Hobby cyclists (long)

"Dukester" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

(long snip)

Sounds like you're the one who had an attitude and a high-and-mighty opinion
of yourself. Seemed to me that he just wanted to be friendly and you put up
a wall.

It also sounds like you're defensive about whatever it is you've done to
convince yourself you wouldn't be better off wearing a helmet.

Try lightening up.
--
Bob C.

"Of course it hurts. The trick is not minding that it hurts."
T. E. Lawrence (of Arabia)

"Dukester" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

"Oh, so you're _just_ commuting?"

For me, comparison of annual mileage usually shuts that one down pretty
fast.

RichC

LOL... "Fabrizio"

I'm makin' that my word of the day.

Peter Cole said:

I think there's a pretty large gap between recreational/utility
cyclists and racer (or wannabe) cyclists. Fact is, other than
turning the pedals, you two have little in common. Part of racers'
attitudes are, I think, due to anxiety over being mistaken for a
non-racing cyclist. The less secure they are with their racing
qualifications, the more snobbish they tend to be. The other thing is
social status. Cycling is often associated with poverty,
eccentricity, or some other undesirable characteristic. Hobby
cyclists, racer or otherwise, will often go to great lengths to
demonstrate that their cycling is a matter of choice, not necessity.
If your gear is a little shabby, you'll get the leper treatment.
Beware reverse snobbery though, it's all too tempting, and just as
bad.

I think you're right. This reminds me of women in wealthy neighborhoods in
southern CA who can't go out for a walk without their exercise clothes, Walkman,
and "Heavy Hands." Walking for transportation is for losers, but
exercise-walking is OK.

Among the racers I've known in the last 15 years, virtually none ride for
transportation. I had a discussion about this with a VA Tech cycling team
member. He was the only one who rode around town (in one of the most
bike-friendly towns in the US). The impression I got from him was, that riding
a bike around town is just uncool among college youth. But sport riding on the
open road is OK.

Matt O.

Matt O'Toole said:

Among the racers I've known in the last 15 years, virtually none ride

for

Quoted message said:

transportation. >
Matt O.

Probably right. And it is probably equally true for lots of serious
recreational riders. But what's wrong with that? I love riding my bike
fast alone or in a group. I also love my bike itself which is very non
utilitarian. It is a pure racer and I have no interest in using it to
accomplish chores.

To me this is pretty much the same thing as folks who play soccer not
wanting to kick the ball around on the way to the grocery store. We
enjoy the sport and not necessarily any of the other things that can be
done on a bike.

But that said it certainly doesn't mean that my preferences for using
the bike my way are any better (or worse) than any body else's.

Matt O'Toole said:

Quoted message said:

I think there's a pretty large gap between recreational/utility
cyclists and racer (or wannabe) cyclists. Fact is, other than
turning the pedals, you two have little in common. Part of racers'
attitudes are, I think, due to anxiety over being mistaken for a
non-racing cyclist. The less secure they are with their racing
qualifications, the more snobbish they tend to be. The other thing
is social status. Cycling is often associated with poverty,
eccentricity, or some other undesirable characteristic. Hobby
cyclists, racer or otherwise, will often go to great lengths to
demonstrate that their cycling is a matter of choice, not
necessity. If your gear is a little shabby, you'll get the leper
treatment. Beware reverse snobbery though, it's all too tempting,
and just as bad.

Quoted message said:

I think you're right. This reminds me of women in wealthy
neighborhoods in southern CA who can't go out for a walk without
their exercise clothes, Walkman, and "Heavy Hands." Walking for
transportation is for losers, but exercise-walking is OK.

Quoted message said:

Among the racers I've known in the last 15 years, virtually none
ride for transportation. I had a discussion about this with a VA
Tech cycling team member. He was the only one who rode around town
(in one of the most bike-friendly towns in the US). The impression
I got from him was, that riding a bike around town is just uncool
among college youth. But sport riding on the open road is OK.

On that line, here's an old one that's been around for a long time:

http://draco.acs.uci.edu/rbfaq/FAQ/6.1.html

It's more widespread that you depict it.

[email hidden]

gds <[email hidden]> wrote:
:> jhas wrote:
:> >>
:> > I see this sort of thing all the time.
:>
:> <snip>
:> > He had an empty bike rack on his car, so as I
:> > pulled to a stop I said "good morning!" He didn't even look at me.
:> > Instead, he tilted his head to get a good read of my down tube and
:> > then, presumably because my bike wasn't worthy of a conversation,
:> > he just got into his car.
:>
:>
:> Interesting! It's always the other guy who has the attitude.
:> I read your comments to mean that you only said hello because he had
:> a bike rack on his car. Does that mean that folks without bike racks
:> don't warrant a polite hello?
:> Attitude comes in lots of flavors.

Sounds like a lot of folks here ought to see the movie "Crash!"

"Peter Cole" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >

Quoted message said:

I think there's a pretty large gap between recreational/utility cyclists
and racer (or wannabe) cyclists. Fact is, other than turning the
pedals, you two have little in common. Part of racers' attitudes are, I
think, due to anxiety over being mistaken for a non-racing cyclist. The
less secure they are with their racing qualifications, the more snobbish
they tend to be. The other thing is social status. Cycling is often
associated with poverty, eccentricity, or some other undesirable
characteristic. Hobby cyclists, racer or otherwise, will often go to
great lengths to demonstrate that their cycling is a matter of choice,
not necessity. If your gear is a little shabby, you'll get the leper
treatment. Beware reverse snobbery though, it's all too tempting, and
just as bad.

Great! I always enjoy the insight in your posts and this one was no
different. I never thought about this kind of disparity before even though
both of were cycling but it makes perfect sense. I wonder what the
conversation would have been (or _if_ it would have been) if I had been
riding my fendered Schwinn Crisscross?

Cheers!
Duke

....that's an obtuse conclusion.

jhas said:

I see this sort of thing all the time. People look first to

see what

Quoted message said:

brand of bike you are on. Last week I was riding to work

(16 miles

Quoted message said:

each way, but who's counting?), and I had stopped for a

light. A guy

Quoted message said:

at the nearby filling station was just finishing fueling up

his Volvo

Quoted message said:

wagon as I rode up. He had an empty bike rack on his car,

so as I

Quoted message said:

pulled to a stop I said "good morning!" He didn't even look

at me.

Quoted message said:

Instead, he tilted his head to get a good read of my down

tube and

Quoted message said:

then, presumably because my bike wasn't worthy of a

conversation, he

Quoted message said:

just got into his car.

Yeah, there's some snoot in all sports and it's definitely
true I get a different reaction when I'm dressed in sweats and
an old windbreaker on the old "bad weather" bike than when I'm
in black shorts and a bike club jersey on my nicer road bike.

That said, sometimes people are checking out the bike as a way
of starting conversation. On my commuter bike, people will ask
about the generator, for example. They are only mildly
curious -- it's just a converation starter.

The O.P. should just lighten up. If somebody else judges you
by how nice a bike you are riding, so what? Their attitude is
their loss, not yours. The world is, unfortunately, full of
A**h***s, and bike snobs are a mild, relatively harmless
variety in the grand scheme of A**h***dom..

That said, I think the O.P.'s tormentor is probably a nice
enough guy with imperfect social skills. I'd guess he was
trying to be friendly, but he was just very clumsy about it.
The O.P.'s attitude probably wasn't helping any.

--
Mike Kruger
Bike Chicago e-mail list info:
http://www.geocities.com/bvonmoss/bikechicago.html

Matt O'Toole said:

Among the racers I've known in the last 15 years, virtually

none ride

Quoted message said:

for transportation. I had a discussion about this with a VA

Tech

Quoted message said:

cycling team member. He was the only one who rode around

town (in

Quoted message said:

one of the most bike-friendly towns in the US). The

impression I got

Quoted message said:

from him was, that riding a bike around town is just uncool

among

Quoted message said:

college youth. But sport riding on the open road is OK.

Yeah. Commuting miles are "junk miles", not "real miles".
Fabrizio can explain.

There's some truth to this attitude from the point of view of
pure conditioning and training, as my commute features a lot
of stop lights and isn't really a training ride. But then the
world isn't built around conditioning and training --
especially since I'm not "training" for anything.

--
Mike Kruger
Bike Chicago e-mail list info:
http://www.geocities.com/bvonmoss/bikechicago.html

Mike Kruger <[email hidden]> wrote:
:> Matt O'Toole wrote:
:> >
:> > Among the racers I've known in the last 15 years, virtually
:> none ride
:> > for transportation. I had a discussion about this with a VA
:> Tech
:> > cycling team member. He was the only one who rode around
:> town (in
:> > one of the most bike-friendly towns in the US). The
:> impression I got
:> > from him was, that riding a bike around town is just uncool
:> among
:> > college youth. But sport riding on the open road is OK.
:> >
:> Yeah. Commuting miles are "junk miles", not "real miles".
:> Fabrizio can explain.
:>
:> There's some truth to this attitude from the point of view of
:> pure conditioning and training, as my commute features a lot
:> of stop lights and isn't really a training ride. But then the
:> world isn't built around conditioning and training --
:> especially since I'm not "training" for anything.

Hmm...I guess I'm a bike snob....everytime I ride, I train....what am I
training for? My next ride!

Roger Zoul said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Among the racers I've known in the last 15 years, virtually none
ride for transportation. I had a discussion about this with a VA
Tech cycling team member. He was the only one who rode around
town (in one of the most bike-friendly towns in the US). The
impression I got from him was, that riding a bike around town is
just uncool among college youth. But sport riding on the open
road is OK.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Yeah. Commuting miles are "junk miles", not "real miles". Fabrizio
can explain.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

There's some truth to this attitude from the point of view of pure
conditioning and training, as my commute features a lot of stop
lights and isn't really a training ride. But then the world isn't
built around conditioning and training -- especially since I'm not
"training" for anything.

Quoted message said:

Hmm... I guess I'm a bike snob... every time I ride, I train... what
am I training for? My next ride!

So when will you go on a real ride, the one for which you seem to be
perpetually training? Somewhere in life there should be a real
experience, not just the anticipation of one. I suppose you are also
preparing for life, day by day. If that is the method, I think you
might be missing the main event.

[email hidden]

Quoted message said:

Roger Zoul writes:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Hmm... I guess I'm a bike snob... every time I ride, I train... what
am I training for? My next ride!

So when will you go on a real ride, the one for which you seem to be
perpetually training? Somewhere in life there should be a real
experience, not just the anticipation of one. I suppose you are also
preparing for life, day by day. If that is the method, I think you
might be missing the main event.

Wow. Pompous, judgmental AND condescending in one short paragraph. Well
done, JB.

gds said:

Matt O'Toole said:

Among the racers I've known in the last 15 years, virtually none

ride

Quoted message said:

for

Quoted message said:

transportation. >
Matt O.

Probably right. And it is probably equally true for lots of serious
recreational riders. But what's wrong with that? I love riding my

bike

Quoted message said:

fast alone or in a group. I also love my bike itself which is very

non

Quoted message said:

utilitarian. It is a pure racer and I have no interest in using it to
accomplish chores.

To me this is pretty much the same thing as folks who play s occer

not

Quoted message said:

wanting to kick the ball around on the way to the grocery store. We
enjoy the sport and not necessarily any of the other things that can

be

Quoted message said:

done on a bike.

Riding a bike is an end in itself. You don't need a race, or
a destination of any sort to justify it. But you sure can kill a lot
of birds with that stone.

If folks enjoy riding bikes, I'd counsel em to do it as much
as possible. Transportational cycling is a great way to incorporate
fun, healthy sh*$ into your everyday routine. If folks don't enjoy
riding bikes, I'd counsel em to stop riding bikes. Remember: life
is short.

Quoted message said:

But that said it certainly doesn't mean that my preferences for using
the bike my way are any better (or worse) than any body e lse's.

I believe my way is better than some others. But I acknowledge
the likelihood that there are other ways out there better than
mine, and I just haven't figured them out yet, and may never.

Robert

Life's not short. Life is loooonnng.
--Chris Rock

e

In article <[email hidden]>,

Claire Petersky said:

"Tom Keats" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I've also been drawn into chat that goes on a little too long,
by people apparently having mental health issues, on public
transit buses. So maybe the guy was just lonely and socially
awkward, and needed some human-to-human contact and some
charitable regard. If that's the case, you did a good deed.
I note you were quite patient and polite with him.

God, I hope you're all charitable to me, too, on the road, for the
equivalent reasons.

Heck, I'd probably offer ya a peanut butter &
cherry pie filling sandwich, if I've got a
spare one :-)

cheers,
Tom

--
-- Nothing is safe from me.
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca

In article <1O7ie.1378465$6l.1282959@pd7tw2no>,

Fabrizio Mazzoleni said:

"jhas" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >

Quoted message said:

I see this sort of thing all the time. People look first to see what
brand of bike you are on.

That's correct.

If you don't make the effort why should someone like
me be bothered with your type?

We should afford some compassion and understanding for
Fabrizio, because of his tragic circumstances. He was
orphaned as a child, in a plane crash in the darkest
depths of Africa, where he was rescued and raised by
Belgian ex-patriots who forced him to cycle competitively.

cheers,
Tom

--
-- Nothing is safe from me.
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca

On Mon, 16 May 2005 22:34:38 -0500, "Mike Kruger" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Matt O'Toole said:

Among the racers I've known in the last 15 years, virtually

none ride

Quoted message said:

for transportation. I had a discussion about this with a VA

Tech

Quoted message said:

cycling team member. He was the only one who rode around

town (in

Quoted message said:

one of the most bike-friendly towns in the US). The

impression I got

Quoted message said:

from him was, that riding a bike around town is just uncool

among

Quoted message said:

college youth. But sport riding on the open road is OK.

Yeah. Commuting miles are "junk miles", not "real miles".
Fabrizio can explain.

There's some truth to this attitude from the point of view of
pure conditioning and training, as my commute features a lot
of stop lights and isn't really a training ride. But then the
world isn't built around conditioning and training --
especially since I'm not "training" for anything.

Commutes aren't even "base miles?"

Hmmmm. True, not the most "efficient" training mileage, but that isn't a factor
for anyone who isn't already expending as much as he can recover from before the
next ride. Of course, Fabs would be.

Ron

psycholist said:

"Dukester" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

(long snip)

Sounds like you're the one who had an attitude and a high-and-mighty

opinion

Quoted message said:

of yourself. Seemed to me that he just wanted to be friendly and you

put up

Quoted message said:

a wall.

It also sounds like you're defensive about whatever it is you've done

to

Quoted message said:

convince yourself you wouldn't be better off wearing a helmet.

Try lightening up.

Your words "sounds like" are a bit ironic. Specifically, you're
reading a summary transcript of the conversation, and disagreeing with
Duke's interpretation. My money's on Duke; he was actually there.

Communication is much more than just words. As a simple example, any
brief sentence (for example, "Nice bike"😉 can be delivered with
worshipful sincerity, or intense sarcasm, or anything in between just
by changing the tone. And Duke was there to hear the tone, plus read
the body language.

I'd assume everyone's met people who are immediately intrusive and
obnoxious. Most of them don't deserve mention on the internet - the
encounters just aren't that important. But this guy's apparent scorn
of utility cycling (and without a special hat!!) justified Duke's post,
IMO.

- Frank Krygowski