5 pounds heavier than the 17-18 I originally
stated. Where it took of on this tangent was the assertion that a 62cm A-D
Ultima could not weigh in the 19 pound range. Clearly an incorrect
assertion. There were many machines in the 1980s that were in the 19 lb
range with some of the smaller framed machines in the 18 lb range.
But thank you all for making me feel my age.

L. Seer wrote:
Perhaps fans should start being more vocal about their opposition to
the rehiring of dopers or boycotting the sponsors of sanctioned
dopers? That is sticky due to all the extremely minor infractions
which could be accidental such as those which appear to be supplement
related, but boycotting could be somewhat effective.

Who gives a **** what US fans boycott. The real racing happens in Europe.

Donald Munro wrote in message . ..
L. Seer wrote:
Perhaps fans should start being more vocal about their opposition to
the rehiring of dopers or boycotting the sponsors of sanctioned
dopers? That is sticky due to all the extremely minor infractions
which could be accidental such as those which appear to be supplement
related, but boycotting could be somewhat effective.

Who gives a **** what US fans boycott. The real racing happens in Europe.

How do you get just US fans out of my post? My post includes
vocalization and boycotting by all fans.

Actually, if US fans are of no significance, OLN wouldn't by the
rights to broadcast such things as the TdF...and companies wouldn't be
marketing their products to an American audience through professional
cycling (bike industry included).

Please explanin your claim, as many companies who utilize professional
cycling marketing vehicles do plenty of business in America.