I had to do this because nobody else did (helmets)

On Fri, 11 Jul 2014 11:49:38 -0700 (PDT), jbeattie
wrote:

On Thursday, July 10, 2014 5:28:11 PM UTC-7, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jul 2014 09:21:39 -0400, Duane

wrote:



On 7/9/2014 10:12 PM, John B. Slocomb wrote:

On Wed, 09 Jul 2014 10:25:02 -0400, Frank Krygowski

wrote:



On 7/9/2014 5:40 AM, John B. Slocomb wrote:

On Wed, 09 Jul 2014 00:11:30 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote:





Still, that couple managed the trip with no injuries. Go figure.





Probably wearing helmets :-)



Yes, it's true, although they hadn't needed them at all.



As I've said recently, "Big Helmet" has won. I'd guess that about 99%

of Americans who are enthusiastic cyclists wear helmets for any ride

over two miles. They're part of the accepted uniform, like cowboy hats

at a rodeo or John Deere caps at a tractor pull.



But with the addition of "Where's your helmet??" snarls for those who

choose differently.



In Thailand bicycles are fairly commonly seen, particularly early in

the mornings when house wives are out and about buying their daily

cooking ingredients. Not a one of the house wives is wearing a helmet,

special shoes, padded shorts or even a tight blouse.



On the other hand, I have been accosted by what I call "sports riders"

and rudely asked, "Where's your helmet". Of course I was wearing a

bright, tight, jersey and the padded shorts.



Apparently those who ride as what is seen as a necessity do not

require a helmet while those who ride as, would one say dilettante.

does.



One could say dilettante if one wanted to insult the riders that were

different than one's self.



dil?et?tante [dil-i-tahnt, dil-i-tahnt, -tahn-tey, -tan-tee] Show IPA





noun, plural dil?et?tantes, dil?et?tan?ti [dil-i-tahn-tee] Show IPA .



1.



a person who takes up an art, activity, or subject merely for amusement,

especially in a desultory or superficial way; dabbler.





I was probably wrong then. After all a bloke who is all togged out in

his 275 dollar Oakleys, the $168 shorts, a $118 jersey, $400 shoes and

wheels out of the yard on his $2,000 bicycle can't be a dilettante,

can he?



After all, one simply has get to the store to pick up that can of

formula for the baby.

--

Cheers,



John B.

Just because of your post, I rode to work in casual shorts and a t-shirt -- which quickly reminded me of why I don't ride to work in casual shorts and a t-shirt. In only five miles, I have a soaked t-shirt and cotton briefs balled-up in my crotch. And my backpack makes my t-shirt crawl up my back. I'm going back to my togs. I also wore a helmet, but only because it brings out the green in my eyes.

-- Jay Beattie.

Yup, special clothing is an absolute necessity as those who actually
make their living pedaling prove
http://www.chiang-mai.org/songthaew.html
and millions of Chinese as well.
http://tinyurl.com/owsggbj
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Friday, July 11, 2014 4:36:18 PM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:
On Friday, July 11, 2014 2:54:54 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Friday, July 11, 2014 2:49:38 PM UTC-4, jbeattie wrote:



Just because of your post, I rode to work in casual shorts and a t-shirt -- which quickly reminded me of why I don't ride to work in casual shorts and a t-shirt. In only five miles, I have a soaked t-shirt and cotton briefs balled-up in my crotch. And my backpack makes my t-shirt crawl up my back. I'm going back to my togs. I also wore a helmet, but only because it brings out the green in my eyes.



The value of the "togs" depends on pace and distance, of course. My commute

was seven miles one way by the shortest route. I was lucky that it was level

to downhill most of the way, with just one short steep climb at the end.. I

took it easy on the way in, and arrived only a little sweaty - not enough to

justify a change of clothes. I did the hard work on the way home but still,

I didn't bother changing. The business casual slacks & shirt just went into

the laundry once home.



I now do a longer version of that ride once per week for a class I'm taking,
again wearing street clothes. But I do try to choose street clothes that work


better than others. For example, I pay attention to which of my shirts change
color with sweat, and try to avoid those. Black shirts eventually show salt
stains, if the day is hot enough.

I used to have slacks with some stretch in the fabric, but those seem to be
harder to find these days, so I use mostly thin cotton, if not casual shorts.

I don't seem to have saddle problems even with cotton briefs, but I sometimes use smartwool briefs, and find them a bit more comfortable.

And if I want something on my head, it's either a cycling cap (summer) or a wool cap (winter).

But my helmet is a beautiful, shining beetle shell! I will never give it up.

If I were going to ride in shorts and a t-shirt on a regular basis, I would get a rack and use panniers. I don't like my t-shirt crawling up my back. I might be able to get used to shorts and underwear.

And for me, I have to change anyway, so the only value in wearing street clothes on my bike is if I have a social engagement on the way home, which happened last night -- but what I did was take a pair of slacks and button-up shirt from work, and then I put those on over my bib shorts when I got to my destination (kind of behind a bush ala Superman).


:-)


Lucky it was a patio affair, because my SPD cleats would have killed the wood floors.


My best pair of shoes are SPD.

Note that my ride to the party was up a 20+ percent hill (but only about 500 meters). Hard not to sweat with a 39/25 on my commuter pig.


Even if I try (like in bitter cold so as not to turn into a
popsicle on the descent), just thinking about it usually makes
me sweat.

I had another 800-900 feet of climbing after the party, which was hard after a couple drinks.


"ala Superman" :-)

On Friday, July 11, 2014 5:32:58 PM UTC-7, John B. Slocomb wrote:

snip

Yup, special clothing is an absolute necessity as those who actually
make their living pedaling prove

http://www.chiang-mai.org/songthaew.html

and millions of Chinese as well.

All you need is love.

On Friday, July 11, 2014 5:32:58 PM UTC-7, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Fri, 11 Jul 2014 11:49:38 -0700 (PDT), jbeattie

wrote:



On Thursday, July 10, 2014 5:28:11 PM UTC-7, John B. Slocomb wrote:

On Thu, 10 Jul 2014 09:21:39 -0400, Duane



wrote:







On 7/9/2014 10:12 PM, John B. Slocomb wrote:



On Wed, 09 Jul 2014 10:25:02 -0400, Frank Krygowski



wrote:







On 7/9/2014 5:40 AM, John B. Slocomb wrote:



On Wed, 09 Jul 2014 00:11:30 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote:











Still, that couple managed the trip with no injuries. Go figure..











Probably wearing helmets :-)







Yes, it's true, although they hadn't needed them at all.







As I've said recently, "Big Helmet" has won. I'd guess that about 99%



of Americans who are enthusiastic cyclists wear helmets for any ride



over two miles. They're part of the accepted uniform, like cowboy hats



at a rodeo or John Deere caps at a tractor pull.







But with the addition of "Where's your helmet??" snarls for those who



choose differently.







In Thailand bicycles are fairly commonly seen, particularly early in



the mornings when house wives are out and about buying their daily



cooking ingredients. Not a one of the house wives is wearing a helmet,



special shoes, padded shorts or even a tight blouse.







On the other hand, I have been accosted by what I call "sports riders"



and rudely asked, "Where's your helmet". Of course I was wearing a



bright, tight, jersey and the padded shorts.







Apparently those who ride as what is seen as a necessity do not



require a helmet while those who ride as, would one say dilettante.



does.







One could say dilettante if one wanted to insult the riders that were



different than one's self.







dil?et?tante [dil-i-tahnt, dil-i-tahnt, -tahn-tey, -tan-tee] Show IPA











noun, plural dil?et?tantes, dil?et?tan?ti [dil-i-tahn-tee] Show IPA

On Fri, 11 Jul 2014 20:04:18 -0700 (PDT), jbeattie
wrote:

Blank lines removed, reducing 293 lines to 68

On Friday, July 11, 2014 5:32:58 PM UTC-7, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Fri, 11 Jul 2014 11:49:38 -0700 (PDT), jbeattie

wrote:
On Thursday, July 10, 2014 5:28:11 PM UTC-7, John B. Slocomb wrote:

On Thu, 10 Jul 2014 09:21:39 -0400, Duane
wrote:
On 7/9/2014 10:12 PM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Wed, 09 Jul 2014 10:25:02 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:
On 7/9/2014 5:40 AM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Wed, 09 Jul 2014 00:11:30 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote:
Still, that couple managed the trip with no injuries. Go figure.
Probably wearing helmets :-)
Yes, it's true, although they hadn't needed them at all.
As I've said recently, "Big Helmet" has won. I'd guess that about 99%
of Americans who are enthusiastic cyclists wear helmets for any ride
over two miles. They're part of the accepted uniform, like cowboy hats
at a rodeo or John Deere caps at a tractor pull.
But with the addition of "Where's your helmet??" snarls for those who
choose differently.
In Thailand bicycles are fairly commonly seen, particularly early in
the mornings when house wives are out and about buying their daily
cooking ingredients. Not a one of the house wives is wearing a helmet,
special shoes, padded shorts or even a tight blouse.
On the other hand, I have been accosted by what I call "sports riders"
and rudely asked, "Where's your helmet". Of course I was wearing a
bright, tight, jersey and the padded shorts.
Apparently those who ride as what is seen as a necessity do not
require a helmet while those who ride as, would one say dilettante.
does.
One could say dilettante if one wanted to insult the riders that were
different than one's self.
dil?et?tante [dil-i-tahnt, dil-i-tahnt, -tahn-tey, -tan-tee] Show IPA
noun, plural dil?et?tantes, dil?et?tan?ti [dil-i-tahn-tee] Show IPA .
a person who takes up an art, activity, or subject merely for amusement,
especially in a desultory or superficial way; dabbler.
I was probably wrong then. After all a bloke who is all togged out in
his 275 dollar Oakleys, the $168 shorts, a $118 jersey, $400 shoes and
wheels out of the yard on his $2,000 bicycle can't be a dilettante,
can he?
After all, one simply has get to the store to pick up that can of
formula for the baby.
--
Cheers,
John B.
Just because of your post, I rode to work in casual shorts and a t-shirt -- which quickly reminded me of why I don't ride to work in casual shorts and a t-shirt. In only five miles, I have a soaked t-shirt and cotton briefs balled-up in my crotch. And my backpack makes my t-shirt crawl up my back. I'm going back to my togs. I also wore a helmet, but only because it brings out the green in my eyes.
-- Jay Beattie.
Yup, special clothing is an absolute necessity as those who actually
make their living pedaling prove
http://www.chiang-mai.org/songthaew.html
and millions of Chinese as well.
http://tinyurl.com/owsggbj

Well, hell, you can ride your bike naked if you want. http://tinyurl.com/nba9o9k Or in a tie
http://www.mormonmissionprep.com/wp-...es-300x300.jpg
Or in jeans, which is the messenger preference. http://streetpeeper.com/fashion/chic...messenger-look I'm also missing out by not wearing pink high-top Converse tennis shoes.
Or in a box, with a fox. If someone can get comfortable riding in chinos and a polo shirt, that's fine with me. I sweat in that crap, and it doesn't dry out in the changing room by the time I go home from work (as confirmed by my experience tonight). Cotton is a lousy material for riding for anyone who gets their pulse above 90 in warm weather, and I don't know how those bicycle rickshaw guys in Thailand do it. Maybe its genetic.
BTW, looking at that Shanghai picture . . . those are people walking while on bicycles. http://sites.davidson.edu/shanghai/2...g-in-shanghai/ If I had to deal with that, I'd shoot myself.

-- Jay Beattie.

I see. You require special clothing and decline to "walk your bike" in
areas of extremely congested traffic.
--
Cheers,

John B.

John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Fri, 11 Jul 2014 20:04:18 -0700 (PDT), jbeattie
wrote:

Blank lines removed, reducing 293 lines to 68

On Friday, July 11, 2014 5:32:58 PM UTC-7, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Fri, 11 Jul 2014 11:49:38 -0700 (PDT), jbeattie

wrote:
On Thursday, July 10, 2014 5:28:11 PM UTC-7, John B. Slocomb wrote:

On Thu, 10 Jul 2014 09:21:39 -0400, Duane
wrote:
On 7/9/2014 10:12 PM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Wed, 09 Jul 2014 10:25:02 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:
On 7/9/2014 5:40 AM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Wed, 09 Jul 2014 00:11:30 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote:
Still, that couple managed the trip with no injuries. Go figure.
Probably wearing helmets :-)
Yes, it's true, although they hadn't needed them at all.
As I've said recently, "Big Helmet" has won. I'd guess that about 99%
of Americans who are enthusiastic cyclists wear helmets for any ride
over two miles. They're part of the accepted uniform, like cowboy hats
at a rodeo or John Deere caps at a tractor pull.
But with the addition of "Where's your helmet??" snarls for those who
choose differently.
In Thailand bicycles are fairly commonly seen, particularly early in
the mornings when house wives are out and about buying their daily
cooking ingredients. Not a one of the house wives is wearing a helmet,
special shoes, padded shorts or even a tight blouse.
On the other hand, I have been accosted by what I call "sports riders"
and rudely asked, "Where's your helmet". Of course I was wearing a
bright, tight, jersey and the padded shorts.
Apparently those who ride as what is seen as a necessity do not
require a helmet while those who ride as, would one say dilettante.
does.
One could say dilettante if one wanted to insult the riders that were
different than one's self.
dil?et?tante [dil-i-tahnt, dil-i-tahnt, -tahn-tey, -tan-tee] Show IPA
noun, plural dil?et?tantes, dil?et?tan?ti [dil-i-tahn-tee] Show IPA .
a person who takes up an art, activity, or subject merely for amusement,
especially in a desultory or superficial way; dabbler.
I was probably wrong then. After all a bloke who is all togged out in
his 275 dollar Oakleys, the $168 shorts, a $118 jersey, $400 shoes and
wheels out of the yard on his $2,000 bicycle can't be a dilettante,
can he?
After all, one simply has get to the store to pick up that can of
formula for the baby.
--
Cheers,
John B.
Just because of your post, I rode to work in casual shorts and a
t-shirt -- which quickly reminded me of why I don't ride to work in
casual shorts and a t-shirt. In only five miles, I have a soaked
t-shirt and cotton briefs balled-up in my crotch. And my backpack
makes my t-shirt crawl up my back. I'm going back to my togs. I also
wore a helmet, but only because it brings out the green in my eyes.
-- Jay Beattie.
Yup, special clothing is an absolute necessity as those who actually
make their living pedaling prove
http://www.chiang-mai.org/songthaew.html
and millions of Chinese as well.
http://tinyurl.com/owsggbj

Well, hell, you can ride your bike naked if you want.
http://tinyurl.com/nba9o9k Or in a tie
http://www.mormonmissionprep.com/wp-...es-300x300.jpg
Or in jeans, which is the messenger preference.
http://streetpeeper.com/fashion/chic...messenger-look I'm also
missing out by not wearing pink high-top Converse tennis shoes.
Or in a box, with a fox. If someone can get comfortable riding in chinos
and a polo shirt, that's fine with me. I sweat in that crap, and it
doesn't dry out in the changing room by the time I go home from work (as
confirmed by my experience tonight). Cotton is a lousy material for
riding for anyone who gets their pulse above 90 in warm weather, and I
don't know how those bicycle rickshaw guys in Thailand do it. Maybe its genetic.
BTW, looking at that Shanghai picture . . . those are people walking
while on bicycles. http://sites.davidson.edu/shanghai/2...g-in-shanghai/ If I
had to deal with that, I'd shoot myself.

-- Jay Beattie.

I see. You require special clothing and decline to "walk your bike" in
areas of extremely congested traffic.
--
Cheers,

Seems like you have something on your mind John? Lol


--
duane

On Friday, July 11, 2014 9:33:09 PM UTC-7, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Fri, 11 Jul 2014 20:04:18 -0700 (PDT), jbeattie

wrote:



Blank lines removed, reducing 293 lines to 68



On Friday, July 11, 2014 5:32:58 PM UTC-7, John B. Slocomb wrote:

On Fri, 11 Jul 2014 11:49:38 -0700 (PDT), jbeattie



wrote:

On Thursday, July 10, 2014 5:28:11 PM UTC-7, John B. Slocomb wrote:



On Thu, 10 Jul 2014 09:21:39 -0400, Duane

wrote:

On 7/9/2014 10:12 PM, John B. Slocomb wrote:

On Wed, 09 Jul 2014 10:25:02 -0400, Frank Krygowski

wrote:

On 7/9/2014 5:40 AM, John B. Slocomb wrote:

On Wed, 09 Jul 2014 00:11:30 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote:

Still, that couple managed the trip with no injuries. Go figure.

Probably wearing helmets :-)

Yes, it's true, although they hadn't needed them at all.

As I've said recently, "Big Helmet" has won. I'd guess that about 99%

of Americans who are enthusiastic cyclists wear helmets for any ride

over two miles. They're part of the accepted uniform, like cowboy hats

at a rodeo or John Deere caps at a tractor pull.

But with the addition of "Where's your helmet??" snarls for those who

choose differently.

In Thailand bicycles are fairly commonly seen, particularly early in

the mornings when house wives are out and about buying their daily

cooking ingredients. Not a one of the house wives is wearing a helmet,

special shoes, padded shorts or even a tight blouse.

On the other hand, I have been accosted by what I call "sports riders"

and rudely asked, "Where's your helmet". Of course I was wearing a

bright, tight, jersey and the padded shorts.

Apparently those who ride as what is seen as a necessity do not

require a helmet while those who ride as, would one say dilettante.

does.

One could say dilettante if one wanted to insult the riders that were

different than one's self.

dil?et?tante [dil-i-tahnt, dil-i-tahnt, -tahn-tey, -tan-tee] Show IPA

noun, plural dil?et?tantes, dil?et?tan?ti [dil-i-tahn-tee] Show IPA .

a person who takes up an art, activity, or subject merely for amusement,

especially in a desultory or superficial way; dabbler.

I was probably wrong then. After all a bloke who is all togged out in

his 275 dollar Oakleys, the $168 shorts, a $118 jersey, $400 shoes and

wheels out of the yard on his $2,000 bicycle can't be a dilettante,

can he?

After all, one simply has get to the store to pick up that can of

formula for the baby.

--

Cheers,

John B.

Just because of your post, I rode to work in casual shorts and a t-shirt -- which quickly reminded me of why I don't ride to work in casual shorts and a t-shirt. In only five miles, I have a soaked t-shirt and cotton briefs balled-up in my crotch. And my backpack makes my t-shirt crawl up my back. I'm going back to my togs. I also wore a helmet, but only because it brings out the green in my eyes.

-- Jay Beattie.

Yup, special clothing is an absolute necessity as those who actually

make their living pedaling prove

http://www.chiang-mai.org/songthaew.html

and millions of Chinese as well.

http://tinyurl.com/owsggbj



Well, hell, you can ride your bike naked if you want. http://tinyurl.com/nba9o9k Or in a tie

http://www.mormonmissionprep.com/wp-...es-300x300.jpg

Or in jeans, which is the messenger preference. http://streetpeeper.com/fashion/chic...messenger-look I'm also missing out by not wearing pink high-top Converse tennis shoes.

Or in a box, with a fox. If someone can get comfortable riding in chinos and a polo shirt, that's fine with me. I sweat in that crap, and it doesn't dry out in the changing room by the time I go home from work (as confirmed by my experience tonight). Cotton is a lousy material for riding for anyone who gets their pulse above 90 in warm weather, and I don't know how those bicycle rickshaw guys in Thailand do it. Maybe its genetic.

BTW, looking at that Shanghai picture . . . those are people walking while on bicycles. http://sites.davidson.edu/shanghai/2...g-in-shanghai/ If I had to deal with that, I'd shoot myself.



-- Jay Beattie.



I see. You require special clothing and decline to "walk your bike" in

areas of extremely congested traffic.


It's more fundamental than that. I refuse to live in areas of extremely congested traffic. If I visited, I'd walk.

I also don't require special clothes, but I prefer them when I am riding for pleasure. I commute in cycling clothes because they are comfortable, convenient and dry quickly. Plus, I have to commute in something and change when I get to work, so why not cycling specific clothes?

-- Jay Beattie.

On 7/12/2014 10:15 AM, jbeattie wrote:

I also don't require special clothes, but I prefer them when I am riding
for pleasure. I commute in cycling clothes because they are comfortable,
convenient and dry quickly. Plus, I have to commute in something and
change
when I get to work, so why not cycling specific clothes?

FWIW, I have no problem with those preferences. I have friends who echo
those views precisely. And I usually use cycling garb for recreational
rides over, say, 15 or 20 miles.

The only downside I see is that others seem to misinterpret those
preferences as necessities, then use them as excuses. I've heard "I
won't ride a bike [to work, or for utility, or even for fun] because I
hate those lycra pants" or "... I don't have a way to carry my good
clothes" or "... helmets mess my hair up" or "... my company doesn't
have showers" or "... I'd look dumb in a racing jersey."

Admittedly, those may have very little to do with the real reasons for
not riding. But I prefer showing that riding - at least, riding
reasonably short distances - is a very normal thing to do, no special
costume required.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Friday, July 11, 2014 11:14:17 PM UTC+1, Duane wrote:

I do ride more than five miles and I ride in what I normally wear at my

desk, khakis or cords, a button-down cotton shirt, a cotton zip-up

jacket, leather street shoes with thick rubber soles to protect the brain

of a genius from the unevenness of the ground. If you have the right bike

(upright geometry, fat tyres, hub gears, correct tooth counts, wide,

sprung Brooks saddle, high handlebars) you arrive without breaking sweat,

unrumpled, comfortable, in charge of the situation.



Andre Jute

A systems approach to cycling



Sure Andre but sometime the intent IS to break a sweat and to be OUT of

your comfort zone. Different strokes. Pun sort of intended. And as Dan

would say, "nothing wrong with that." Either way.



--

duane

Yeah, when I turn right outside my door instead of left, it's uphill instead of downhill, and what you say suddenly becomes true... I think today I'll turn right.

Andre Jute

Yo, Franki-boy, we all know that you're terminally insensitive, but here you've outdone yourself. The phrase "But I prefer showing that riding" sets your new record for wilfull unawareness of reality. We also know you're a pompous braggart, as "But I prefer showing that riding" demonstrates by its subtext that you're a paragon worth emulating.

But what interests me is how come you got to be old, and in teaching at that (!), without learning that to be an exemplar worth following, you must first have charisma, at least a little charm, something people can like. There's nothing about you to like, so nothing to emulate, nothing to copy, nothing to follow. "But I prefer showing that riding" is the paradigm of a slackly unobservant idiot indulging in wistful thinking.

Nobody will even notice, Franki-boy, never mind follow your "lead". They just think you're some poor old pensioner too ignorant or too poor to know one rides in Lycra.

Andre Jute
What secrets hide behind the words!

On Saturday, July 12, 2014 3:33:49 PM UTC+1, Frank Krygowski wrote:

... But I prefer showing that riding...