On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 11:21:55 -0500,
Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> On 11/15/2023 6:07 AM, Roger Merriman wrote:
> >
> > Roadies do have a habit of bunching up so are more prone to
> > this, and unless you’re on the road at speed it really has no
> > value. Ie better to be side by side etc, as you your
> > visibility is better etc.
>
> "Bunching up" really has no value? Sorry, I disagree. I don't
> know what you consider "at speed," but in strong headwinds
> there can be value from drafting when riding quite slowly.
> Especially on our tandem, but also on my single, I've spent
> many miles towing riders into headwinds.

Same in my experience.

> But more to the point, the person complaining the most about
> this brags about roughly zero experience riding with others.
> His claim that one can't see the scenery is nonsense...

Not sure what all this may be referencing, but the immediately
preceding post had this bit...

| Riding a bicycle directly behind another rider who is blocking
| your view ahead seems like a foolish thing to do. You have to
| trust the rider you're tailgating and you have to pay close
| attention to his or her hind end to keep from tangling wheels,
| so you miss viewing much of your surroundings as you ride.

I agree with aspects of each. In many group rides, I can see the
scenery just fine and don't have to focus overmuch on the rider in
front of me. On the other hand, when I'm part of a group that is
going all out (especially when I'm at or near the limits of what I
can sustain) I have to draft quite closely--and that, combined
with usually higher speed, means I have to really pay attention to
the rider in front. So it's really a matter of circumstance.

I can add a relevant anecdote. On a tandem group ride a few years
ago I flatted both tires on a hole in the road. I might have seen
and avoided it had I not been following the bike ahead so closely.

> I ride for utility. I ride for exploration. I ride for
> exercise, and to challenge myself physically. I ride for
> solitude. But I also ride for the pleasure of socializing with
> others...

I can heartily agree with all of these motivations for riding!

--
Ted Heise <theise@panix.com> West Lafayette, IN, USA

On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 11:21:55 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>On 11/15/2023 6:07 AM, Roger Merriman wrote:
>>
>> Roadies do have a habit of bunching up so are more prone to this, and
>> unless you’re on the road at speed it really has no value. Ie better to be
>> side by side etc, as you your visibility is better etc.
>
>"Bunching up" really has no value? Sorry, I disagree. I don't know what
>you consider "at speed," but in strong headwinds there can be value from
>drafting when riding quite slowly. Especially on our tandem, but also on
>my single, I've spent many miles towing riders into headwinds.
>
>But more to the point, the person complaining the most about this brags
>about roughly zero experience riding with others. His claim that one
>can't see the scenery is nonsense, as are his jabs about "butts in the
>air" and other offensive crap.

I'm not complaining. I have nothing to complain about since I'm not so
stupid as to ride such that I can't see where I'm going.

>Most of all, he's conclusively shown himself to be pathologically
>repulsed by human contact.

Another nonsense strawman statement from RBT's master of nonsense
strawmen, although I am repulsed by the thought of having to hang
around with him and/or members of his small talk, gossiping bike club,
on a bike ride or anywhere else.

>I suspect he's the only person here who has
>not frequently enjoyed the pleasure of (gasp!) conversation

(Small talk, gossip)

>with other
>people during bike rides.

Other than my wife and a couple short rides with one of my kids or
grandkids, make that *never. I'm happy to sit for a while and
converse with a small group of people I know and like, but my bike
rides are not for socializing.

>I ride for utility. I ride for exploration. I ride for exercise, and to
>challenge myself physically. I ride for solitude. But I also ride for
>the pleasure of socializing with others. For people of normal healthy
>psychology, that is a significant benefit.

What would RBT's resident narcissist know about a normal healthy
psychology?

>> This said while the rider may have been unwise, a Bollard is still a bad
>> idea as it can be hidden from view relatively easily. If they do need to
>> keep cars out planters ie large heavy wooden boxes with plants are probably
>> better for number of reasons.
>
>Agreed, bollards are almost always bad. Their intent is to prevent or
>dissuade motorists from entering bike facilities, but there are other
>ways that AASHTO

(bureaucrats)

>prefers. One is an island section of low shrubbery.
>Even if an out of control cyclists were to run into it, serious injury
>would be unlikely.

I have no problem with that, but then I have no problem with bollards,
either.
>
>And if a bollard must be used, there are pavement markings that can give
>plenty of advanced warning to riders. But the crash I referred to was on
>a crushed limestone path where pavement stripes, etc. are not possible.
>Again, bad design.

Ah yes, blame the bike path and the bollard for a stupid mistake made
by the bike rider.

Maybe a sign that says, "please watch where you're going."

On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 11:34:11 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>On 11/15/2023 8:21 AM, Roger Merriman wrote:
>>
>> Seems an odd place to ride as a peloton? I’m assuming it has
>> walkers/dogs/kids and so on? Road would be a better option as well tend not
>> to get such folks there.
>
>"Peloton"??
>
>I use the word "peloton" to refer to the main group of cyclists in a
>race. I'd never use it to apply to a group of three to five cyclists out
>for a social ride.

I use it to describe any group of people riding wheel to wheel. (face
to butt)

Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> On 11/15/2023 6:07 AM, Roger Merriman wrote:
>>
>> Roadies do have a habit of bunching up so are more prone to this, and
>> unless you’re on the road at speed it really has no value. Ie better to be
>> side by side etc, as you your visibility is better etc.
>
> "Bunching up" really has no value? Sorry, I disagree. I don't know what
> you consider "at speed," but in strong headwinds there can be value from
> drafting when riding quite slowly. Especially on our tandem, but also on
> my single, I've spent many miles towing riders into headwinds.

Its more the ability to see what’s coming and chat other riders, a rail
trail doesn’t seem like the place to bunch up close, or have more than 2/3
riders in my experience as well shared space and possibly car centric
design ie bollards or barriers.

Closing to draft while useful is always going to be risky some where where
the probabilities of having to brake surprisingly is high such as a trail.
>
> But more to the point, the person complaining the most about this brags
> about roughly zero experience riding with others. His claim that one
> can't see the scenery is nonsense, as are his jabs about "butts in the
> air" and other offensive crap.
>
> Most of all, he's conclusively shown himself to be pathologically
> repulsed by human contact. I suspect he's the only person here who has
> not frequently enjoyed the pleasure of (gasp!) conversation with other
> people during bike rides.
>
> I ride for utility. I ride for exploration. I ride for exercise, and to
> challenge myself physically. I ride for solitude. But I also ride for
> the pleasure of socializing with others. For people of normal healthy
> psychology, that is a significant benefit.
>
>> This said while the rider may have been unwise, a Bollard is still a bad
>> idea as it can be hidden from view relatively easily. If they do need to
>> keep cars out planters ie large heavy wooden boxes with plants are probably
>> better for number of reasons.
>
> Agreed, bollards are almost always bad. Their intent is to prevent or
> dissuade motorists from entering bike facilities, but there are other
> ways that AASHTO prefers. One is an island section of low shrubbery.
> Even if an out of control cyclists were to run into it, serious injury
> would be unlikely.
>
> And if a bollard must be used, there are pavement markings that can give
> plenty of advanced warning to riders. But the crash I referred to was on
> a crushed limestone path where pavement stripes, etc. are not possible.
> Again, bad design.
>
Does sound like it to be honest only places I can think of locally are
decades old, and in all cases the bollard doesn’t do anything useful.

Roger Merriman

Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> On 11/15/2023 8:21 AM, Roger Merriman wrote:
>>
>> Seems an odd place to ride as a peloton? I’m assuming it has
>> walkers/dogs/kids and so on? Road would be a better option as well tend not
>> to get such folks there.
>
> "Peloton"??
>
> I use the word "peloton" to refer to the main group of cyclists in a
> race. I'd never use it to apply to a group of three to five cyclists out
> for a social ride.
>
If folks are closing that close and using or I guess not signs to
communicate then I’d personally would more social rides in my experience
have a bit more gaps to allow folks to chat without watch the rear
wheel/focus as much.

Roger Merriman

On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 16:54:58 -0000 (UTC), Ted Heise <theise@panix.com>
wrote:

>On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 11:21:55 -0500,
> Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>> On 11/15/2023 6:07 AM, Roger Merriman wrote:
>> >
>> > Roadies do have a habit of bunching up so are more prone to
>> > this, and unless you’re on the road at speed it really has no
>> > value. Ie better to be side by side etc, as you your
>> > visibility is better etc.
>>
>> "Bunching up" really has no value? Sorry, I disagree. I don't
>> know what you consider "at speed," but in strong headwinds
>> there can be value from drafting when riding quite slowly.
>> Especially on our tandem, but also on my single, I've spent
>> many miles towing riders into headwinds.
>
>Same in my experience.
>
>
>> But more to the point, the person complaining the most about
>> this brags about roughly zero experience riding with others.
>> His claim that one can't see the scenery is nonsense...
>
>Not sure what all this may be referencing, but the immediately
>preceding post had this bit...
>
>| Riding a bicycle directly behind another rider who is blocking
>| your view ahead seems like a foolish thing to do. You have to
>| trust the rider you're tailgating and you have to pay close
>| attention to his or her hind end to keep from tangling wheels,
>| so you miss viewing much of your surroundings as you ride.
>
>I agree with aspects of each. In many group rides, I can see the
>scenery just fine and don't have to focus overmuch on the rider in
>front of me. On the other hand, when I'm part of a group that is
>going all out (especially when I'm at or near the limits of what I
>can sustain) I have to draft quite closely--and that, combined
>with usually higher speed, means I have to really pay attention to
>the rider in front. So it's really a matter of circumstance.
>
>I can add a relevant anecdote. On a tandem group ride a few years
>ago I flatted both tires on a hole in the road. I might have seen
>and avoided it had I not been following the bike ahead so closely.
>
>
>> I ride for utility. I ride for exploration. I ride for
>> exercise, and to challenge myself physically. I ride for
>> solitude. But I also ride for the pleasure of socializing with
>> others...
>
>I can heartily agree with all of these motivations for riding!

Any reason to ride is a good reason to ride. Most people have their
own list of reasons.

Catrike Rider <soloman@drafting.not> wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 13:21:34 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Catrike Rider <soloman@drafting.not> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 11:07:00 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Catrike Rider <soloman@drafting.not> wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 21:35:59 -0500, Frank Krygowski
>>>>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 11/14/2023 5:57 PM, John B. wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But enquiring minds might wonder why she didn't see the post in the
>>>>>>> road? Was she gazing around at the scenery instead of watching where
>>>>>>> she was going? Talking with a friend in stead of paying attention to
>>>>>>> the road/path? Riding way too fast the conditions?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I wasn't there, but I heard about the event in detail. She didn't see it
>>>>>> because it was a group ride and a tall guy was visually blocking her view.
>>>>>
>>>>> Assuming the story is true, she was following too closely and/or not
>>>>> paying attention. Thank goodness her ignorant, irresponsible behavior
>>>>> didn't hurt anyone but herself.
>>>>>
>>>>>> On group rides it's considered good practice to call out hazards. Some
>>>>>> people know less about competent cycling and fail to do that. I suppose
>>>>>> that was the case before this crash.
>>>>>
>>>>> Riding a bicycle directly behind another rider who is blocking your
>>>>> view ahead seems like a foolish thing to do. You have to trust the
>>>>> rider you're tailgating and you have to pay close attention to his or
>>>>> her hind end to keep from tangling wheels, so you miss viewing much of
>>>>> your surroundings as you ride.
>>>>
>>>> Roadies do have a habit of bunching up so are more prone to this, and
>>>> unless you?re on the road at speed it really has no value. Ie better to be
>>>> side by side etc, as you your visibility is better etc.
>>>
>>> I've been run off the path several times by people popping out from
>>> long lines of group riders. Once I saw, just ahead of me, a rider in a
>>> large group that was riding towards me and taking up the entire path,
>>> being run off his side of the path into a large bush by people trying
>>> to get back in line. I've become extremely wary when meeting groups of
>>> riders.
>>
>> Seems an odd place to ride as a peloton? I’m assuming it has
>> walkers/dogs/kids and so on? Road would be a better option as well tend not
>> to get such folks there.
>
> You must be kidding. I occasionally see one or two riders on streets
> or roads, but here in this part of Florida, the vast majority of
> bicycle riding is done on the bike trails. They're wide and smooth and
> many have several miles of uninterrupted riding. Why mix it up with
> cars and trucks when you can go 20/30 miles with only a half dozen
> places where you might encounter a vehicle and maybe have to put your
> foot down? The distances between access points also means that
> walker/dogs/kids/etc are not such a common thing.

Maybe you don’t see them but I suspect they do use more than the trails,
Strava which is very much a roadie thing more than other groups, for
example SugerLoaf MT is ridden up many more times by many more people than
Starkey Park trails, or link trails and interesting roads or nice cafes
together and so on.
>
> I routinely ride, as a warm up and cool down, a six mile trail
> (Starkey Park) that takes me from my parking location out to the
> junction with Suncoast trail. It runs through a wilderness area with
> no other places to get on or off. From the junction south on the
> Suncoast to the next access point is five miles to Highway 54. There's
> nothing in between. Three miles to the north, there is a highway bike
> trail interchange with zero parking facilities. People can get on or
> off the system four miles to the east of that point, or by continuing
> two miles further north to Hwy 52. Those two are not really access
> points, but merely places where one might find a place nearby to park
> their car. The next real access point to the north is about 23 miles
> from the one at Highway 54. There are a few road crossings in between
> where some people occasionally park and access the trail, but not in
> significant numbers. I occasionally come across walkers, but they're
> isolated enough not to be a problem for me or the pelotoners.
>
>>>> This said while the rider may have been unwise, a Bollard is still a bad
>>>> idea as it can be hidden from view relatively easily. If they do need to
>>>> keep cars out planters ie large heavy wooden boxes with plants are probably
>>>> better for number of reasons.
>>>
>>> It seems to me these bollard accidents only happen to people riding
>>> in groups. I can understand people who ride in groups being afraid of
>>> them, but they seem quite innocent to me.
>>>
>> Can’t say I’ve ever known anyone having accidents with them, but it’s car
>> infrastructure ie to keep cars out, it’s fairly rare over here even on rail
>> trails, I do pass two sets on way to work neither of which serve any
>> purpose, and in fairness are decades old.
>
> What I see around here is a single steel pole in the middle of the
> trail at road crossings. They can be removed to allow maintenance
> vehicles, but are otherwise locked down.
>
>> Shared spaces be that cycleways or more linear parks tend to be more busy
>> ie pedestrian/kids/dogs/runnners etc so something like a bollard isn’t a
>> good idea, as it can be hidden from view etc, and frankly isn’t bike but
>> car infrastructure.
>>
>>> I believe encountering group riders is more problematic than
>>> encountering bollards.
>>>
>>>>> I understand that some people see value in getting together in groups
>>>>> so they can engage in small talk and gossip, but the concept of
>>>>> turning bicycle rides into a social affairs seems simple minded to me.
>>>>>
>>>>> I also understand that drafting is an advantage in bicycle racing, but
>>>>> I assume the racers know and accept the potential problems, and are
>>>>> not interested in viewing their surroundings.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Other people know less about competent cycling and apparently get
>>>>>> confused by the phrase "blind spot."
>>>>>
>>>>> No one is confused by the phrase "blind spot."
>>>>>
>>>>>> Unfortunately instead of trying to
>>>>>> learn, they post mockery and glory in their ignorance.
>>>>>
>>>>> In my opinion, one element of "competent cycling" would be make sure
>>>>> you can always see where you're going.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Roger Merriman
>>>
>>
>> Roger Merriman
>>
>>
>
Roger Merriman

On 11/15/2023 11:30 AM, Catrike Rider wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 16:54:58 -0000 (UTC), Ted Heise <theise@panix.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 11:21:55 -0500,
>> Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>> On 11/15/2023 6:07 AM, Roger Merriman wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Roadies do have a habit of bunching up so are more prone to
>>>> this, and unless you’re on the road at speed it really has no
>>>> value. Ie better to be side by side etc, as you your
>>>> visibility is better etc.
>>>
>>> "Bunching up" really has no value? Sorry, I disagree. I don't
>>> know what you consider "at speed," but in strong headwinds
>>> there can be value from drafting when riding quite slowly.
>>> Especially on our tandem, but also on my single, I've spent
>>> many miles towing riders into headwinds.
>>
>> Same in my experience.
>>
>>
>>> But more to the point, the person complaining the most about
>>> this brags about roughly zero experience riding with others.
>>> His claim that one can't see the scenery is nonsense...
>>
>> Not sure what all this may be referencing, but the immediately
>> preceding post had this bit...
>>
>> | Riding a bicycle directly behind another rider who is blocking
>> | your view ahead seems like a foolish thing to do. You have to
>> | trust the rider you're tailgating and you have to pay close
>> | attention to his or her hind end to keep from tangling wheels,
>> | so you miss viewing much of your surroundings as you ride.
>>
>> I agree with aspects of each. In many group rides, I can see the
>> scenery just fine and don't have to focus overmuch on the rider in
>> front of me. On the other hand, when I'm part of a group that is
>> going all out (especially when I'm at or near the limits of what I
>> can sustain) I have to draft quite closely--and that, combined
>> with usually higher speed, means I have to really pay attention to
>> the rider in front. So it's really a matter of circumstance.
>>
>> I can add a relevant anecdote. On a tandem group ride a few years
>> ago I flatted both tires on a hole in the road. I might have seen
>> and avoided it had I not been following the bike ahead so closely.
>>
>>
>>> I ride for utility. I ride for exploration. I ride for
>>> exercise, and to challenge myself physically. I ride for
>>> solitude. But I also ride for the pleasure of socializing with
>>> others...
>>
>> I can heartily agree with all of these motivations for riding!
>
> Any reason to ride is a good reason to ride. Most people have their
> own list of reasons.

+1
I resemble that remark.
--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 17:27:51 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
wrote:

>Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>> On 11/15/2023 6:07 AM, Roger Merriman wrote:
>>>
>>> Roadies do have a habit of bunching up so are more prone to this, and
>>> unless you’re on the road at speed it really has no value. Ie better to be
>>> side by side etc, as you your visibility is better etc.
>>
>> "Bunching up" really has no value? Sorry, I disagree. I don't know what
>> you consider "at speed," but in strong headwinds there can be value from
>> drafting when riding quite slowly. Especially on our tandem, but also on
>> my single, I've spent many miles towing riders into headwinds.
>
>Its more the ability to see what’s coming and chat other riders, a rail
>trail doesn’t seem like the place to bunch up close, or have more than 2/3
>riders in my experience as well shared space and possibly car centric
>design ie bollards or barriers.

As I've said, the trails I ride are not so "well shared." On my ususal
40/50 mile rides. I might see no more than two dozen other trail
users.

>Closing to draft while useful is always going to be risky some where where
>the probabilities of having to brake surprisingly is high such as a trail.

I brake more often when riding on neighborhood streets. That's a good
reason I don't often ride them.

>> But more to the point, the person complaining the most about this brags
>> about roughly zero experience riding with others. His claim that one
>> can't see the scenery is nonsense, as are his jabs about "butts in the
>> air" and other offensive crap.
>>
>> Most of all, he's conclusively shown himself to be pathologically
>> repulsed by human contact. I suspect he's the only person here who has
>> not frequently enjoyed the pleasure of (gasp!) conversation with other
>> people during bike rides.
>>
>> I ride for utility. I ride for exploration. I ride for exercise, and to
>> challenge myself physically. I ride for solitude. But I also ride for
>> the pleasure of socializing with others. For people of normal healthy
>> psychology, that is a significant benefit.
>>
>>> This said while the rider may have been unwise, a Bollard is still a bad
>>> idea as it can be hidden from view relatively easily. If they do need to
>>> keep cars out planters ie large heavy wooden boxes with plants are probably
>>> better for number of reasons.
>>
>> Agreed, bollards are almost always bad. Their intent is to prevent or
>> dissuade motorists from entering bike facilities, but there are other
>> ways that AASHTO prefers. One is an island section of low shrubbery.
>> Even if an out of control cyclists were to run into it, serious injury
>> would be unlikely.
>>
>> And if a bollard must be used, there are pavement markings that can give
>> plenty of advanced warning to riders. But the crash I referred to was on
>> a crushed limestone path where pavement stripes, etc. are not possible.
>> Again, bad design.
>>
>Does sound like it to be honest only places I can think of locally are
>decades old, and in all cases the bollard doesn’t do anything useful.
>
>Roger Merriman
>

On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 17:43:46 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
wrote:

>Catrike Rider <soloman@drafting.not> wrote:
>> On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 13:21:34 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Catrike Rider <soloman@drafting.not> wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 11:07:00 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Catrike Rider <soloman@drafting.not> wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 21:35:59 -0500, Frank Krygowski
>>>>>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 11/14/2023 5:57 PM, John B. wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But enquiring minds might wonder why she didn't see the post in the
>>>>>>>> road? Was she gazing around at the scenery instead of watching where
>>>>>>>> she was going? Talking with a friend in stead of paying attention to
>>>>>>>> the road/path? Riding way too fast the conditions?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I wasn't there, but I heard about the event in detail. She didn't see it
>>>>>>> because it was a group ride and a tall guy was visually blocking her view.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Assuming the story is true, she was following too closely and/or not
>>>>>> paying attention. Thank goodness her ignorant, irresponsible behavior
>>>>>> didn't hurt anyone but herself.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On group rides it's considered good practice to call out hazards. Some
>>>>>>> people know less about competent cycling and fail to do that. I suppose
>>>>>>> that was the case before this crash.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Riding a bicycle directly behind another rider who is blocking your
>>>>>> view ahead seems like a foolish thing to do. You have to trust the
>>>>>> rider you're tailgating and you have to pay close attention to his or
>>>>>> her hind end to keep from tangling wheels, so you miss viewing much of
>>>>>> your surroundings as you ride.
>>>>>
>>>>> Roadies do have a habit of bunching up so are more prone to this, and
>>>>> unless you?re on the road at speed it really has no value. Ie better to be
>>>>> side by side etc, as you your visibility is better etc.
>>>>
>>>> I've been run off the path several times by people popping out from
>>>> long lines of group riders. Once I saw, just ahead of me, a rider in a
>>>> large group that was riding towards me and taking up the entire path,
>>>> being run off his side of the path into a large bush by people trying
>>>> to get back in line. I've become extremely wary when meeting groups of
>>>> riders.
>>>
>>> Seems an odd place to ride as a peloton? I?m assuming it has
>>> walkers/dogs/kids and so on? Road would be a better option as well tend not
>>> to get such folks there.
>>
>> You must be kidding. I occasionally see one or two riders on streets
>> or roads, but here in this part of Florida, the vast majority of
>> bicycle riding is done on the bike trails. They're wide and smooth and
>> many have several miles of uninterrupted riding. Why mix it up with
>> cars and trucks when you can go 20/30 miles with only a half dozen
>> places where you might encounter a vehicle and maybe have to put your
>> foot down? The distances between access points also means that
>> walker/dogs/kids/etc are not such a common thing.
>
>Maybe you don’t see them but I suspect they do use more than the trails,
>Strava which is very much a roadie thing more than other groups, for
>example SugerLoaf MT is ridden up many more times by many more people than
>Starkey Park trails, or link trails and interesting roads or nice cafes
>together and so on.

Sugarloaf is a special challenging place where people come from far
away to put their ride in Strava. Strava is probably not a thing for
most Starky riders.

>> I routinely ride, as a warm up and cool down, a six mile trail
>> (Starkey Park) that takes me from my parking location out to the
>> junction with Suncoast trail. It runs through a wilderness area with
>> no other places to get on or off. From the junction south on the
>> Suncoast to the next access point is five miles to Highway 54. There's
>> nothing in between. Three miles to the north, there is a highway bike
>> trail interchange with zero parking facilities. People can get on or
>> off the system four miles to the east of that point, or by continuing
>> two miles further north to Hwy 52. Those two are not really access
>> points, but merely places where one might find a place nearby to park
>> their car. The next real access point to the north is about 23 miles
>> from the one at Highway 54. There are a few road crossings in between
>> where some people occasionally park and access the trail, but not in
>> significant numbers. I occasionally come across walkers, but they're
>> isolated enough not to be a problem for me or the pelotoners.
>>
>>>>> This said while the rider may have been unwise, a Bollard is still a bad
>>>>> idea as it can be hidden from view relatively easily. If they do need to
>>>>> keep cars out planters ie large heavy wooden boxes with plants are probably
>>>>> better for number of reasons.
>>>>
>>>> It seems to me these bollard accidents only happen to people riding
>>>> in groups. I can understand people who ride in groups being afraid of
>>>> them, but they seem quite innocent to me.
>>>>
>>> Can?t say I?ve ever known anyone having accidents with them, but it?s car
>>> infrastructure ie to keep cars out, it?s fairly rare over here even on rail
>>> trails, I do pass two sets on way to work neither of which serve any
>>> purpose, and in fairness are decades old.
>>
>> What I see around here is a single steel pole in the middle of the
>> trail at road crossings. They can be removed to allow maintenance
>> vehicles, but are otherwise locked down.
>>
>>> Shared spaces be that cycleways or more linear parks tend to be more busy
>>> ie pedestrian/kids/dogs/runnners etc so something like a bollard isn?t a
>>> good idea, as it can be hidden from view etc, and frankly isn?t bike but
>>> car infrastructure.
>>>
>>>> I believe encountering group riders is more problematic than
>>>> encountering bollards.
>>>>
>>>>>> I understand that some people see value in getting together in groups
>>>>>> so they can engage in small talk and gossip, but the concept of
>>>>>> turning bicycle rides into a social affairs seems simple minded to me.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I also understand that drafting is an advantage in bicycle racing, but
>>>>>> I assume the racers know and accept the potential problems, and are
>>>>>> not interested in viewing their surroundings.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Other people know less about competent cycling and apparently get
>>>>>>> confused by the phrase "blind spot."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No one is confused by the phrase "blind spot."
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Unfortunately instead of trying to
>>>>>>> learn, they post mockery and glory in their ignorance.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In my opinion, one element of "competent cycling" would be make sure
>>>>>> you can always see where you're going.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Roger Merriman
>>>>
>>>
>>> Roger Merriman
>>>
>>>
>>
>Roger Merriman
>
>

On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 13:23:17 -0500, Catrike Rider
<soloman@drafting.not> wrote:

>On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 17:43:46 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
>wrote:
>
>>Catrike Rider <soloman@drafting.not> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 13:21:34 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Catrike Rider <soloman@drafting.not> wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 11:07:00 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Catrike Rider <soloman@drafting.not> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 21:35:59 -0500, Frank Krygowski
>>>>>>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 11/14/2023 5:57 PM, John B. wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> But enquiring minds might wonder why she didn't see the post in the
>>>>>>>>> road? Was she gazing around at the scenery instead of watching where
>>>>>>>>> she was going? Talking with a friend in stead of paying attention to
>>>>>>>>> the road/path? Riding way too fast the conditions?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I wasn't there, but I heard about the event in detail. She didn't see it
>>>>>>>> because it was a group ride and a tall guy was visually blocking her view.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Assuming the story is true, she was following too closely and/or not
>>>>>>> paying attention. Thank goodness her ignorant, irresponsible behavior
>>>>>>> didn't hurt anyone but herself.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On group rides it's considered good practice to call out hazards. Some
>>>>>>>> people know less about competent cycling and fail to do that. I suppose
>>>>>>>> that was the case before this crash.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Riding a bicycle directly behind another rider who is blocking your
>>>>>>> view ahead seems like a foolish thing to do. You have to trust the
>>>>>>> rider you're tailgating and you have to pay close attention to his or
>>>>>>> her hind end to keep from tangling wheels, so you miss viewing much of
>>>>>>> your surroundings as you ride.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Roadies do have a habit of bunching up so are more prone to this, and
>>>>>> unless you?re on the road at speed it really has no value. Ie better to be
>>>>>> side by side etc, as you your visibility is better etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> I've been run off the path several times by people popping out from
>>>>> long lines of group riders. Once I saw, just ahead of me, a rider in a
>>>>> large group that was riding towards me and taking up the entire path,
>>>>> being run off his side of the path into a large bush by people trying
>>>>> to get back in line. I've become extremely wary when meeting groups of
>>>>> riders.
>>>>
>>>> Seems an odd place to ride as a peloton? I?m assuming it has
>>>> walkers/dogs/kids and so on? Road would be a better option as well tend not
>>>> to get such folks there.
>>>
>>> You must be kidding. I occasionally see one or two riders on streets
>>> or roads, but here in this part of Florida, the vast majority of
>>> bicycle riding is done on the bike trails. They're wide and smooth and
>>> many have several miles of uninterrupted riding. Why mix it up with
>>> cars and trucks when you can go 20/30 miles with only a half dozen
>>> places where you might encounter a vehicle and maybe have to put your
>>> foot down? The distances between access points also means that
>>> walker/dogs/kids/etc are not such a common thing.
>>
>>Maybe you don’t see them but I suspect they do use more than the trails,
>>Strava which is very much a roadie thing more than other groups, for
>>example SugerLoaf MT is ridden up many more times by many more people than
>>Starkey Park trails, or link trails and interesting roads or nice cafes
>>together and so on.
>
>Sugarloaf is a special challenging place where people come from far
>away to put their ride in Strava. Strava is probably not a thing for
>most Starky riders.
>
>>> I routinely ride, as a warm up and cool down, a six mile trail
>>> (Starkey Park) that takes me from my parking location out to the
>>> junction with Suncoast trail. It runs through a wilderness area with
>>> no other places to get on or off. From the junction south on the
>>> Suncoast to the next access point is five miles to Highway 54. There's
>>> nothing in between. Three miles to the north, there is a highway bike
>>> trail interchange with zero parking facilities. People can get on or
>>> off the system four miles to the east of that point, or by continuing
>>> two miles further north to Hwy 52. Those two are not really access
>>> points, but merely places where one might find a place nearby to park
>>> their car. The next real access point to the north is about 23 miles
>>> from the one at Highway 54. There are a few road crossings in between
>>> where some people occasionally park and access the trail, but not in
>>> significant numbers. I occasionally come across walkers, but they're
>>> isolated enough not to be a problem for me or the pelotoners.
>>>
>>>>>> This said while the rider may have been unwise, a Bollard is still a bad
>>>>>> idea as it can be hidden from view relatively easily. If they do need to
>>>>>> keep cars out planters ie large heavy wooden boxes with plants are probably
>>>>>> better for number of reasons.
>>>>>
>>>>> It seems to me these bollard accidents only happen to people riding
>>>>> in groups. I can understand people who ride in groups being afraid of
>>>>> them, but they seem quite innocent to me.
>>>>>
>>>> Can?t say I?ve ever known anyone having accidents with them, but it?s car
>>>> infrastructure ie to keep cars out, it?s fairly rare over here even on rail
>>>> trails, I do pass two sets on way to work neither of which serve any
>>>> purpose, and in fairness are decades old.
>>>
>>> What I see around here is a single steel pole in the middle of the
>>> trail at road crossings. They can be removed to allow maintenance
>>> vehicles, but are otherwise locked down.
>>>
>>>> Shared spaces be that cycleways or more linear parks tend to be more busy
>>>> ie pedestrian/kids/dogs/runnners etc so something like a bollard isn?t a
>>>> good idea, as it can be hidden from view etc, and frankly isn?t bike but
>>>> car infrastructure.
>>>>
>>>>> I believe encountering group riders is more problematic than
>>>>> encountering bollards.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> I understand that some people see value in getting together in groups
>>>>>>> so they can engage in small talk and gossip, but the concept of
>>>>>>> turning bicycle rides into a social affairs seems simple minded to me.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I also understand that drafting is an advantage in bicycle racing, but
>>>>>>> I assume the racers know and accept the potential problems, and are
>>>>>>> not interested in viewing their surroundings.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Other people know less about competent cycling and apparently get
>>>>>>>> confused by the phrase "blind spot."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No one is confused by the phrase "blind spot."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Unfortunately instead of trying to
>>>>>>>> learn, they post mockery and glory in their ignorance.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In my opinion, one element of "competent cycling" would be make sure
>>>>>>> you can always see where you're going.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Roger Merriman
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Roger Merriman
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>Roger Merriman
>>
>>

On Wednesday, November 15, 2023 at 10:07:35 AM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
> On 11/15/2023 11:30 AM, Catrike Rider wrote:
> > On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 16:54:58 -0000 (UTC), Ted Heise <the...@panix.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 11:21:55 -0500,
> >> Frank Krygowski <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> >>> On 11/15/2023 6:07 AM, Roger Merriman wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Roadies do have a habit of bunching up so are more prone to
> >>>> this, and unless you’re on the road at speed it really has no
> >>>> value. Ie better to be side by side etc, as you your
> >>>> visibility is better etc.
> >>>
> >>> "Bunching up" really has no value? Sorry, I disagree. I don't
> >>> know what you consider "at speed," but in strong headwinds
> >>> there can be value from drafting when riding quite slowly.
> >>> Especially on our tandem, but also on my single, I've spent
> >>> many miles towing riders into headwinds.
> >>
> >> Same in my experience.
> >>
> >>
> >>> But more to the point, the person complaining the most about
> >>> this brags about roughly zero experience riding with others.
> >>> His claim that one can't see the scenery is nonsense...
> >>
> >> Not sure what all this may be referencing, but the immediately
> >> preceding post had this bit...
> >>
> >> | Riding a bicycle directly behind another rider who is blocking
> >> | your view ahead seems like a foolish thing to do. You have to
> >> | trust the rider you're tailgating and you have to pay close
> >> | attention to his or her hind end to keep from tangling wheels,
> >> | so you miss viewing much of your surroundings as you ride.
> >>
> >> I agree with aspects of each. In many group rides, I can see the
> >> scenery just fine and don't have to focus overmuch on the rider in
> >> front of me. On the other hand, when I'm part of a group that is
> >> going all out (especially when I'm at or near the limits of what I
> >> can sustain) I have to draft quite closely--and that, combined
> >> with usually higher speed, means I have to really pay attention to
> >> the rider in front. So it's really a matter of circumstance.
> >>
> >> I can add a relevant anecdote. On a tandem group ride a few years
> >> ago I flatted both tires on a hole in the road. I might have seen
> >> and avoided it had I not been following the bike ahead so closely.
> >>
> >>
> >>> I ride for utility. I ride for exploration. I ride for
> >>> exercise, and to challenge myself physically. I ride for
> >>> solitude. But I also ride for the pleasure of socializing with
> >>> others...
> >>
> >> I can heartily agree with all of these motivations for riding!
> >
> > Any reason to ride is a good reason to ride. Most people have their
> > own list of reasons.
> +1
> I resemble that remark.
> --
> Andrew Muzi
> a...@yellowjersey.org
> Open every day since 1 April, 1971
Agreed. I think that riding becomes more important when you can see the end of it on the close horizon.

On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 12:21:26 -0500, Catrike Rider
<soloman@drafting.not> wrote:

>On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 11:21:55 -0500, Frank Krygowski
><frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>>On 11/15/2023 6:07 AM, Roger Merriman wrote:
>>>
>>> Roadies do have a habit of bunching up so are more prone to this, and
>>> unless you’re on the road at speed it really has no value. Ie better to be
>>> side by side etc, as you your visibility is better etc.
>>
>>"Bunching up" really has no value? Sorry, I disagree. I don't know what
>>you consider "at speed," but in strong headwinds there can be value from
>>drafting when riding quite slowly. Especially on our tandem, but also on
>>my single, I've spent many miles towing riders into headwinds.
>>
>>But more to the point, the person complaining the most about this brags
>>about roughly zero experience riding with others. His claim that one
>>can't see the scenery is nonsense, as are his jabs about "butts in the
>>air" and other offensive crap.
>
>I'm not complaining. I have nothing to complain about since I'm not so
>stupid as to ride such that I can't see where I'm going.
>
>>Most of all, he's conclusively shown himself to be pathologically
>>repulsed by human contact.
>
>Another nonsense strawman statement from RBT's master of nonsense
>strawmen, although I am repulsed by the thought of having to hang
>around with him and/or members of his small talk, gossiping bike club,
>on a bike ride or anywhere else.
>
>>I suspect he's the only person here who has
>>not frequently enjoyed the pleasure of (gasp!) conversation
>
>(Small talk, gossip)
>
>>with other
>>people during bike rides.
>
>Other than my wife and a couple short rides with one of my kids or
>grandkids, make that *never. I'm happy to sit for a while and
>converse with a small group of people I know and like, but my bike
>rides are not for socializing.
>
>>I ride for utility. I ride for exploration. I ride for exercise, and to
>>challenge myself physically. I ride for solitude. But I also ride for
>>the pleasure of socializing with others. For people of normal healthy
>>psychology, that is a significant benefit.
>
>What would RBT's resident narcissist know about a normal healthy
>psychology?
>
>>> This said while the rider may have been unwise, a Bollard is still a bad
>>> idea as it can be hidden from view relatively easily. If they do need to
>>> keep cars out planters ie large heavy wooden boxes with plants are probably
>>> better for number of reasons.
>>
>>Agreed, bollards are almost always bad. Their intent is to prevent or
>>dissuade motorists from entering bike facilities, but there are other
>>ways that AASHTO
>
>(bureaucrats)
>
>>prefers. One is an island section of low shrubbery.
>>Even if an out of control cyclists were to run into it, serious injury
>>would be unlikely.
>
>I have no problem with that, but then I have no problem with bollards,
>either.
>>
>>And if a bollard must be used, there are pavement markings that can give
>>plenty of advanced warning to riders. But the crash I referred to was on
>>a crushed limestone path where pavement stripes, etc. are not possible.
>>Again, bad design.
>
>Ah yes, blame the bike path and the bollard for a stupid mistake made
>by the bike rider.
>
>Maybe a sign that says, "please watch where you're going."

The whole bollard thing seems at best a straw man story and at worst,
simply a lie. Example, bollards in Thailand.
https://www.zjeastsea.com/product-guidelines-bollard/
https://www.dreamstime.com/parking-lot-thailand-parking-sign-empty-no-people-moveable-steel-fence-barrier-concrete-floor-use-parking-area-image108832374
Can't see them? Then I suggest that you either so stupid or so blind
that you certainly should not be allowed to ride a bicycle on public
highways.

Or maybe you have invisible bollards in the U.S. ?
--
Cheers,

John B.

Catrike Rider <soloman@drafting.not> wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 17:43:46 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Catrike Rider <soloman@drafting.not> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 13:21:34 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Catrike Rider <soloman@drafting.not> wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 11:07:00 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Catrike Rider <soloman@drafting.not> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 21:35:59 -0500, Frank Krygowski
>>>>>>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 11/14/2023 5:57 PM, John B. wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> But enquiring minds might wonder why she didn't see the post in the
>>>>>>>>> road? Was she gazing around at the scenery instead of watching where
>>>>>>>>> she was going? Talking with a friend in stead of paying attention to
>>>>>>>>> the road/path? Riding way too fast the conditions?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I wasn't there, but I heard about the event in detail. She didn't see it
>>>>>>>> because it was a group ride and a tall guy was visually blocking her view.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Assuming the story is true, she was following too closely and/or not
>>>>>>> paying attention. Thank goodness her ignorant, irresponsible behavior
>>>>>>> didn't hurt anyone but herself.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On group rides it's considered good practice to call out hazards. Some
>>>>>>>> people know less about competent cycling and fail to do that. I suppose
>>>>>>>> that was the case before this crash.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Riding a bicycle directly behind another rider who is blocking your
>>>>>>> view ahead seems like a foolish thing to do. You have to trust the
>>>>>>> rider you're tailgating and you have to pay close attention to his or
>>>>>>> her hind end to keep from tangling wheels, so you miss viewing much of
>>>>>>> your surroundings as you ride.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Roadies do have a habit of bunching up so are more prone to this, and
>>>>>> unless you?re on the road at speed it really has no value. Ie better to be
>>>>>> side by side etc, as you your visibility is better etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> I've been run off the path several times by people popping out from
>>>>> long lines of group riders. Once I saw, just ahead of me, a rider in a
>>>>> large group that was riding towards me and taking up the entire path,
>>>>> being run off his side of the path into a large bush by people trying
>>>>> to get back in line. I've become extremely wary when meeting groups of
>>>>> riders.
>>>>
>>>> Seems an odd place to ride as a peloton? I?m assuming it has
>>>> walkers/dogs/kids and so on? Road would be a better option as well tend not
>>>> to get such folks there.
>>>
>>> You must be kidding. I occasionally see one or two riders on streets
>>> or roads, but here in this part of Florida, the vast majority of
>>> bicycle riding is done on the bike trails. They're wide and smooth and
>>> many have several miles of uninterrupted riding. Why mix it up with
>>> cars and trucks when you can go 20/30 miles with only a half dozen
>>> places where you might encounter a vehicle and maybe have to put your
>>> foot down? The distances between access points also means that
>>> walker/dogs/kids/etc are not such a common thing.
>>
>> Maybe you don’t see them but I suspect they do use more than the trails,
>> Strava which is very much a roadie thing more than other groups, for
>> example SugerLoaf MT is ridden up many more times by many more people than
>> Starkey Park trails, or link trails and interesting roads or nice cafes
>> together and so on.
>
> Sugarloaf is a special challenging place where people come from far
> away to put their ride in Strava. Strava is probably not a thing for
> most Starky riders.
>
It’s special due to its height as Florida is flat and so highest point, but
it’s not a challenging climb, nor does it have that high numbers, it’s a
cool 0.89 mile 3.7% grade climb, ridden by 10k folk.

even Box Hill in Surrey is more of challenge, it’s not even on a single
speed bike. With 1.53 miles at 4.7% grade. And some 146k folks have ridden
it.

Note london/Surrey population is broadly similar to Florida.

Or stuff like Climbs in the Lake District, which are iconic and are mile or
so with generally double digits average grades and max grades in the 20-30%
range people travel and holiday to ride them as they such a challenge and
beautiful Honister Pass is something out of Lord of the Rings quite
frankly.

>>> I routinely ride, as a warm up and cool down, a six mile trail
>>> (Starkey Park) that takes me from my parking location out to the
>>> junction with Suncoast trail. It runs through a wilderness area with
>>> no other places to get on or off. From the junction south on the
>>> Suncoast to the next access point is five miles to Highway 54. There's
>>> nothing in between. Three miles to the north, there is a highway bike
>>> trail interchange with zero parking facilities. People can get on or
>>> off the system four miles to the east of that point, or by continuing
>>> two miles further north to Hwy 52. Those two are not really access
>>> points, but merely places where one might find a place nearby to park
>>> their car. The next real access point to the north is about 23 miles
>>> from the one at Highway 54. There are a few road crossings in between
>>> where some people occasionally park and access the trail, but not in
>>> significant numbers. I occasionally come across walkers, but they're
>>> isolated enough not to be a problem for me or the pelotoners.
>>>
>>>>>> This said while the rider may have been unwise, a Bollard is still a bad
>>>>>> idea as it can be hidden from view relatively easily. If they do need to
>>>>>> keep cars out planters ie large heavy wooden boxes with plants are probably
>>>>>> better for number of reasons.
>>>>>
>>>>> It seems to me these bollard accidents only happen to people riding
>>>>> in groups. I can understand people who ride in groups being afraid of
>>>>> them, but they seem quite innocent to me.
>>>>>
>>>> Can?t say I?ve ever known anyone having accidents with them, but it?s car
>>>> infrastructure ie to keep cars out, it?s fairly rare over here even on rail
>>>> trails, I do pass two sets on way to work neither of which serve any
>>>> purpose, and in fairness are decades old.
>>>
>>> What I see around here is a single steel pole in the middle of the
>>> trail at road crossings. They can be removed to allow maintenance
>>> vehicles, but are otherwise locked down.
>>>
>>>> Shared spaces be that cycleways or more linear parks tend to be more busy
>>>> ie pedestrian/kids/dogs/runnners etc so something like a bollard isn?t a
>>>> good idea, as it can be hidden from view etc, and frankly isn?t bike but
>>>> car infrastructure.
>>>>
>>>>> I believe encountering group riders is more problematic than
>>>>> encountering bollards.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> I understand that some people see value in getting together in groups
>>>>>>> so they can engage in small talk and gossip, but the concept of
>>>>>>> turning bicycle rides into a social affairs seems simple minded to me.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I also understand that drafting is an advantage in bicycle racing, but
>>>>>>> I assume the racers know and accept the potential problems, and are
>>>>>>> not interested in viewing their surroundings.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Other people know less about competent cycling and apparently get
>>>>>>>> confused by the phrase "blind spot."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No one is confused by the phrase "blind spot."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Unfortunately instead of trying to
>>>>>>>> learn, they post mockery and glory in their ignorance.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In my opinion, one element of "competent cycling" would be make sure
>>>>>>> you can always see where you're going.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Roger Merriman
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Roger Merriman
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>> Roger Merriman
>>
>>
>
Roger Merriman

On Thu, 16 Nov 2023 05:46:34 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 12:21:26 -0500, Catrike Rider
><soloman@drafting.not> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 11:21:55 -0500, Frank Krygowski
>><frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>
>>>On 11/15/2023 6:07 AM, Roger Merriman wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Roadies do have a habit of bunching up so are more prone to this, and
>>>> unless you’re on the road at speed it really has no value. Ie better to be
>>>> side by side etc, as you your visibility is better etc.
>>>
>>>"Bunching up" really has no value? Sorry, I disagree. I don't know what
>>>you consider "at speed," but in strong headwinds there can be value from
>>>drafting when riding quite slowly. Especially on our tandem, but also on
>>>my single, I've spent many miles towing riders into headwinds.
>>>
>>>But more to the point, the person complaining the most about this brags
>>>about roughly zero experience riding with others. His claim that one
>>>can't see the scenery is nonsense, as are his jabs about "butts in the
>>>air" and other offensive crap.
>>
>>I'm not complaining. I have nothing to complain about since I'm not so
>>stupid as to ride such that I can't see where I'm going.
>>
>>>Most of all, he's conclusively shown himself to be pathologically
>>>repulsed by human contact.
>>
>>Another nonsense strawman statement from RBT's master of nonsense
>>strawmen, although I am repulsed by the thought of having to hang
>>around with him and/or members of his small talk, gossiping bike club,
>>on a bike ride or anywhere else.
>>
>>>I suspect he's the only person here who has
>>>not frequently enjoyed the pleasure of (gasp!) conversation
>>
>>(Small talk, gossip)
>>
>>>with other
>>>people during bike rides.
>>
>>Other than my wife and a couple short rides with one of my kids or
>>grandkids, make that *never. I'm happy to sit for a while and
>>converse with a small group of people I know and like, but my bike
>>rides are not for socializing.
>>
>>>I ride for utility. I ride for exploration. I ride for exercise, and to
>>>challenge myself physically. I ride for solitude. But I also ride for
>>>the pleasure of socializing with others. For people of normal healthy
>>>psychology, that is a significant benefit.
>>
>>What would RBT's resident narcissist know about a normal healthy
>>psychology?
>>
>>>> This said while the rider may have been unwise, a Bollard is still a bad
>>>> idea as it can be hidden from view relatively easily. If they do need to
>>>> keep cars out planters ie large heavy wooden boxes with plants are probably
>>>> better for number of reasons.
>>>
>>>Agreed, bollards are almost always bad. Their intent is to prevent or
>>>dissuade motorists from entering bike facilities, but there are other
>>>ways that AASHTO
>>
>>(bureaucrats)
>>
>>>prefers. One is an island section of low shrubbery.
>>>Even if an out of control cyclists were to run into it, serious injury
>>>would be unlikely.
>>
>>I have no problem with that, but then I have no problem with bollards,
>>either.
>>>
>>>And if a bollard must be used, there are pavement markings that can give
>>>plenty of advanced warning to riders. But the crash I referred to was on
>>>a crushed limestone path where pavement stripes, etc. are not possible.
>>>Again, bad design.
>>
>>Ah yes, blame the bike path and the bollard for a stupid mistake made
>>by the bike rider.
>>
>>Maybe a sign that says, "please watch where you're going."
>
>The whole bollard thing seems at best a straw man story and at worst,
>simply a lie. Example, bollards in Thailand.
>https://www.zjeastsea.com/product-guidelines-bollard/
>https://www.dreamstime.com/parking-lot-thailand-parking-sign-empty-no-people-moveable-steel-fence-barrier-concrete-floor-use-parking-area-image108832374
>Can't see them? Then I suggest that you either so stupid or so blind
>that you certainly should not be allowed to ride a bicycle on public
>highways.
>
>Or maybe you have invisible bollards in the U.S. ?

Some bureaucrats say they're dangerous, but I'm not afraid of them, so
they don't bother me at all.

On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 12:07:30 -0600,
AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
> On 11/15/2023 11:30 AM, Catrike Rider wrote:
> > On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 16:54:58 -0000 (UTC), Ted Heise <theise@panix.com>
> > wrote:
> >> On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 11:21:55 -0500,
> >> Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

> >>> I ride for utility. I ride for exploration. I ride for
> >>> exercise, and to challenge myself physically. I ride for
> >>> solitude. But I also ride for the pleasure of socializing
> >>> with others...
> >>
> >> I can heartily agree with all of these motivations for
> >> riding!
> >
> > Any reason to ride is a good reason to ride. Most people have
> > their own list of reasons.
>
> +1
> I resemble that remark.

And today I got out for a lovely ride. Reasons were (in no
particular order):

* indulging myself by taking advantage of reduced work hours in my
final year of employment

* enjoying the sun with temps in the 60s

* taking in the colorful fall foliage

* knowing I sleep better after days I've gotten some exercise

--
Ted Heise <theise@panix.com> West Lafayette, IN, USA

On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 23:16:18 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
wrote:

>Catrike Rider <soloman@drafting.not> wrote:
>> On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 17:43:46 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Catrike Rider <soloman@drafting.not> wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 13:21:34 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Catrike Rider <soloman@drafting.not> wrote:
>>>>>> On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 11:07:00 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Catrike Rider <soloman@drafting.not> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 21:35:59 -0500, Frank Krygowski
>>>>>>>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 11/14/2023 5:57 PM, John B. wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> But enquiring minds might wonder why she didn't see the post in the
>>>>>>>>>> road? Was she gazing around at the scenery instead of watching where
>>>>>>>>>> she was going? Talking with a friend in stead of paying attention to
>>>>>>>>>> the road/path? Riding way too fast the conditions?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I wasn't there, but I heard about the event in detail. She didn't see it
>>>>>>>>> because it was a group ride and a tall guy was visually blocking her view.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Assuming the story is true, she was following too closely and/or not
>>>>>>>> paying attention. Thank goodness her ignorant, irresponsible behavior
>>>>>>>> didn't hurt anyone but herself.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On group rides it's considered good practice to call out hazards. Some
>>>>>>>>> people know less about competent cycling and fail to do that. I suppose
>>>>>>>>> that was the case before this crash.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Riding a bicycle directly behind another rider who is blocking your
>>>>>>>> view ahead seems like a foolish thing to do. You have to trust the
>>>>>>>> rider you're tailgating and you have to pay close attention to his or
>>>>>>>> her hind end to keep from tangling wheels, so you miss viewing much of
>>>>>>>> your surroundings as you ride.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Roadies do have a habit of bunching up so are more prone to this, and
>>>>>>> unless you?re on the road at speed it really has no value. Ie better to be
>>>>>>> side by side etc, as you your visibility is better etc.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've been run off the path several times by people popping out from
>>>>>> long lines of group riders. Once I saw, just ahead of me, a rider in a
>>>>>> large group that was riding towards me and taking up the entire path,
>>>>>> being run off his side of the path into a large bush by people trying
>>>>>> to get back in line. I've become extremely wary when meeting groups of
>>>>>> riders.
>>>>>
>>>>> Seems an odd place to ride as a peloton? I?m assuming it has
>>>>> walkers/dogs/kids and so on? Road would be a better option as well tend not
>>>>> to get such folks there.
>>>>
>>>> You must be kidding. I occasionally see one or two riders on streets
>>>> or roads, but here in this part of Florida, the vast majority of
>>>> bicycle riding is done on the bike trails. They're wide and smooth and
>>>> many have several miles of uninterrupted riding. Why mix it up with
>>>> cars and trucks when you can go 20/30 miles with only a half dozen
>>>> places where you might encounter a vehicle and maybe have to put your
>>>> foot down? The distances between access points also means that
>>>> walker/dogs/kids/etc are not such a common thing.
>>>
>>> Maybe you don?t see them but I suspect they do use more than the trails,
>>> Strava which is very much a roadie thing more than other groups, for
>>> example SugerLoaf MT is ridden up many more times by many more people than
>>> Starkey Park trails, or link trails and interesting roads or nice cafes
>>> together and so on.
>>
>> Sugarloaf is a special challenging place where people come from far
>> away to put their ride in Strava. Strava is probably not a thing for
>> most Starky riders.
>>
>It’s special due to its height as Florida is flat and so highest point, but
>it’s not a challenging climb, nor does it have that high numbers, it’s a
>cool 0.89 mile 3.7% grade climb, ridden by 10k folk.

More like 10/12 % grade.

https://www.strava.com/segments/637166

I ride several 6-7% grades on the Suncoast trail north of between hwy
50 and hwy 98.

>even Box Hill in Surrey is more of challenge, it’s not even on a single
>speed bike. With 1.53 miles at 4.7% grade. And some 146k folks have ridden
>it.
>
>Note london/Surrey population is broadly similar to Florida.
>
>Or stuff like Climbs in the Lake District, which are iconic and are mile or
>so with generally double digits average grades and max grades in the 20-30%
>range people travel and holiday to ride them as they such a challenge and
>beautiful Honister Pass is something out of Lord of the Rings quite
>frankly.
>
>
>
>
>>>> I routinely ride, as a warm up and cool down, a six mile trail
>>>> (Starkey Park) that takes me from my parking location out to the
>>>> junction with Suncoast trail. It runs through a wilderness area with
>>>> no other places to get on or off. From the junction south on the
>>>> Suncoast to the next access point is five miles to Highway 54. There's
>>>> nothing in between. Three miles to the north, there is a highway bike
>>>> trail interchange with zero parking facilities. People can get on or
>>>> off the system four miles to the east of that point, or by continuing
>>>> two miles further north to Hwy 52. Those two are not really access
>>>> points, but merely places where one might find a place nearby to park
>>>> their car. The next real access point to the north is about 23 miles
>>>> from the one at Highway 54. There are a few road crossings in between
>>>> where some people occasionally park and access the trail, but not in
>>>> significant numbers. I occasionally come across walkers, but they're
>>>> isolated enough not to be a problem for me or the pelotoners.
>>>>
>>>>>>> This said while the rider may have been unwise, a Bollard is still a bad
>>>>>>> idea as it can be hidden from view relatively easily. If they do need to
>>>>>>> keep cars out planters ie large heavy wooden boxes with plants are probably
>>>>>>> better for number of reasons.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It seems to me these bollard accidents only happen to people riding
>>>>>> in groups. I can understand people who ride in groups being afraid of
>>>>>> them, but they seem quite innocent to me.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Can?t say I?ve ever known anyone having accidents with them, but it?s car
>>>>> infrastructure ie to keep cars out, it?s fairly rare over here even on rail
>>>>> trails, I do pass two sets on way to work neither of which serve any
>>>>> purpose, and in fairness are decades old.
>>>>
>>>> What I see around here is a single steel pole in the middle of the
>>>> trail at road crossings. They can be removed to allow maintenance
>>>> vehicles, but are otherwise locked down.
>>>>
>>>>> Shared spaces be that cycleways or more linear parks tend to be more busy
>>>>> ie pedestrian/kids/dogs/runnners etc so something like a bollard isn?t a
>>>>> good idea, as it can be hidden from view etc, and frankly isn?t bike but
>>>>> car infrastructure.
>>>>>
>>>>>> I believe encountering group riders is more problematic than
>>>>>> encountering bollards.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I understand that some people see value in getting together in groups
>>>>>>>> so they can engage in small talk and gossip, but the concept of
>>>>>>>> turning bicycle rides into a social affairs seems simple minded to me.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I also understand that drafting is an advantage in bicycle racing, but
>>>>>>>> I assume the racers know and accept the potential problems, and are
>>>>>>>> not interested in viewing their surroundings.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Other people know less about competent cycling and apparently get
>>>>>>>>> confused by the phrase "blind spot."
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No one is confused by the phrase "blind spot."
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Unfortunately instead of trying to
>>>>>>>>> learn, they post mockery and glory in their ignorance.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In my opinion, one element of "competent cycling" would be make sure
>>>>>>>> you can always see where you're going.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Roger Merriman
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Roger Merriman
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>> Roger Merriman
>>>
>>>
>>
>Roger Merriman
>

On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 19:15:52 -0500, Catrike Rider
<soloman@drafting.not> wrote:

>On Thu, 16 Nov 2023 05:46:34 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 12:21:26 -0500, Catrike Rider
>><soloman@drafting.not> wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 11:21:55 -0500, Frank Krygowski
>>><frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On 11/15/2023 6:07 AM, Roger Merriman wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Roadies do have a habit of bunching up so are more prone to this, and
>>>>> unless you’re on the road at speed it really has no value. Ie better to be
>>>>> side by side etc, as you your visibility is better etc.
>>>>
>>>>"Bunching up" really has no value? Sorry, I disagree. I don't know what
>>>>you consider "at speed," but in strong headwinds there can be value from
>>>>drafting when riding quite slowly. Especially on our tandem, but also on
>>>>my single, I've spent many miles towing riders into headwinds.
>>>>
>>>>But more to the point, the person complaining the most about this brags
>>>>about roughly zero experience riding with others. His claim that one
>>>>can't see the scenery is nonsense, as are his jabs about "butts in the
>>>>air" and other offensive crap.
>>>
>>>I'm not complaining. I have nothing to complain about since I'm not so
>>>stupid as to ride such that I can't see where I'm going.
>>>
>>>>Most of all, he's conclusively shown himself to be pathologically
>>>>repulsed by human contact.
>>>
>>>Another nonsense strawman statement from RBT's master of nonsense
>>>strawmen, although I am repulsed by the thought of having to hang
>>>around with him and/or members of his small talk, gossiping bike club,
>>>on a bike ride or anywhere else.
>>>
>>>>I suspect he's the only person here who has
>>>>not frequently enjoyed the pleasure of (gasp!) conversation
>>>
>>>(Small talk, gossip)
>>>
>>>>with other
>>>>people during bike rides.
>>>
>>>Other than my wife and a couple short rides with one of my kids or
>>>grandkids, make that *never. I'm happy to sit for a while and
>>>converse with a small group of people I know and like, but my bike
>>>rides are not for socializing.
>>>
>>>>I ride for utility. I ride for exploration. I ride for exercise, and to
>>>>challenge myself physically. I ride for solitude. But I also ride for
>>>>the pleasure of socializing with others. For people of normal healthy
>>>>psychology, that is a significant benefit.
>>>
>>>What would RBT's resident narcissist know about a normal healthy
>>>psychology?
>>>
>>>>> This said while the rider may have been unwise, a Bollard is still a bad
>>>>> idea as it can be hidden from view relatively easily. If they do need to
>>>>> keep cars out planters ie large heavy wooden boxes with plants are probably
>>>>> better for number of reasons.
>>>>
>>>>Agreed, bollards are almost always bad. Their intent is to prevent or
>>>>dissuade motorists from entering bike facilities, but there are other
>>>>ways that AASHTO
>>>
>>>(bureaucrats)
>>>
>>>>prefers. One is an island section of low shrubbery.
>>>>Even if an out of control cyclists were to run into it, serious injury
>>>>would be unlikely.
>>>
>>>I have no problem with that, but then I have no problem with bollards,
>>>either.
>>>>
>>>>And if a bollard must be used, there are pavement markings that can give
>>>>plenty of advanced warning to riders. But the crash I referred to was on
>>>>a crushed limestone path where pavement stripes, etc. are not possible.
>>>>Again, bad design.
>>>
>>>Ah yes, blame the bike path and the bollard for a stupid mistake made
>>>by the bike rider.
>>>
>>>Maybe a sign that says, "please watch where you're going."
>>
>>The whole bollard thing seems at best a straw man story and at worst,
>>simply a lie. Example, bollards in Thailand.
>>https://www.zjeastsea.com/product-guidelines-bollard/
>>https://www.dreamstime.com/parking-lot-thailand-parking-sign-empty-no-people-moveable-steel-fence-barrier-concrete-floor-use-parking-area-image108832374
>>Can't see them? Then I suggest that you either so stupid or so blind
>>that you certainly should not be allowed to ride a bicycle on public
>>highways.
>>
>>Or maybe you have invisible bollards in the U.S. ?
>
>
>Some bureaucrats say they're dangerous, but I'm not afraid of them, so
>they don't bother me at all.

Wandering around the Internet I came across the following:
"a Chicopee, Massachusetts convenience store saw an SUV plow into the
place at 71 miles per hour, killing a customer and injuring an
employee. Internal documents disclosed that the convenience store
chain saw 485 “car strikes” in a 20 year period."

That is about 24 cars running into buildings per year, or 2 per month.

Now, if people drive into great big store fronts then what chance does
a poor little bollard have :-)

--
Cheers,

John B.

On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 08:47:40 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich
<cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Wednesday, November 15, 2023 at 6:49:47?AM UTC-8, Catrike Rider wrote:
>> On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 08:06:13 -0600, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>>
>> >On 11/15/2023 4:52 AM, John B. wrote:
>> >> On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 03:20:52 -0500, Catrike Rider
>> >> <sol...@drafting.not> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 07:51:09 +0700, John B. <sloc...@gmail.com>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 19:02:48 -0500, Catrike Rider
>> >>>> <sol...@drafting.not> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 05:57:48 +0700, John B. <sloc...@gmail.com>
>> >>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 12:29:37 -0500, Catrike Rider
>> >>>>>> <sol...@drafting.not> wrote:
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 09:37:33 -0500, Frank Krygowski
>> >>>>>>> <frkr...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> On 11/14/2023 3:22 AM, John B. wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Well, the statistics I see seem to say that the cyclists are at fault
>> >>>>>>>>> in slightly more then half of the auto-bike collisions and apparently
>> >>>>>>>>> this is simply an example why.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> As the Trik Guy says. The post is there and the cyclist runs into
>> >>>>>>>>> it....and the cause is?
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> The worst bollard case among my friends did not actually involve a
>> >>>>>>>> collision with a bollard. The friend dodged the bollard at the last
>> >>>>>>>> moment, lost traction and fell. She hit her helmeted head and was
>> >>>>>>>> knocked unconscious despite the fact that the surface was crushed
>> >>>>>>>> limestone instead of asphalt, and despite the magic foam hat she wore.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Another undocumented anecdote from RBT's top storyteller...
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> How could she not see a bollard? The phenomenon is called a "moving
>> >>>>>>>> blind spot." The cyclist in front of her blocked her view of the bollard
>> >>>>>>>> as she approached it.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> A good reason to watch where you're going and maybe not tailgate. Same
>> >>>>>>> things apply to driving a vehicle.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Again, AASHTO
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> (Bureaucrats)
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> design standards discourage the use of bollards. How odd
>> >>>>>>>> that codgers posting here defend them by blaming cyclist.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> <Heh, heh> As opposed to running into a stationary object, and blaming
>> >>>>>>> the stationary object?
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> But "Any bike
>> >>>>>>>> facility is a good bike facility" in some minds.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Krygowski is the only person saying that, so his mind is the only one
>> >>>>>>> that it's in.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Amazing, and yet another reason that I put Frankie in my "don't bother
>> >>>>>> with him" file. Friend riding down the road and the friend dodged the
>> >>>>>> bollard at the last moment, lost traction and fell. Sure, makes
>> >>>>>> perfect sense, at least in Frankie's mind.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> But enquiring minds might wonder why she didn't see the post in the
>> >>>>>> road? Was she gazing around at the scenery instead of watching where
>> >>>>>> she was going? Talking with a friend in stead of paying attention to
>> >>>>>> the road/path? Riding way too fast the conditions?
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> As usual, Frankie's comments bolster his arguments even though they
>> >>>>>> don't make sense to any normal rational person.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Krygowski recently spoke about taking classes in critical thinking.
>> >>>>> which I believe is his source of his constant references to making
>> >>>>> choices based on his evaluation of benefits and detriments. He seems
>> >>>>> to believe that his "understanding" of that simple process qualifies
>> >>>>> him to pester and berate other people about their choices.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> But Beneficial and determents depend largely on who is viewing the
>> >>>> question.
>> >>>
>> >>> Indeed, benefits and detriments are, for the most part, subjective
>> >>> evaluations..
>> >>>
>> >>>> The Vietnam "war" that Tom recently mentioned, for example. the U.S.
>> >>>> viewed it as a way to prevent communism from taking over the world
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> When you say "the U.S," are you referring to the people, the
>> >>> government, or the behind the scenes power brokers who duped the other
>> >>> two into believing the war would stop communism. Sadly, that duping
>> >>> process continues.
>> >>
>> >> Well, the U.S. as a nation. Government, and the various agencies.
>> >> And yes, I do believe that it was an effort primarily to contain
>> >> communism which was spreading down through S.E. Asia. And, of course,
>> >> an effort to control yet another country.
>> >>
>> >> The problem was that in several parts of S.E. Asia communism really
>> >> was an improvement over the government that existed at the time.
>> >>
>> >
>> >Not for the victims.
>> >
>> >https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/106169.The_Black_Book_of_Communism
>> Communism requires a dictatorial government. That says all that needs
>> to be said.
>What did we just go through with this Fauci created pandemic and the Democrats using that to commit election fraud.

Well, if the Democrats did commit voter fraud it seems to be an
indication that Demos are smarter then Repub's. After all the
Republicans have brought, what is it now? 62 court cases alleging
voter fraud and not a one has made it through the courts.

Nearly all the suits were dismissed or dropped due to lack of
evidence. Judges, lawyers, and other observers described the suits as
"frivolous" and "without merit". In one instance, the Trump campaign
and other groups seeking his reelection collectively lost multiple
cases in six states on a single day.

So who do you want running the country? The slick, slippery Democrats
who can steal the election right from under the noses of the
Republicans, and never get caught? Or some bumbling Republican that,
as far as voter fraud goes couldn't catch a Democrat if the Demo's
had both hands tied behind their back?

--
Cheers,

John B.

Catrike Rider <soloman@drafting.not> wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 23:16:18 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Catrike Rider <soloman@drafting.not> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 17:43:46 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Catrike Rider <soloman@drafting.not> wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 13:21:34 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Catrike Rider <soloman@drafting.not> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 11:07:00 GMT, Roger Merriman <roger@sarlet.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Catrike Rider <soloman@drafting.not> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 14 Nov 2023 21:35:59 -0500, Frank Krygowski
>>>>>>>>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 11/14/2023 5:57 PM, John B. wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> But enquiring minds might wonder why she didn't see the post in the
>>>>>>>>>>> road? Was she gazing around at the scenery instead of watching where
>>>>>>>>>>> she was going? Talking with a friend in stead of paying attention to
>>>>>>>>>>> the road/path? Riding way too fast the conditions?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I wasn't there, but I heard about the event in detail. She didn't see it
>>>>>>>>>> because it was a group ride and a tall guy was visually blocking her view.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Assuming the story is true, she was following too closely and/or not
>>>>>>>>> paying attention. Thank goodness her ignorant, irresponsible behavior
>>>>>>>>> didn't hurt anyone but herself.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On group rides it's considered good practice to call out hazards. Some
>>>>>>>>>> people know less about competent cycling and fail to do that. I suppose
>>>>>>>>>> that was the case before this crash.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Riding a bicycle directly behind another rider who is blocking your
>>>>>>>>> view ahead seems like a foolish thing to do. You have to trust the
>>>>>>>>> rider you're tailgating and you have to pay close attention to his or
>>>>>>>>> her hind end to keep from tangling wheels, so you miss viewing much of
>>>>>>>>> your surroundings as you ride.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Roadies do have a habit of bunching up so are more prone to this, and
>>>>>>>> unless you?re on the road at speed it really has no value. Ie better to be
>>>>>>>> side by side etc, as you your visibility is better etc.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I've been run off the path several times by people popping out from
>>>>>>> long lines of group riders. Once I saw, just ahead of me, a rider in a
>>>>>>> large group that was riding towards me and taking up the entire path,
>>>>>>> being run off his side of the path into a large bush by people trying
>>>>>>> to get back in line. I've become extremely wary when meeting groups of
>>>>>>> riders.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Seems an odd place to ride as a peloton? I?m assuming it has
>>>>>> walkers/dogs/kids and so on? Road would be a better option as well tend not
>>>>>> to get such folks there.
>>>>>
>>>>> You must be kidding. I occasionally see one or two riders on streets
>>>>> or roads, but here in this part of Florida, the vast majority of
>>>>> bicycle riding is done on the bike trails. They're wide and smooth and
>>>>> many have several miles of uninterrupted riding. Why mix it up with
>>>>> cars and trucks when you can go 20/30 miles with only a half dozen
>>>>> places where you might encounter a vehicle and maybe have to put your
>>>>> foot down? The distances between access points also means that
>>>>> walker/dogs/kids/etc are not such a common thing.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe you don?t see them but I suspect they do use more than the trails,
>>>> Strava which is very much a roadie thing more than other groups, for
>>>> example SugerLoaf MT is ridden up many more times by many more people than
>>>> Starkey Park trails, or link trails and interesting roads or nice cafes
>>>> together and so on.
>>>
>>> Sugarloaf is a special challenging place where people come from far
>>> away to put their ride in Strava. Strava is probably not a thing for
>>> most Starky riders.
>>>
>> It’s special due to its height as Florida is flat and so highest point, but
>> it’s not a challenging climb, nor does it have that high numbers, it’s a
>> cool 0.89 mile 3.7% grade climb, ridden by 10k folk.
>
> More like 10/12 % grade.
>
> https://www.strava.com/segments/637166
>
>
At peak possibly, that still in of its self doesn’t make it particularly
challenging, it’s has iconic value as the high point and all that.

> I ride several 6-7% grades on the Suncoast trail north of between hwy
> 50 and hwy 98.
>
Even my pan flat commute has some 5% grades up and over the flyover.

>> even Box Hill in Surrey is more of challenge, it’s not even on a single
>> speed bike. With 1.53 miles at 4.7% grade. And some 146k folks have ridden
>> it.
>>
>> Note london/Surrey population is broadly similar to Florida.
>>
>> Or stuff like Climbs in the Lake District, which are iconic and are mile or
>> so with generally double digits average grades and max grades in the 20-30%
>> range people travel and holiday to ride them as they such a challenge and
>> beautiful Honister Pass is something out of Lord of the Rings quite
>> frankly.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>> I routinely ride, as a warm up and cool down, a six mile trail
>>>>> (Starkey Park) that takes me from my parking location out to the
>>>>> junction with Suncoast trail. It runs through a wilderness area with
>>>>> no other places to get on or off. From the junction south on the
>>>>> Suncoast to the next access point is five miles to Highway 54. There's
>>>>> nothing in between. Three miles to the north, there is a highway bike
>>>>> trail interchange with zero parking facilities. People can get on or
>>>>> off the system four miles to the east of that point, or by continuing
>>>>> two miles further north to Hwy 52. Those two are not really access
>>>>> points, but merely places where one might find a place nearby to park
>>>>> their car. The next real access point to the north is about 23 miles
>>>>> from the one at Highway 54. There are a few road crossings in between
>>>>> where some people occasionally park and access the trail, but not in
>>>>> significant numbers. I occasionally come across walkers, but they're
>>>>> isolated enough not to be a problem for me or the pelotoners.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This said while the rider may have been unwise, a Bollard is still a bad
>>>>>>>> idea as it can be hidden from view relatively easily. If they do need to
>>>>>>>> keep cars out planters ie large heavy wooden boxes with plants are probably
>>>>>>>> better for number of reasons.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It seems to me these bollard accidents only happen to people riding
>>>>>>> in groups. I can understand people who ride in groups being afraid of
>>>>>>> them, but they seem quite innocent to me.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Can?t say I?ve ever known anyone having accidents with them, but it?s car
>>>>>> infrastructure ie to keep cars out, it?s fairly rare over here even on rail
>>>>>> trails, I do pass two sets on way to work neither of which serve any
>>>>>> purpose, and in fairness are decades old.
>>>>>
>>>>> What I see around here is a single steel pole in the middle of the
>>>>> trail at road crossings. They can be removed to allow maintenance
>>>>> vehicles, but are otherwise locked down.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Shared spaces be that cycleways or more linear parks tend to be more busy
>>>>>> ie pedestrian/kids/dogs/runnners etc so something like a bollard isn?t a
>>>>>> good idea, as it can be hidden from view etc, and frankly isn?t bike but
>>>>>> car infrastructure.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I believe encountering group riders is more problematic than
>>>>>>> encountering bollards.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I understand that some people see value in getting together in groups
>>>>>>>>> so they can engage in small talk and gossip, but the concept of
>>>>>>>>> turning bicycle rides into a social affairs seems simple minded to me.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I also understand that drafting is an advantage in bicycle racing, but
>>>>>>>>> I assume the racers know and accept the potential problems, and are
>>>>>>>>> not interested in viewing their surroundings.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Other people know less about competent cycling and apparently get
>>>>>>>>>> confused by the phrase "blind spot."
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> No one is confused by the phrase "blind spot."
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Unfortunately instead of trying to
>>>>>>>>>> learn, they post mockery and glory in their ignorance.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> In my opinion, one element of "competent cycling" would be make sure
>>>>>>>>> you can always see where you're going.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Roger Merriman
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Roger Merriman
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Roger Merriman
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>> Roger Merriman
>>
>
Roger Merriman

On 11/15/2023 12:27 PM, Roger Merriman wrote:
> Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>
>> "Bunching up" really has no value? Sorry, I disagree. I don't know what
>> you consider "at speed," but in strong headwinds there can be value from
>> drafting when riding quite slowly. Especially on our tandem, but also on
>> my single, I've spent many miles towing riders into headwinds.
>
> Its more the ability to see what’s coming and chat other riders, a rail
> trail doesn’t seem like the place to bunch up close, or have more than 2/3
> riders in my experience as well shared space and possibly car centric
> design ie bollards or barriers.
>
> Closing to draft while useful is always going to be risky some where where
> the probabilities of having to brake surprisingly is high such as a trail.

I'd describe drafting as having one's front tire within less than two
feet of someone's rear tire, and much closer if possible. I agree that
it carries risks and requires concentration. I've done lots of it over
the decades, although I've spent many more miles as the person who's
being drafted. There are many people I know who I would never draft,
simply because they're not steady enough.

But I've had no indication that the woman who crashed by avoiding that
trail's bollard was actually drafting someone. It was a club ride on a
crushed limestone trail roughly 60 miles away in a national park. I
assume they drove all that way to see the park while cycling, not to do
a "chain gang" training ride.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 11/15/2023 11:54 AM, Ted Heise wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 11:21:55 -0500,
> Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>> On 11/15/2023 6:07 AM, Roger Merriman wrote:
>>>
>>> Roadies do have a habit of bunching up so are more prone to
>>> this, and unless you’re on the road at speed it really has no
>>> value. Ie better to be side by side etc, as you your
>>> visibility is better etc.
>>
>> "Bunching up" really has no value? Sorry, I disagree. I don't
>> know what you consider "at speed," but in strong headwinds
>> there can be value from drafting when riding quite slowly.
>> Especially on our tandem, but also on my single, I've spent
>> many miles towing riders into headwinds.
>
> Same in my experience.
>
>
>> But more to the point, the person complaining the most about
>> this brags about roughly zero experience riding with others.
>> His claim that one can't see the scenery is nonsense...
>
> Not sure what all this may be referencing, but the immediately
> preceding post had this bit...
>
> | Riding a bicycle directly behind another rider who is blocking
> | your view ahead seems like a foolish thing to do. You have to
> | trust the rider you're tailgating and you have to pay close
> | attention to his or her hind end to keep from tangling wheels,
> | so you miss viewing much of your surroundings as you ride.
>
> I agree with aspects of each. In many group rides, I can see the
> scenery just fine and don't have to focus overmuch on the rider in
> front of me. On the other hand, when I'm part of a group that is
> going all out (especially when I'm at or near the limits of what I
> can sustain) I have to draft quite closely--and that, combined
> with usually higher speed, means I have to really pay attention to
> the rider in front. So it's really a matter of circumstance.
>
> I can add a relevant anecdote. On a tandem group ride a few years
> ago I flatted both tires on a hole in the road. I might have seen
> and avoided it had I not been following the bike ahead so closely.
>
>
>> I ride for utility. I ride for exploration. I ride for
>> exercise, and to challenge myself physically. I ride for
>> solitude. But I also ride for the pleasure of socializing with
>> others...
>
> I can heartily agree with all of these motivations for riding!

About your double flat incident:

On a group ride I think it's important for riders to point out road
hazards. I know one guy who does this excessively loudly ("HOLE!"
"GLASS!!") but I prefer that to no notice at all. It's often sufficient
to just point to the hazard as you ride past it, which is what some
excellent riders I know tend to do.

And its also important to watch the road far enough ahead to avoid
hazards without sudden violent swerves. If that and the warning had been
done properly, I'd bet you'd have avoided that hole.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 11/15/2023 6:16 PM, Roger Merriman wrote:
>
> [Sugarloaf "Mountain" is] special due to its height as Florida is flat and so highest point, but
> it’s not a challenging climb, nor does it have that high numbers, it’s a
> cool 0.89 mile 3.7% grade climb, ridden by 10k folk.

312 feet above sea level? 3.7% grade? How does that qualify as a
"mountain"?

Google says Florida's highest point is Britton Hill, only 345 feet above
sea level. When I've ridden in Florida, the only real uphills were bridges.

--
- Frank Krygowski

John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com> writes:

> On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 12:21:26 -0500, Catrike Rider
> <soloman@drafting.not> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 11:21:55 -0500, Frank Krygowski
>><frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>
>>>On 11/15/2023 6:07 AM, Roger Merriman wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Roadies do have a habit of bunching up so are more prone to this, and
>>>> unless you’re on the road at speed it really has no value. Ie better to be
>>>> side by side etc, as you your visibility is better etc.
>>>
>>>"Bunching up" really has no value? Sorry, I disagree. I don't know what
>>>you consider "at speed," but in strong headwinds there can be value from
>>>drafting when riding quite slowly. Especially on our tandem, but also on
>>>my single, I've spent many miles towing riders into headwinds.
>>>
>>>But more to the point, the person complaining the most about this brags
>>>about roughly zero experience riding with others. His claim that one
>>>can't see the scenery is nonsense, as are his jabs about "butts in the
>>>air" and other offensive crap.
>>
>>I'm not complaining. I have nothing to complain about since I'm not so
>>stupid as to ride such that I can't see where I'm going.
>>
>>>Most of all, he's conclusively shown himself to be pathologically
>>>repulsed by human contact.
>>
>>Another nonsense strawman statement from RBT's master of nonsense
>>strawmen, although I am repulsed by the thought of having to hang
>>around with him and/or members of his small talk, gossiping bike club,
>>on a bike ride or anywhere else.
>>
>>>I suspect he's the only person here who has
>>>not frequently enjoyed the pleasure of (gasp!) conversation
>>
>>(Small talk, gossip)
>>
>>>with other
>>>people during bike rides.
>>
>>Other than my wife and a couple short rides with one of my kids or
>>grandkids, make that *never. I'm happy to sit for a while and
>>converse with a small group of people I know and like, but my bike
>>rides are not for socializing.
>>
>>>I ride for utility. I ride for exploration. I ride for exercise, and to
>>>challenge myself physically. I ride for solitude. But I also ride for
>>>the pleasure of socializing with others. For people of normal healthy
>>>psychology, that is a significant benefit.
>>
>>What would RBT's resident narcissist know about a normal healthy
>>psychology?
>>
>>>> This said while the rider may have been unwise, a Bollard is still a bad
>>>> idea as it can be hidden from view relatively easily. If they do need to
>>>> keep cars out planters ie large heavy wooden boxes with plants are probably
>>>> better for number of reasons.
>>>
>>>Agreed, bollards are almost always bad. Their intent is to prevent or
>>>dissuade motorists from entering bike facilities, but there are other
>>>ways that AASHTO
>>
>>(bureaucrats)
>>
>>>prefers. One is an island section of low shrubbery.
>>>Even if an out of control cyclists were to run into it, serious injury
>>>would be unlikely.
>>
>>I have no problem with that, but then I have no problem with bollards,
>>either.
>>>
>>>And if a bollard must be used, there are pavement markings that can give
>>>plenty of advanced warning to riders. But the crash I referred to was on
>>>a crushed limestone path where pavement stripes, etc. are not possible.
>>>Again, bad design.
>>
>>Ah yes, blame the bike path and the bollard for a stupid mistake made
>>by the bike rider.
>>
>>Maybe a sign that says, "please watch where you're going."
>
> The whole bollard thing seems at best a straw man story and at worst,
> simply a lie. Example, bollards in Thailand.
> https://www.zjeastsea.com/product-guidelines-bollard/
> https://www.dreamstime.com/parking-lot-thailand-parking-sign-empty-no-people-moveable-steel-fence-barrier-concrete-floor-use-parking-area-image108832374
> Can't see them? Then I suggest that you either so stupid or so blind
> that you certainly should not be allowed to ride a bicycle on public
> highways.
>
> Or maybe you have invisible bollards in the U.S. ?

More or less: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i_Cw0QJU8ro

Those are in the UK, but we have them here too. My wife's sister in law
ran a rental car into one.

On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 22:28:13 -0500, Radey Shouman
<shouman@comcast.net> wrote:

>John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 12:21:26 -0500, Catrike Rider
>> <soloman@drafting.not> wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 15 Nov 2023 11:21:55 -0500, Frank Krygowski
>>><frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On 11/15/2023 6:07 AM, Roger Merriman wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Roadies do have a habit of bunching up so are more prone to this, and
>>>>> unless you’re on the road at speed it really has no value. Ie better to be
>>>>> side by side etc, as you your visibility is better etc.
>>>>
>>>>"Bunching up" really has no value? Sorry, I disagree. I don't know what
>>>>you consider "at speed," but in strong headwinds there can be value from
>>>>drafting when riding quite slowly. Especially on our tandem, but also on
>>>>my single, I've spent many miles towing riders into headwinds.
>>>>
>>>>But more to the point, the person complaining the most about this brags
>>>>about roughly zero experience riding with others. His claim that one
>>>>can't see the scenery is nonsense, as are his jabs about "butts in the
>>>>air" and other offensive crap.
>>>
>>>I'm not complaining. I have nothing to complain about since I'm not so
>>>stupid as to ride such that I can't see where I'm going.
>>>
>>>>Most of all, he's conclusively shown himself to be pathologically
>>>>repulsed by human contact.
>>>
>>>Another nonsense strawman statement from RBT's master of nonsense
>>>strawmen, although I am repulsed by the thought of having to hang
>>>around with him and/or members of his small talk, gossiping bike club,
>>>on a bike ride or anywhere else.
>>>
>>>>I suspect he's the only person here who has
>>>>not frequently enjoyed the pleasure of (gasp!) conversation
>>>
>>>(Small talk, gossip)
>>>
>>>>with other
>>>>people during bike rides.
>>>
>>>Other than my wife and a couple short rides with one of my kids or
>>>grandkids, make that *never. I'm happy to sit for a while and
>>>converse with a small group of people I know and like, but my bike
>>>rides are not for socializing.
>>>
>>>>I ride for utility. I ride for exploration. I ride for exercise, and to
>>>>challenge myself physically. I ride for solitude. But I also ride for
>>>>the pleasure of socializing with others. For people of normal healthy
>>>>psychology, that is a significant benefit.
>>>
>>>What would RBT's resident narcissist know about a normal healthy
>>>psychology?
>>>
>>>>> This said while the rider may have been unwise, a Bollard is still a bad
>>>>> idea as it can be hidden from view relatively easily. If they do need to
>>>>> keep cars out planters ie large heavy wooden boxes with plants are probably
>>>>> better for number of reasons.
>>>>
>>>>Agreed, bollards are almost always bad. Their intent is to prevent or
>>>>dissuade motorists from entering bike facilities, but there are other
>>>>ways that AASHTO
>>>
>>>(bureaucrats)
>>>
>>>>prefers. One is an island section of low shrubbery.
>>>>Even if an out of control cyclists were to run into it, serious injury
>>>>would be unlikely.
>>>
>>>I have no problem with that, but then I have no problem with bollards,
>>>either.
>>>>
>>>>And if a bollard must be used, there are pavement markings that can give
>>>>plenty of advanced warning to riders. But the crash I referred to was on
>>>>a crushed limestone path where pavement stripes, etc. are not possible.
>>>>Again, bad design.
>>>
>>>Ah yes, blame the bike path and the bollard for a stupid mistake made
>>>by the bike rider.
>>>
>>>Maybe a sign that says, "please watch where you're going."
>>
>> The whole bollard thing seems at best a straw man story and at worst,
>> simply a lie. Example, bollards in Thailand.
>> https://www.zjeastsea.com/product-guidelines-bollard/
>> https://www.dreamstime.com/parking-lot-thailand-parking-sign-empty-no-people-moveable-steel-fence-barrier-concrete-floor-use-parking-area-image108832374
>> Can't see them? Then I suggest that you either so stupid or so blind
>> that you certainly should not be allowed to ride a bicycle on public
>> highways.
>>
>> Or maybe you have invisible bollards in the U.S. ?
>
>More or less: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i_Cw0QJU8ro
>
>Those are in the UK, but we have them here too. My wife's sister in law
>ran a rental car into one.

To be a rude, an example of a driver who doesn't understand how to
drive, at least in those circumstances. You drive up to the device,
the sensor detects you and the posts retract.

We have similar devices here. Parking lot gate. You pull up to the
booth, you pay the fee and the gate arm swings up and you drive
through. You don't try to squeeze through when the car in front of
yours pays and the arm swings up because it will "hit you on the
head".
--
Cheers,

John B.