The Carmichael Spin

[B. Lafferty]

"Carl Sundquist" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "B. Lafferty" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> > > > As I said earlier, I don't know if Obree invented or merely
> popularized
> > >
> > > > How these rules are interpreted can be quite delicate. Another
> > alternative
> > > > would be to use the Japanese Keirin Association approach where there
> is
> > no
> > > > questioning the spirit of the rules whatsoever.
> > >
> > > There ya go, have everyone in the TDF, Use Ganwell Pro or Nagasawa
steel
> > > framed bikes exactly equipped, and race the TDF, see who wins, be like
> an
> > > IROC race
> > >
> > > Dave
> >
> > Henri D. did exactly that in some pre-WWII years of the TdF. Lets make
> them
> > all ride Raleigh Pro bikes, circa 1980.
> >
>
> Didn't some of those bikes have bottom bracket problems where the 'CC' was
> cut out?


Don't know. Some of the bikes provided to our club by our sponsor Windsor
Bicycles (Mexican made in the same factory as Benotto) in the early 80s had
bb failures due to overheating of the shell when built. Quality was much
more hit or miss back then, even with "name" brands.

 

[Stewart Fleming]

B. Lafferty wrote:
> "John Everett" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>>On Sat, 05 Jun 2004 10:33:00 GMT, "B. Lafferty" <[email protected]>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>We'll have the answer to the question late on the afternoon of July 19th.
>>>
>>
>>What can we expect to learn on a rest day in Nîmes? ;-)
>
> Right you are. July 24th. Stage 19.

What was the question again?

 

[B. Lafferty]

"Stewart Fleming" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news[email protected]...
>
>
> B. Lafferty wrote:
> > "John Everett" <[email protected]> wrote in
message
> > news:[email protected]...
> >
> >>On Sat, 05 Jun 2004 10:33:00 GMT, "B. Lafferty" <[email protected]>
> >>wrote:
> >>
> >>>We'll have the answer to the question late on the afternoon of July
19th.
> >>>
> >>
> >>What can we expect to learn on a rest day in Nîmes? ;-)
> >
> > Right you are. July 24th. Stage 19.
>
> What was the question again?

Question? What question?

>

 

[Charles Hizark]

"Carl Sundquist" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> "Kyle Legate" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > > "TritonRider" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > news:[email protected]...
> > >>
> > >> The bike that Armstrong has dropped had been specially designed by
> > >> bike sponsor Trek and featured a narrower bottom bracket shell in an
> > >> effort to reduce the overall frontal area of rider and bike. "
> > >
> > Doesn't this violate the spirit of the UCI rules, which try to ensure that
> > every athlete competes using more or less the same equipment? By designing
> a
> > one-of-a-kind bike with a narrower BB shell, Trek is creating equipment
> that
> > gives Lance an unfair technological advantage.
>
> As I said earlier, I don't know if Obree invented or merely popularized
> narrow BBs more than 10 years ago, but the concept has been laid out on the
> table for all to use. If Obree can fabricate a bike out of junkyard parts,
> then why can't a large corporation create essentially the same thing?

I believe that Cinelli and or the Raleigh developed the narrow bottom
bracket concept for the 1980 Olympics....
>
> The intellectual value of (in this instance) the piece is common now.
>
> If the issue is production v. prototype then that is a hugely grey area,
> whether from a manufacturing POV or a 'spirit of the rules' POV.
>
> How these rules are interpreted can be quite delicate. Another alternative
> would be to use the Japanese Keirin Association approach where there is no
> questioning the spirit of the rules whatsoever.

 

[Charles Hizark]

"Carl Sundquist" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> "Kyle Legate" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > > "TritonRider" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > news:[email protected]...
> > >>
> > >> The bike that Armstrong has dropped had been specially designed by
> > >> bike sponsor Trek and featured a narrower bottom bracket shell in an
> > >> effort to reduce the overall frontal area of rider and bike. "
> > >
> > Doesn't this violate the spirit of the UCI rules, which try to ensure that
> > every athlete competes using more or less the same equipment? By designing
> a
> > one-of-a-kind bike with a narrower BB shell, Trek is creating equipment
> that
> > gives Lance an unfair technological advantage.
>
> As I said earlier, I don't know if Obree invented or merely popularized
> narrow BBs more than 10 years ago, but the concept has been laid out on the
> table for all to use. If Obree can fabricate a bike out of junkyard parts,
> then why can't a large corporation create essentially the same thing?

I believe that Cinelli and or the Raleigh developed the narrow bottom
bracket concept for the 1980 Olympics....
>
> The intellectual value of (in this instance) the piece is common now.
>
> If the issue is production v. prototype then that is a hugely grey area,
> whether from a manufacturing POV or a 'spirit of the rules' POV.
>
> How these rules are interpreted can be quite delicate. Another alternative
> would be to use the Japanese Keirin Association approach where there is no
> questioning the spirit of the rules whatsoever.

 

[Andy Coggan]

"Kyle Legate" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> > "TritonRider" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> >>
> >> The bike that Armstrong has dropped had been specially designed by
> >> bike sponsor Trek and featured a narrower bottom bracket shell in an
> >> effort to reduce the overall frontal area of rider and bike. "
> >
> Doesn't this violate the spirit of the UCI rules, which try to ensure that
> every athlete competes using more or less the same equipment? By designing
a
> one-of-a-kind bike with a narrower BB shell, Trek is creating equipment
that
> gives Lance an unfair technological advantage. Just another example of an
> organization that does all it can to bend the rules to its advantage
> (remember the Actovegin almost-scandal?) by playing in the grey area. Of
> course all teams do this, but it kind of destroys any moral hgh ground
USPS
> might try to claim for itself.

Troll.

Andy Coggan

 

[Kyle Legate]

Andy Coggan wrote:
>
> Troll.
>
Sharp eye.

 

[Ewoud Dronkert]

On Sat, 5 Jun 2004 14:57:16 +0200, Kyle Legate wrote:
> any moral hgh ground USPS might try to claim for itself.

Ha! Hgh, good one.