In another forum, someone postulated that integrated brake & shift
levers (like STI) were the most significant bit of racing technology
ever designed for increasing speed. But that claim met with little
respect. One skeptic noted that there was no great increase in average
race speeds in Paris-Roubaix, Milan-San Remo, Tour of Flanders, Leige- Bastogne-Leige or Giro de Lobardia since about 1960, including during
the era of STI adoption. By contrast, in the years 1930 - 1960 average speeds increased around 30%. (Note: That does not mean that STI is not tactically beneficial. That's a separate issue.)
But if not STI, what were the most significant tech developments
regarding bicycle race speeds?
Here’s my list:
Pedals & cranks, as opposed to scooting a “hobby horse” via feet on the ground.
Tubular metal frames and wire tension (spoke) wheels.
Large driven wheels, to give a much higher effective “gear.” (The Ordinary or Penny Farthing)
The “Safety Bicycle” with a diamond frame and chain drive, getting the rider down lower, to greatly reduce aero drag as well as pitchover on braking.
Pneumatic tires. Hard tired “safeties” had terrible rolling resistance.
The handlebar stem, invented by the heroic Major Taylor, to allow a much
more aero riding position.
Rim brakes, by whatever mechanism, as opposed to spoon brakes acting on
a tire.
Multiple gears, by whatever mechanism.
The derailleur, making multiple gears easy to shift, customizable and
light weight.
Recumbent geometry in some situations. Recumbents seem to be slower
uphill, but tend to be faster on level or downhills
Fully enclosed streamlined aero shells tremendously increased speed, but
at a great reduction in versatility and practicality.
Beyond those, ISTM that most developments have been chasing ever
diminishing returns.
In another forum, someone postulated that integrated brake & shift
levers (like STI) were the most significant bit of racing technology
ever designed for increasing speed. But that claim met with little
respect. One skeptic noted that there was no great increase in average
race speeds in Paris-Roubaix, Milan-San Remo, Tour of Flanders, Leige- Bastogne-Leige or Giro de Lobardia since about 1960, including during
the era of STI adoption. By contrast, in the years 1930 - 1960 average speeds increased around 30%. (Note: That does not mean that STI is not tactically beneficial. That's a separate issue.)
But if not STI, what were the most significant tech developments
regarding bicycle race speeds?
Here’s my list:
Pedals & cranks, as opposed to scooting a “hobby horse” via feet on the ground.
Tubular metal frames and wire tension (spoke) wheels.
Large driven wheels, to give a much higher effective “gear.” (The Ordinary or Penny Farthing)
The “Safety Bicycle” with a diamond frame and chain drive, getting the rider down lower, to greatly reduce aero drag as well as pitchover on braking.
Pneumatic tires. Hard tired “safeties” had terrible rolling resistance.
The handlebar stem, invented by the heroic Major Taylor, to allow a much
more aero riding position.
Rim brakes, by whatever mechanism, as opposed to spoon brakes acting on
a tire.
Multiple gears, by whatever mechanism.
The derailleur, making multiple gears easy to shift, customizable and
light weight.
Recumbent geometry in some situations. Recumbents seem to be slower
uphill, but tend to be faster on level or downhills
Fully enclosed streamlined aero shells tremendously increased speed, but
at a great reduction in versatility and practicality.
Beyond those, ISTM that most developments have been chasing ever
diminishing returns.
In another forum, someone postulated that integrated brake &
shift levers (like STI) were the most significant bit of
racing technology ever designed for increasing speed. But
that claim met with little respect. One skeptic noted that
there was no great increase in average race speeds in Paris-
Roubaix, Milan-San Remo, Tour of Flanders, Leige-Bastogne-
Leige or Giro de Lobardia since about 1960, including during
the era of STI adoption. By contrast, in the years 1930 -
1960 average speeds increased around 30%. (Note: That does
not mean that STI is not tactically beneficial. That's a
separate issue.)
But if not STI, what were the most significant tech
developments regarding bicycle race speeds?
Here’s my list:
Pedals & cranks, as opposed to scooting a “hobby horse” via
feet on the ground.
Tubular metal frames and wire tension (spoke) wheels.
Large driven wheels, to give a much higher effective
“gear.” (The Ordinary or Penny Farthing)
The “Safety Bicycle” with a diamond frame and chain drive,
getting the rider down lower, to greatly reduce aero drag as
well as pitchover on braking.
Pneumatic tires. Hard tired “safeties” had terrible rolling
resistance.
The handlebar stem, invented by the heroic Major Taylor, to
allow a much more aero riding position.
Rim brakes, by whatever mechanism, as opposed to spoon
brakes acting on a tire.
Multiple gears, by whatever mechanism.
The derailleur, making multiple gears easy to shift,
customizable and light weight.
Recumbent geometry in some situations. Recumbents seem to be
slower uphill, but tend to be faster on level or downhills
Fully enclosed streamlined aero shells tremendously
increased speed, but at a great reduction in versatility and
practicality.
Beyond those, ISTM that most developments have been chasing
ever diminishing returns.
On 1/24/2025 2:33 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
In another forum, someone postulated that integrated brake & shift
levers (like STI) were the most significant bit of racing technology
ever designed for increasing speed. But that claim met with little
respect. One skeptic noted that there was no great increase in average
race speeds in Paris-Roubaix, Milan-San Remo, Tour of Flanders, Leige-
Bastogne-Leige or Giro de Lobardia since about 1960, including during
the era of STI adoption. By contrast, in the years 1930 - 1960 average
speeds increased around 30%. (Note: That does not mean that STI is not
tactically beneficial. That's a separate issue.)
I'm going to take issue with this claim. The speeds have been showing a steady increase. "Great" increase is somewhat subjective, and taking
into account the general "square-law effect" with going faster on a
bicycle, a increase of 1MPH from 28 to 29 MPH could indeed be considered
a "great" increase over going from 25 to 26 MPH.
Granted, this has little to do with integrated shifting, my nit is over
the claim "there was no great increase in average race speeds....since
about 1960"
from wikipedia, the top ten fastest editions of PAris-Roubaix were:
Mathieu van der Poel (NED) 47.80 km/h (29.70 mph) 2024
Mathieu van der Poel (NED) 46.84 km/h (29.11 mph) 2023
Dylan van Baarle (NED) 45.79 km/h (28.45 mph) 2022
Greg Van Avermaet (BEL) 45.20 km/h (28.09 mph) 2017
Peter Post (NED) 45.13 km/h (28.04 mph) 1964
Fabian Cancellara (SUI) 44.19 km/h (27.46 mph) 2013
Rik Van Steenbergen (BEL) 43.99 km/h (27.33 mph) 1948
Mathew Hayman (AUS) 43.91 km/h (27.28 mph) 2016
Peter Sagan (SVK) 43.55 km/h (27.06 mph) 2018
Pino Cerami (BEL) 43.54 km/h (27.05 mph) 1960
Out of the top ten in the 100+ year history of the race, 6 are within
the past ten years. I challenge anyone to argue against a 10% increase
since Sagan in 2018 to VDP in 2024 as anything but a "great" increase.
Milan/San Remo shows a similar trend. From https://www.procyclingstats.com/race/milano-sanremo/results/fastest-editions
:
Edition Year Avg. speed
115 2024 46.11
114 2023 45.773
113 2022 45.331
97 2006 45.268
112 2021 45.06
100 2009 44.421
98 2007 43.665
110 2019 43.625
104 2013 43.577
102 2011 43.486
It certainly isn't due to drivetrain technology, I'll suggest the trend towards wider tires has a great deal to do with it, but more so training
and diet technological advances.
But if not STI, what were the most significant tech developments
regarding bicycle race speeds?
Here’s my list:
Pedals & cranks, as opposed to scooting a “hobby horse” via feet on the >> ground.
Tubular metal frames and wire tension (spoke) wheels.
Large driven wheels, to give a much higher effective “gear.” (The
Ordinary or Penny Farthing)
The “Safety Bicycle” with a diamond frame and chain drive, getting the >> rider down lower, to greatly reduce aero drag as well as pitchover on
braking.
Pneumatic tires. Hard tired “safeties” had terrible rolling resistance. >>
The handlebar stem, invented by the heroic Major Taylor, to allow a much
more aero riding position.
Rim brakes, by whatever mechanism, as opposed to spoon brakes acting on
a tire.
Multiple gears, by whatever mechanism.
The derailleur, making multiple gears easy to shift, customizable and
light weight.
Recumbent geometry in some situations. Recumbents seem to be slower
uphill, but tend to be faster on level or downhills
Fully enclosed streamlined aero shells tremendously increased speed, but
at a great reduction in versatility and practicality.
Beyond those, ISTM that most developments have been chasing ever
diminishing returns.
Zen Cycle <[email protected]> wrote:
On 1/24/2025 2:33 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:Though it has ment that groupsets manufacturers do produce/provide for the >Pros some truly massive chain rings I don�t spin out 46/11 on the flat, and >gravity is my friend on the downs being on the heavy side!
In another forum, someone postulated that integrated brake & shift
levers (like STI) were the most significant bit of racing technology
ever designed for increasing speed. But that claim met with little
respect. One skeptic noted that there was no great increase in average
race speeds in Paris-Roubaix, Milan-San Remo, Tour of Flanders, Leige-
Bastogne-Leige or Giro de Lobardia since about 1960, including during
the era of STI adoption. By contrast, in the� years 1930 - 1960 average
speeds increased around 30%. (Note: That does not mean that STI is not
tactically beneficial. That's a separate issue.)
I'm going to take issue with this claim. The speeds have been showing a
steady increase. "Great" increase is somewhat subjective, and taking
into account the general "square-law effect" with going faster on a
bicycle, a increase of 1MPH from 28 to 29 MPH could indeed be considered
a "great" increase over going from 25 to 26 MPH.
Granted, this has little to do with integrated shifting, my nit is over
the claim "there was no great increase in average race speeds....since
about 1960"
from wikipedia, the top ten fastest editions of PAris-Roubaix were:
Mathieu van der Poel (NED) 47.80 km/h (29.70 mph) 2024
Mathieu van der Poel (NED) 46.84 km/h (29.11 mph) 2023
Dylan van Baarle (NED) 45.79 km/h (28.45 mph) 2022
Greg Van Avermaet (BEL) 45.20 km/h (28.09 mph) 2017
Peter Post (NED) 45.13 km/h (28.04 mph) 1964
Fabian Cancellara (SUI) 44.19 km/h (27.46 mph) 2013
Rik Van Steenbergen (BEL) 43.99 km/h (27.33 mph) 1948
Mathew Hayman (AUS) 43.91 km/h (27.28 mph) 2016
Peter Sagan (SVK) 43.55 km/h (27.06 mph) 2018
Pino Cerami (BEL) 43.54 km/h (27.05 mph) 1960
Out of the top ten in the 100+ year history of the race, 6 are within
the past ten years. I challenge anyone to argue against a 10% increase
since Sagan in 2018 to VDP in 2024 as anything but a "great" increase.
Milan/San Remo shows a similar trend. From
https://www.procyclingstats.com/race/milano-sanremo/results/fastest-editions >> :
Edition Year Avg. speed
115 2024 46.11
114 2023 45.773
113 2022 45.331
97 2006 45.268
112 2021 45.06
100 2009 44.421
98 2007 43.665
110 2019 43.625
104 2013 43.577
102 2011 43.486
It certainly isn't due to drivetrain technology, I'll suggest the trend
towards wider tires has a great deal to do with it, but more so training
and diet technological advances.
Roger Merriman
But if not STI, what were the most significant tech developments
regarding bicycle race speeds?
Here�s my list:
Pedals & cranks, as opposed to scooting a �hobby horse� via feet on the
ground.
Tubular metal frames and wire tension (spoke) wheels.
Large driven wheels, to give a much higher effective �gear.� (The
Ordinary or Penny Farthing)
The �Safety Bicycle� with a diamond frame and chain drive, getting the
rider down lower, to greatly reduce aero drag as well as pitchover on
braking.
Pneumatic tires. Hard tired �safeties� had terrible rolling resistance.
The handlebar stem, invented by the heroic Major Taylor, to allow a much >>> more aero riding position.
Rim brakes, by whatever mechanism, as opposed to spoon brakes acting on
a tire.
Multiple gears, by whatever mechanism.
The derailleur, making multiple gears easy to shift, customizable and
light weight.
Recumbent geometry in some situations. Recumbents seem to be slower
uphill, but tend to be faster on level or downhills
Fully enclosed streamlined aero shells tremendously increased speed, but >>> at a great reduction in versatility and practicality.
Beyond those, ISTM that most developments have been chasing ever
diminishing returns.
In another forum, someone postulated that integrated brake & shift
levers (like STI) were the most significant bit of racing technology
ever designed for increasing speed. But that claim met with little
respect. One skeptic noted that there was no great increase in average
race speeds in Paris-Roubaix, Milan-San Remo, Tour of Flanders, >Leige-Bastogne-Leige or Giro de Lobardia since about 1960, including
during the era of STI adoption. By contrast, in the years 1930 - 1960 >average speeds increased around 30%. (Note: That does not mean that STI
is not tactically beneficial. That's a separate issue.)
But if not STI, what were the most significant tech developments
regarding bicycle race speeds?
Here�s my list:
Pedals & cranks, as opposed to scooting a �hobby horse� via feet on the >ground.
Tubular metal frames and wire tension (spoke) wheels.
Large driven wheels, to give a much higher effective �gear.� (The
Ordinary or Penny Farthing)
The �Safety Bicycle� with a diamond frame and chain drive, getting the
rider down lower, to greatly reduce aero drag as well as pitchover on >braking.
Pneumatic tires. Hard tired �safeties� had terrible rolling resistance.
The handlebar stem, invented by the heroic Major Taylor, to allow a much
more aero riding position.
Rim brakes, by whatever mechanism, as opposed to spoon brakes acting on
a tire.
Multiple gears, by whatever mechanism.
The derailleur, making multiple gears easy to shift, customizable and
light weight.
Recumbent geometry in some situations. Recumbents seem to be slower
uphill, but tend to be faster on level or downhills
Fully enclosed streamlined aero shells tremendously increased speed, but
at a great reduction in versatility and practicality.
Beyond those, ISTM that most developments have been chasing ever
diminishing returns.
In another forum, someone postulated that integrated brake & shift
levers (like STI) were the most significant bit of racing technology
ever designed for increasing speed. But that claim met with little
respect. One skeptic noted that there was no great increase in average
race speeds in Paris-Roubaix, Milan-San Remo, Tour of Flanders, Leige-Bastogne-Leige or Giro de Lobardia since about 1960, including
during the era of STI adoption. By contrast, in the years 1930 - 1960 average speeds increased around 30%. (Note: That does not mean that STI
is not tactically beneficial. That's a separate issue.)
But if not STI, what were the most significant tech developments
regarding bicycle race speeds?
Here’s my list:
Pedals & cranks, as opposed to scooting a “hobby horse” via feet on the ground.
Tubular metal frames and wire tension (spoke) wheels.
Large driven wheels, to give a much higher effective “gear.” (The Ordinary or Penny Farthing)
The “Safety Bicycle” with a diamond frame and chain drive, getting the rider down lower, to greatly reduce aero drag as well as pitchover on braking.
Pneumatic tires. Hard tired “safeties” had terrible rolling resistance.
The handlebar stem, invented by the heroic Major Taylor, to allow a much
more aero riding position.
Rim brakes, by whatever mechanism, as opposed to spoon brakes acting on
a tire.
Multiple gears, by whatever mechanism.
The derailleur, making multiple gears easy to shift, customizable and
light weight.
Recumbent geometry in some situations. Recumbents seem to be slower
uphill, but tend to be faster on level or downhills
Fully enclosed streamlined aero shells tremendously increased speed, but
at a great reduction in versatility and practicality.
Beyond those, ISTM that most developments have been chasing ever
diminishing returns.
Frank Krygowski <[email protected]> wrote:
In another forum, someone postulated that integrated brake & shiftOn a broader point bit like disks eventually coming to road, MTB had if not integrated brakes and shift levers that one didn’t need to move one’s hands
levers (like STI) were the most significant bit of racing technology
ever designed for increasing speed. But that claim met with little
respect. One skeptic noted that there was no great increase in average
race speeds in Paris-Roubaix, Milan-San Remo, Tour of Flanders,
Leige-Bastogne-Leige or Giro de Lobardia since about 1960, including
during the era of STI adoption. By contrast, in the years 1930 - 1960
average speeds increased around 30%. (Note: That does not mean that STI
is not tactically beneficial. That's a separate issue.)
or even shift finger positions, with thumb shifters.
Ie it was being done on a related design so was inevitable just matter of when.
But if not STI, what were the most significant tech developments
regarding bicycle race speeds?
Probably that one actually I believe that Penny farthings could shift,
Here’s my list:
Pedals & cranks, as opposed to scooting a “hobby horse” via feet on the >> ground.
where raced around Herne Hill which is old ish Velodrome in East London.
And they certainly could shift probably the biggest jump.
Don’t get me wrong been lots of improvements, some have been speed by default even in the 90’s MTB didn’t really last long in races be that frame/components etc. be that getting a double puncture, loosing the chain
or something bending/snapping!
That’s certainly come a long way racers now expect their bikes to last the race and even over multiple runs!
Tubular metal frames and wire tension (spoke) wheels.I believe that bikes went to cranks as they didn’t have anything drive chain as such yet.
Large driven wheels, to give a much higher effective “gear.” (The
Ordinary or Penny Farthing)
The “Safety Bicycle” with a diamond frame and chain drive, getting the >> rider down lower, to greatly reduce aero drag as well as pitchover onRoger Merriman
braking.
Pneumatic tires. Hard tired “safeties” had terrible rolling resistance. >>7
The handlebar stem, invented by the heroic Major Taylor, to allow a much
more aero riding position.
Rim brakes, by whatever mechanism, as opposed to spoon brakes acting on
a tire.
Multiple gears, by whatever mechanism.
The derailleur, making multiple gears easy to shift, customizable and
light weight.
Recumbent geometry in some situations. Recumbents seem to be slower
uphill, but tend to be faster on level or downhills
Fully enclosed streamlined aero shells tremendously increased speed, but
at a great reduction in versatility and practicality.
Beyond those, ISTM that most developments have been chasing ever
diminishing returns.
On 24 Jan 2025 23:51:10 GMT, Roger Merriman <[email protected]> wrote:
Zen Cycle <[email protected]> wrote:
On 1/24/2025 2:33 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:Though it has ment that groupsets manufacturers do produce/provide for the >> Pros some truly massive chain rings I dont spin out 46/11 on the flat, and >> gravity is my friend on the downs being on the heavy side!
In another forum, someone postulated that integrated brake & shift
levers (like STI) were the most significant bit of racing technology
ever designed for increasing speed. But that claim met with little
respect. One skeptic noted that there was no great increase in average >>>> race speeds in Paris-Roubaix, Milan-San Remo, Tour of Flanders, Leige- >>>> Bastogne-Leige or Giro de Lobardia since about 1960, including during
the era of STI adoption. By contrast, in the years 1930 - 1960 average >>>> speeds increased around 30%. (Note: That does not mean that STI is not >>>> tactically beneficial. That's a separate issue.)
I'm going to take issue with this claim. The speeds have been showing a
steady increase. "Great" increase is somewhat subjective, and taking
into account the general "square-law effect" with going faster on a
bicycle, a increase of 1MPH from 28 to 29 MPH could indeed be considered >>> a "great" increase over going from 25 to 26 MPH.
Granted, this has little to do with integrated shifting, my nit is over
the claim "there was no great increase in average race speeds....since
about 1960"
from wikipedia, the top ten fastest editions of PAris-Roubaix were:
Mathieu van der Poel (NED) 47.80 km/h (29.70 mph) 2024
Mathieu van der Poel (NED) 46.84 km/h (29.11 mph) 2023
Dylan van Baarle (NED) 45.79 km/h (28.45 mph) 2022
Greg Van Avermaet (BEL) 45.20 km/h (28.09 mph) 2017
Peter Post (NED) 45.13 km/h (28.04 mph) 1964
Fabian Cancellara (SUI) 44.19 km/h (27.46 mph) 2013
Rik Van Steenbergen (BEL) 43.99 km/h (27.33 mph) 1948
Mathew Hayman (AUS) 43.91 km/h (27.28 mph) 2016
Peter Sagan (SVK) 43.55 km/h (27.06 mph) 2018
Pino Cerami (BEL) 43.54 km/h (27.05 mph) 1960
Out of the top ten in the 100+ year history of the race, 6 are within
the past ten years. I challenge anyone to argue against a 10% increase
since Sagan in 2018 to VDP in 2024 as anything but a "great" increase.
Milan/San Remo shows a similar trend. From
https://www.procyclingstats.com/race/milano-sanremo/results/fastest-editions
:
Edition Year Avg. speed
115 2024 46.11
114 2023 45.773
113 2022 45.331
97 2006 45.268
112 2021 45.06
100 2009 44.421
98 2007 43.665
110 2019 43.625
104 2013 43.577
102 2011 43.486
It certainly isn't due to drivetrain technology, I'll suggest the trend
towards wider tires has a great deal to do with it, but more so training >>> and diet technological advances.
Roger Merriman
But if not STI, what were the most significant tech developments
regarding bicycle race speeds?
Heres my list:
Pedals & cranks, as opposed to scooting a hobby horse via feet on the >>>> ground.
Tubular metal frames and wire tension (spoke) wheels.
Large driven wheels, to give a much higher effective gear. (The
Ordinary or Penny Farthing)
The Safety Bicycle with a diamond frame and chain drive, getting the >>>> rider down lower, to greatly reduce aero drag as well as pitchover on
braking.
Pneumatic tires. Hard tired safeties had terrible rolling resistance. >>>>
The handlebar stem, invented by the heroic Major Taylor, to allow a much >>>> more aero riding position.
Rim brakes, by whatever mechanism, as opposed to spoon brakes acting on >>>> a tire.
Multiple gears, by whatever mechanism.
The derailleur, making multiple gears easy to shift, customizable and
light weight.
Recumbent geometry in some situations. Recumbents seem to be slower
uphill, but tend to be faster on level or downhills
Fully enclosed streamlined aero shells tremendously increased speed, but >>>> at a great reduction in versatility and practicality.
Beyond those, ISTM that most developments have been chasing ever
diminishing returns.
46 is massive? I have a 53, also with an 11.. Although I don't use
that anymore except in a downhill. Granted that I have a 26 inch
wheel.
--
C'est bon
Soloman
On 1/24/2025 6:48 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
On Fri, 24 Jan 2025 14:33:53 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
In another forum, someone postulated that integrated brake & shift
levers (like STI) were the most significant bit of racing technology
ever designed for increasing speed. But that claim met with little
respect. One skeptic noted that there was no great increase in average
race speeds in Paris-Roubaix, Milan-San Remo, Tour of Flanders,
Leige-Bastogne-Leige or Giro de Lobardia since about 1960, including
during the era of STI adoption. By contrast, in the years 1930 - 1960
average speeds increased around 30%. (Note: That does not mean that STI
is not tactically beneficial. That's a separate issue.)
But if not STI, what were the most significant tech developments
regarding bicycle race speeds?
Here�s my list:
Pedals & cranks, as opposed to scooting a �hobby horse� via feet on the
ground.
Tubular metal frames and wire tension (spoke) wheels.
Large driven wheels, to give a much higher effective �gear.� (The
Ordinary or Penny Farthing)
The �Safety Bicycle� with a diamond frame and chain drive, getting the
rider down lower, to greatly reduce aero drag as well as pitchover on
braking.
Pneumatic tires. Hard tired �safeties� had terrible rolling resistance.
The handlebar stem, invented by the heroic Major Taylor, to allow a much >>> more aero riding position.
Rim brakes, by whatever mechanism, as opposed to spoon brakes acting on
a tire.
Multiple gears, by whatever mechanism.
The derailleur, making multiple gears easy to shift, customizable and
light weight.
Recumbent geometry in some situations. Recumbents seem to be slower
uphill, but tend to be faster on level or downhills
Fully enclosed streamlined aero shells tremendously increased speed, but >>> at a great reduction in versatility and practicality.
Beyond those, ISTM that most developments have been chasing ever
diminishing returns.
..and yet people buy them and use them. What's your problem with that?
Good grief! It's a discussion of bike technology! I'm not saying I have
a problem with anything!
You're an angry, bitter man with an obsession. You should seek help.
On 1/24/2025 6:48 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
On Fri, 24 Jan 2025 14:33:53 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
In another forum, someone postulated that integrated brake & shift
levers (like STI) were the most significant bit of racing technology
ever designed for increasing speed. But that claim met with little
respect. One skeptic noted that there was no great increase in average
race speeds in Paris-Roubaix, Milan-San Remo, Tour of Flanders,
Leige-Bastogne-Leige or Giro de Lobardia since about 1960, including
during the era of STI adoption. By contrast, in the years 1930 - 1960
average speeds increased around 30%. (Note: That does not mean that STI
is not tactically beneficial. That's a separate issue.)
But if not STI, what were the most significant tech developments
regarding bicycle race speeds?
Here’s my list:
Pedals & cranks, as opposed to scooting a “hobby horse” via feet on the >>> ground.
Tubular metal frames and wire tension (spoke) wheels.
Large driven wheels, to give a much higher effective “gear.” (The
Ordinary or Penny Farthing)
The “Safety Bicycle” with a diamond frame and chain drive, getting the >>> rider down lower, to greatly reduce aero drag as well as pitchover on
braking.
Pneumatic tires. Hard tired “safeties” had terrible rolling resistance. >>>
The handlebar stem, invented by the heroic Major Taylor, to allow a much >>> more aero riding position.
Rim brakes, by whatever mechanism, as opposed to spoon brakes acting on
a tire.
Multiple gears, by whatever mechanism.
The derailleur, making multiple gears easy to shift, customizable and
light weight.
Recumbent geometry in some situations. Recumbents seem to be slower
uphill, but tend to be faster on level or downhills
Fully enclosed streamlined aero shells tremendously increased speed, but >>> at a great reduction in versatility and practicality.
Beyond those, ISTM that most developments have been chasing ever
diminishing returns.
..and yet people buy them and use them. What's your problem with that?
Good grief! It's a discussion of bike technology! I'm not saying I have
a problem with anything!
You're an angry, bitter man with an obsession. You should seek help.
On 1/24/2025 5:51 PM, Roger Merriman wrote:
Frank Krygowski <[email protected]> wrote:
In another forum, someone postulated that integrated brake & shiftOn a broader point bit like disks eventually coming to road, MTB had if not >> integrated brakes and shift levers that one didn’t need to move one’s hands
levers (like STI) were the most significant bit of racing technology
ever designed for increasing speed. But that claim met with little
respect. One skeptic noted that there was no great increase in average
race speeds in Paris-Roubaix, Milan-San Remo, Tour of Flanders,
Leige-Bastogne-Leige or Giro de Lobardia since about 1960, including
during the era of STI adoption. By contrast, in the years 1930 - 1960
average speeds increased around 30%. (Note: That does not mean that STI
is not tactically beneficial. That's a separate issue.)
or even shift finger positions, with thumb shifters.
Ie it was being done on a related design so was inevitable just matter of
when.
But if not STI, what were the most significant tech developments
regarding bicycle race speeds?
Probably that one actually I believe that Penny farthings could shift,
Here’s my list:
Pedals & cranks, as opposed to scooting a “hobby horse” via feet on the >>> ground.
where raced around Herne Hill which is old ish Velodrome in East London.
And they certainly could shift probably the biggest jump.
Don’t get me wrong been lots of improvements, some have been speed by
default even in the 90’s MTB didn’t really last long in races be that
frame/components etc. be that getting a double puncture, loosing the chain >> or something bending/snapping!
That’s certainly come a long way racers now expect their bikes to last the >> race and even over multiple runs!
Tubular metal frames and wire tension (spoke) wheels.I believe that bikes went to cranks as they didn’t have anything drive
Large driven wheels, to give a much higher effective “gear.” (The
Ordinary or Penny Farthing)
chain as such yet.
The “Safety Bicycle” with a diamond frame and chain drive, getting the >>> rider down lower, to greatly reduce aero drag as well as pitchover onRoger Merriman
braking.
Pneumatic tires. Hard tired “safeties” had terrible rolling resistance. >>> 7
The handlebar stem, invented by the heroic Major Taylor, to allow a much >>> more aero riding position.
Rim brakes, by whatever mechanism, as opposed to spoon brakes acting on
a tire.
Multiple gears, by whatever mechanism.
The derailleur, making multiple gears easy to shift, customizable and
light weight.
Recumbent geometry in some situations. Recumbents seem to be slower
uphill, but tend to be faster on level or downhills
Fully enclosed streamlined aero shells tremendously increased speed, but >>> at a great reduction in versatility and practicality.
Beyond those, ISTM that most developments have been chasing ever
diminishing returns.
Geared ordinaries are rare items: https://www.gracesguide.co.uk/Geared_Ordinary_Bicycle
Truly outliers, never popular, especially after James
Starley's innovations of 1885.
https://aehistory.wordpress.com/1885/10/05/1885-first-chain-driven-bicycle-the-rover/
In another forum, someone postulated that integrated brake & shift
levers (like STI) were the most significant bit of racing technology
ever designed for increasing speed.
But that claim met with little
respect. One skeptic noted that there was no great increase in average
race speeds in Paris-Roubaix, Milan-San Remo, Tour of Flanders, >Leige-Bastogne-Leige or Giro de Lobardia since about 1960, including
during the era of STI adoption.
By contrast, in the years 1930 - 1960
average speeds increased around 30%. (Note: That does not mean that STI
is not tactically beneficial. That's a separate issue.)
But if not STI, what were the most significant tech developments
regarding bicycle race speeds?
Here’s my list:
Pedals & cranks, as opposed to scooting a “hobby horse” via feet on the >ground.
Tubular metal frames and wire tension (spoke) wheels.
Large driven wheels, to give a much higher effective “gear.” (The >Ordinary or Penny Farthing)
The “Safety Bicycle” with a diamond frame and chain drive, getting the >rider down lower, to greatly reduce aero drag as well as pitchover on >braking.
Pneumatic tires. Hard tired “safeties” had terrible rolling resistance.
The handlebar stem, invented by the heroic Major Taylor, to allow a much
more aero riding position.
Rim brakes, by whatever mechanism, as opposed to spoon brakes acting on
a tire.
Multiple gears, by whatever mechanism.
The derailleur, making multiple gears easy to shift, customizable and
light weight.
Recumbent geometry in some situations. Recumbents seem to be slower
uphill, but tend to be faster on level or downhills
Fully enclosed streamlined aero shells tremendously increased speed, but
at a great reduction in versatility and practicality.
Beyond those, ISTM that most developments have been chasing ever
diminishing returns.
On Fri Jan 24 14:33:53 2025 Frank Krygowski wrote:
In another forum, someone postulated that integrated brake & shift
levers (like STI) were the most significant bit of racing technology
ever designed for increasing speed. But that claim met with little
respect. One skeptic noted that there was no great increase in average
race speeds in Paris-Roubaix, Milan-San Remo, Tour of Flanders,
Leige-Bastogne-Leige or Giro de Lobardia since about 1960, including
during the era of STI adoption. By contrast, in the years 1930 - 1960
average speeds increased around 30%. (Note: That does not mean that STI
is not tactically beneficial. That's a separate issue.)
But if not STI, what were the most significant tech developments
regarding bicycle race speeds?
Here?s my list:
Pedals & cranks, as opposed to scooting a ?hobby horse? via feet on the
ground.
Tubular metal frames and wire tension (spoke) wheels.
Large driven wheels, to give a much higher effective ?gear.? (The
Ordinary or Penny Farthing)
The ?Safety Bicycle? with a diamond frame and chain drive, getting the
rider down lower, to greatly reduce aero drag as well as pitchover on
braking.
Pneumatic tires. Hard tired ?safeties? had terrible rolling resistance.
The handlebar stem, invented by the heroic Major Taylor, to allow a much
more aero riding position.
Rim brakes, by whatever mechanism, as opposed to spoon brakes acting on
a tire.
Multiple gears, by whatever mechanism.
The derailleur, making multiple gears easy to shift, customizable and
light weight.
Recumbent geometry in some situations. Recumbents seem to be slower
uphill, but tend to be faster on level or downhills
Fully enclosed streamlined aero shells tremendously increased speed, but
at a great reduction in versatility and practicality.
Beyond those, ISTM that most developments have been chasing ever
diminishing returns.
Frank, using average speeds of flat races where the riders are in high gear all of the time, the roads have been vastely degrading year to year and the distances have been being reduced is hardly a way to measure the effect of shifting components.
On 1/25/2025 11:04 AM, cyclintom wrote:
Frank, using average speeds of flat races where the riders are in high
gear all of the time, the roads have been vastely degrading year to year
and the distances have been being reduced is hardly a way to measure the
effect of shifting components.
Are those all flat races? Really? And have the roads really degraded in
the past 40 years or so? I'd love to see your evidence on both points.
On Fri Jan 24 18:00:57 2025 Zen Cycle wrote:
I'm going to take issue with this claim. The speeds have been showing a
steady increase. "Great" increase is somewhat subjective, and taking
into account the general "square-law effect" with going faster on a
bicycle, a increase of 1MPH from 28 to 29 MPH could indeed be considered
a "great" increase over going from 25 to 26 MPH.
Granted, this has little to do with integrated shifting, my nit is over
the claim "there was no great increase in average race speeds....since
about 1960"
from wikipedia, the top ten fastest editions of PAris-Roubaix were:
Mathieu van der Poel (NED) 47.80 km/h (29.70 mph) 2024
Mathieu van der Poel (NED) 46.84 km/h (29.11 mph) 2023
Dylan van Baarle (NED) 45.79 km/h (28.45 mph) 2022
Greg Van Avermaet (BEL) 45.20 km/h (28.09 mph) 2017
Peter Post (NED) 45.13 km/h (28.04 mph) 1964
Fabian Cancellara (SUI) 44.19 km/h (27.46 mph) 2013
Rik Van Steenbergen (BEL) 43.99 km/h (27.33 mph) 1948
Mathew Hayman (AUS) 43.91 km/h (27.28 mph) 2016
Peter Sagan (SVK) 43.55 km/h (27.06 mph) 2018
Pino Cerami (BEL) 43.54 km/h (27.05 mph) 1960
Out of the top ten in the 100+ year history of the race, 6 are within
the past ten years. I challenge anyone to argue against a 10% increase
since Sagan in 2018 to VDP in 2024 as anything but a "great" increase.
Milan/San Remo shows a similar trend. From
https://www.procyclingstats.com/race/milano-sanremo/results/fastest-editions >> :
Edition Year Avg. speed
115 2024 46.11
114 2023 45.773
113 2022 45.331
97 2006 45.268
112 2021 45.06
100 2009 44.421
98 2007 43.665
110 2019 43.625
104 2013 43.577
102 2011 43.486
It certainly isn't due to drivetrain technology, I'll suggest the trend
towards wider tires has a great deal to do with it, but more so training
and diet technological advances.
Got that Frank, he takes issue with your comments despite the fact that these courses all change change a little from year to year, the speeds on the hardeat races despite being shorter than in the past are going down and not up.
While I don't agree with your use of flat rides that are all in high gear and things like STI are unlikely to have effect, Flunky's comments at least are rediculous.
On 25/1/25 13:51, Frank Krygowski wrote:
The discussion I saw had a graph representing the winning speeds over
time. I think I've tracked down the website it apparently came from:
https://www.cyclistshub.com/cycling-monuments-statistics/
Lots of data there. (Anyone curious about the winning riders'
heights?) The "Cycling Monuments – Average Speed" plot is about a
third of the way down. There's lots of scatter, of course; but the
plot makes clear that the speed increases after about 1950 were
nothing like the speed increases up to 1950.
No mention of the Melbourne to Warrnambool? Shocking.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melbourne_to_Warrnambool_Classic
On 1/25/2025 10:04 AM, cyclintom wrote:
On Fri Jan 24 14:33:53 2025 Frank Krygowski wrote:
In another forum, someone postulated that integrated brake & shift
levers (like STI) were the most significant bit of racing technology
ever designed for increasing speed. But that claim met with little
respect. One skeptic noted that there was no great increase in average
race speeds in Paris-Roubaix, Milan-San Remo, Tour of Flanders,
Leige-Bastogne-Leige or Giro de Lobardia since about 1960, including
during the era of STI adoption. By contrast, in the years 1930 - 1960
average speeds increased around 30%. (Note: That does not mean that STI
is not tactically beneficial. That's a separate issue.)
But if not STI, what were the most significant tech developments
regarding bicycle race speeds?
Here?s my list:
Pedals & cranks, as opposed to scooting a ?hobby horse? via feet on the
ground.
Tubular metal frames and wire tension (spoke) wheels.
Large driven wheels, to give a much higher effective ?gear.? (The
Ordinary or Penny Farthing)
The ?Safety Bicycle? with a diamond frame and chain drive, getting the
rider down lower, to greatly reduce aero drag as well as pitchover on
braking.
Pneumatic tires. Hard tired ?safeties? had terrible rolling resistance.
The handlebar stem, invented by the heroic Major Taylor, to allow a much >>> more aero riding position.
Rim brakes, by whatever mechanism, as opposed to spoon brakes acting on
a tire.
Multiple gears, by whatever mechanism.
The derailleur, making multiple gears easy to shift, customizable and
light weight.
Recumbent geometry in some situations. Recumbents seem to be slower
uphill, but tend to be faster on level or downhills
Fully enclosed streamlined aero shells tremendously increased speed, but >>> at a great reduction in versatility and practicality.
Beyond those, ISTM that most developments have been chasing ever
diminishing returns.
Frank, using average speeds of flat races where the riders are in high
gear all of the time, the roads have been vastely degrading year to
year and the distances have been being reduced is hardly a way to
measure the effect of shifting components.
Are there degraded roads? Yes of course. But generally the typical
paving of the classic era with Bartali and Coppi
https://www.todaysport.it/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/bartali-giusto.jpg
Is now different:
https://pezcyclingnews.com/travel/giro-2016-dolomites-preview/
On 1/25/2025 1:43 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Fri Jan 24 18:00:57 2025 Zen Cycle wrote:
I'm going to take issue with this claim. The speeds have been showing a
steady increase. "Great" increase is somewhat subjective, and taking
into account the general "square-law effect" with going faster on a
bicycle, a increase of 1MPH from 28 to 29 MPH could indeed be considered >>> a "great" increase over going from 25 to 26 MPH.
Granted, this has little to do with integrated shifting, my nit is over
the claim "there was no great increase in average race speeds....since
about 1960"
from wikipedia, the top ten fastest editions of PAris-Roubaix were:
Mathieu van der Poel (NED) 47.80 km/h (29.70 mph) 2024 >>> Mathieu van der Poel (NED) 46.84 km/h (29.11 mph) 2023 >>> Dylan van Baarle (NED) 45.79 km/h (28.45 mph) 2022
Greg Van Avermaet (BEL) 45.20 km/h (28.09 mph) 2017
Peter Post (NED) 45.13 km/h (28.04 mph) 1964
Fabian Cancellara (SUI) 44.19 km/h (27.46 mph) 2013
Rik Van Steenbergen (BEL) 43.99 km/h (27.33 mph) 1948 >>> Mathew Hayman (AUS) 43.91 km/h (27.28 mph) 2016 >>> Peter Sagan (SVK) 43.55 km/h (27.06 mph) 2018 >>> Pino Cerami (BEL) 43.54 km/h (27.05 mph) 1960 >>>
Out of the top ten in the 100+ year history of the race, 6 are within
the past ten years. I challenge anyone to argue against a 10% increase
since Sagan in 2018 to VDP in 2024 as anything but a "great" increase.
Milan/San Remo shows a similar trend. From
https://www.procyclingstats.com/race/milano-sanremo/results/fastest-
editions
:
Edition Year Avg. speed
115 2024 46.11
114 2023 45.773
113 2022 45.331
97 2006 45.268
112 2021 45.06
100 2009 44.421
98 2007 43.665
110 2019 43.625
104 2013 43.577
102 2011 43.486
It certainly isn't due to drivetrain technology, I'll suggest the trend
towards wider tires has a great deal to do with it, but more so training >>> and diet technological advances.
Got that Frank, he takes issue with your comments despite the fact
that these courses all change change a little from year to year, the
speeds on the hardeat races despite being shorter than in the past are
going down and not up.
While I don't agree with your use of flat rides that are all in high
gear and things like STI are unlikely to have effect, Flunky's
comments at least are rediculous.
On 1/25/2025 11:28 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 1/25/2025 10:04 AM, cyclintom wrote:
On Fri Jan 24 14:33:53 2025 Frank Krygowski wrote:
In another forum, someone postulated that integrated
brake & shift
levers (like STI) were the most significant bit of
racing technology
ever designed for increasing speed. But that claim met
with little
respect. One skeptic noted that there was no great
increase in average
race speeds in Paris-Roubaix, Milan-San Remo, Tour of
Flanders,
Leige-Bastogne-Leige or Giro de Lobardia since about
1960, including
during the era of STI adoption. By contrast, in the
years 1930 - 1960
average speeds increased around 30%. (Note: That does
not mean that STI
is not tactically beneficial. That's a separate issue.)
But if not STI, what were the most significant tech
developments
regarding bicycle race speeds?
Here?s my list:
Pedals & cranks, as opposed to scooting a ?hobby horse?
via feet on the
ground.
Tubular metal frames and wire tension (spoke) wheels.
Large driven wheels, to give a much higher effective ?
gear.? (The
Ordinary or Penny Farthing)
The ?Safety Bicycle? with a diamond frame and chain
drive, getting the
rider down lower, to greatly reduce aero drag as well as
pitchover on
braking.
Pneumatic tires. Hard tired ?safeties? had terrible
rolling resistance.
The handlebar stem, invented by the heroic Major Taylor,
to allow a much
more aero riding position.
Rim brakes, by whatever mechanism, as opposed to spoon
brakes acting on
a tire.
Multiple gears, by whatever mechanism.
The derailleur, making multiple gears easy to shift,
customizable and
light weight.
Recumbent geometry in some situations. Recumbents seem
to be slower
uphill, but tend to be faster on level or downhills
Fully enclosed streamlined aero shells tremendously
increased speed, but
at a great reduction in versatility and practicality.
Beyond those, ISTM that most developments have been
chasing ever
diminishing returns.
Frank, using average speeds of flat races where the
riders are in high gear all of the time, the roads have
been vastely degrading year to year and the distances
have been being reduced is hardly a way to measure the
effect of shifting components.
Are there degraded roads? Yes of course. But generally the
typical paving of the classic era with Bartali and Coppi
https://www.todaysport.it/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/
bartali-giusto.jpg
Is now different:
https://pezcyclingnews.com/travel/giro-2016-dolomites-
preview/
That's a point I was going to bring up about race speeds
increasing faster before the 60's as well - paved roads play
a big factor.
There's also the difference in race structure where in the
early years, rides were completely unsupported to the point
that all riders were responsible for their own repairs.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Eug%C3%A8ne_Christophe#1913_and_the_Tourmalet_incident
Paved roads and team support lead to the increases in
overall speed in the early years of racing.
But if not STI, what were the most significant tech developments
regarding bicycle race speeds?
On 1/26/2025 6:56 PM, cyclintom wrote:
Any race that is more or less in high gear (as most of the spring classics) ...
I think that's a strange notion. High gear up mountain passes?
On 1/24/2025 5:10 PM, Zen Cycle wrote:
I'd like to point out that integrated brake/shifter designs also
enhanced safety, eliminating the need to move the hands from a
position of control on the bars (Even bar-end shifters required moving
your hand to a position with less control).
Yes, I suppose in a furious pack sprint that could be an issue.
Those of us who remember the "new bike vs. 1980s bike" comparison road
test, with young racers riding up a mountain, may recall that some of
the young guys said it was scary to take their hands off the lever to
shift.
Ah well. I've taken off both jackets and rain capes while riding. I even drink from a water bottle while riding! But I'm not racing.
On Fri, 24 Jan 2025 14:33:53 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
But if not STI, what were the most significant tech developments
regarding bicycle race speeds?
I would put mechanical doping (hidden e-Bike conversion) at the top of
the list of speed improvement developments. The only problem is you
can't tell anyone about it.
On 1/25/2025 11:04 AM, cyclintom wrote:
Frank, using average speeds of flat races where the riders are in high
gear all of the time, the roads have been vastely degrading year to
year and the distances have been being reduced is hardly a way to
measure the effect of shifting components.
Are those all flat races? Really? And have the roads really degraded in
the past 40 years or so? I'd love to see your evidence on both points.
On 1/25/2025 11:28 AM, AMuzi wrote:Eug%C3%A8ne_Christophe#1913_and_the_Tourmalet_incident
On 1/25/2025 10:04 AM, cyclintom wrote:That's a point I was going to bring up about race speeds increasing
On Fri Jan 24 14:33:53 2025 Frank Krygowski wrote:
In another forum, someone postulated that integrated brake & shift
levers (like STI) were the most significant bit of racing technology
ever designed for increasing speed. But that claim met with little
respect. One skeptic noted that there was no great increase in
average race speeds in Paris-Roubaix, Milan-San Remo, Tour of
Flanders, Leige-Bastogne-Leige or Giro de Lobardia since about 1960,
including during the era of STI adoption. By contrast, in the years
1930 - 1960 average speeds increased around 30%. (Note: That does not
mean that STI is not tactically beneficial. That's a separate issue.)
But if not STI, what were the most significant tech developments
regarding bicycle race speeds?
Here?s my list:
Pedals & cranks, as opposed to scooting a ?hobby horse? via feet on
the ground.
Tubular metal frames and wire tension (spoke) wheels.
Large driven wheels, to give a much higher effective ?gear.? (The
Ordinary or Penny Farthing)
The ?Safety Bicycle? with a diamond frame and chain drive, getting
the rider down lower, to greatly reduce aero drag as well as
pitchover on braking.
Pneumatic tires. Hard tired ?safeties? had terrible rolling
resistance.
The handlebar stem, invented by the heroic Major Taylor, to allow a
much more aero riding position.
Rim brakes, by whatever mechanism, as opposed to spoon brakes acting
on a tire.
Multiple gears, by whatever mechanism.
The derailleur, making multiple gears easy to shift, customizable and
light weight.
Recumbent geometry in some situations. Recumbents seem to be slower
uphill, but tend to be faster on level or downhills
Fully enclosed streamlined aero shells tremendously increased speed,
but at a great reduction in versatility and practicality.
Beyond those, ISTM that most developments have been chasing ever
diminishing returns.
Frank, using average speeds of flat races where the riders are in high
gear all of the time, the roads have been vastely degrading year to
year and the distances have been being reduced is hardly a way to
measure the effect of shifting components.
Are there degraded roads? Yes of course. But generally the typical
paving of the classic era with Bartali and Coppi
https://www.todaysport.it/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/bartali-giusto.jpg
Is now different:
https://pezcyclingnews.com/travel/giro-2016-dolomites-preview/
faster before the 60's as well - paved roads play a big factor.
There's also the difference in race structure where in the early years,
rides were completely unsupported to the point that all riders were responsible for their own repairs.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Paved roads and team support lead to the increases in overall speed in
the early years of racing.
On 1/24/2025 6:48 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
On Fri, 24 Jan 2025 14:33:53 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
In another forum, someone postulated that integrated brake & shift
levers (like STI) were the most significant bit of racing technology
ever designed for increasing speed. But that claim met with little
respect. One skeptic noted that there was no great increase in average
race speeds in Paris-Roubaix, Milan-San Remo, Tour of Flanders,
Leige-Bastogne-Leige or Giro de Lobardia since about 1960, including
during the era of STI adoption. By contrast, in the years 1930 - 1960
average speeds increased around 30%. (Note: That does not mean that
STI is not tactically beneficial. That's a separate issue.)
But if not STI, what were the most significant tech developments
regarding bicycle race speeds?
Here’s my list:
Pedals & cranks, as opposed to scooting a “hobby horse” via feet on
the ground.
Tubular metal frames and wire tension (spoke) wheels.
Large driven wheels, to give a much higher effective “gear.” (The
Ordinary or Penny Farthing)
The “Safety Bicycle” with a diamond frame and chain drive, getting the >>> rider down lower, to greatly reduce aero drag as well as pitchover on
braking.
Pneumatic tires. Hard tired “safeties” had terrible rolling
resistance.
The handlebar stem, invented by the heroic Major Taylor, to allow a
much more aero riding position.
Rim brakes, by whatever mechanism, as opposed to spoon brakes acting
on a tire.
Multiple gears, by whatever mechanism.
The derailleur, making multiple gears easy to shift, customizable and
light weight.
Recumbent geometry in some situations. Recumbents seem to be slower
uphill, but tend to be faster on level or downhills
Fully enclosed streamlined aero shells tremendously increased speed,
but at a great reduction in versatility and practicality.
Beyond those, ISTM that most developments have been chasing ever
diminishing returns.
..and yet people buy them and use them. What's your problem with that?
Good grief! It's a discussion of bike technology! I'm not saying I have
a problem with anything!
You're an angry, bitter man with an obsession. You should seek help.
editionsOn 1/25/2025 1:43 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Fri Jan 24 18:00:57 2025 Zen Cycle wrote:
I'm going to take issue with this claim. The speeds have been showing
a steady increase. "Great" increase is somewhat subjective, and
taking into account the general "square-law effect" with going faster
on a bicycle, a increase of 1MPH from 28 to 29 MPH could indeed be
considered a "great" increase over going from 25 to 26 MPH.
Granted, this has little to do with integrated shifting, my nit is
over the claim "there was no great increase in average race
speeds....since about 1960"
from wikipedia, the top ten fastest editions of PAris-Roubaix were:
Mathieu van der Poel (NED) 47.80 km/h (29.70 mph) 2024 >>>> Mathieu van der Poel (NED) 46.84 km/h (29.11 mph) 2023 >>>> Dylan van Baarle (NED) 45.79 km/h (28.45 mph) 2022
Greg Van Avermaet (BEL) 45.20 km/h (28.09 mph) 2017 Peter
Post (NED) 45.13 km/h (28.04 mph) 1964 Fabian >>>> Cancellara (SUI) 44.19 km/h (27.46 mph) 2013 Rik Van >>>> Steenbergen (BEL) 43.99 km/h (27.33 mph) 1948 Mathew >>>> Hayman (AUS) 43.91 km/h (27.28 mph) 2016 Peter Sagan
(SVK) 43.55 km/h (27.06 mph) 2018 Pino Cerami >>>> (BEL) 43.54 km/h (27.05 mph) 1960
Out of the top ten in the 100+ year history of the race, 6 are within
the past ten years. I challenge anyone to argue against a 10%
increase since Sagan in 2018 to VDP in 2024 as anything but a "great"
increase.
Milan/San Remo shows a similar trend. From
https://www.procyclingstats.com/race/milano-sanremo/results/fastest-
editions
:
Edition Year Avg. speed 115 2024 46.11 114 2023
45.773 113 2022 45.331 97 2006 45.268 112 2021
45.06 100 2009 44.421 98 2007 43.665 110 2019
43.625 104 2013 43.577 102 2011 43.486
It certainly isn't due to drivetrain technology, I'll suggest the
trend towards wider tires has a great deal to do with it, but more so
training and diet technological advances.
Got that Frank, he takes issue with your comments despite the fact
that these courses all change change a little from year to year, the
speeds on the hardeat races despite being shorter than in the past are
going down and not up.
the speeds of the hardest races are going down?
Paris roubaix Mathieu van der Poel 47.80 km/h (29.70 mph) 2024
Mathieu van der Poel 46.84 km/h (29.11 mph) 2023 Dylan van Baarle
45.79 km/h (28.45 mph) 2022
https://www.procyclingstats.com/race/paris-roubaix/results/fastest-
https://www.procyclingstats.com/race/liege-bastogne-liege/results/fastest-editions
https://www.procyclingstats.com/race/tour-de-france/results/fastest-editions
https://www.procyclingstats.com/race/giro-d-italia/results/fastest-editions
Must be more of that "tommy math"
While I don't agree with your use of flat rides that are all in high
gear and things like STI are unlikely to have effect, Flunky's
comments at least are rediculous.
Sure sparky, show a reference to an overall trend which shows that race speeds are going down.
On Sat Jan 25 10:13:31 2025 Roger Merriman wr
No my gravel bikes chainrings are not massive by any means dropped from
32-48 to 30-46 recently which has made no difference to the top end in that >> at that point I?m generally freewheeling.
But pros are running 53 and above and into the 60?s apparently
<https://www.bikeradar.com/features/tech/why-are-pros-using-such-big-chainrings>
As the speed of road racing has year by year increased.
I get your point, but I have to have top end in several nearly flat roads around maniac drivers. A 50-11 is probably too high but a 50-12 does see use.
On Fri, 24 Jan 2025 21:54:11 -0500, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 1/24/2025 6:48 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
On Fri, 24 Jan 2025 14:33:53 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
In another forum, someone postulated that integrated brake & shift
levers (like STI) were the most significant bit of racing technology
ever designed for increasing speed. But that claim met with little
respect. One skeptic noted that there was no great increase in average >>>> race speeds in Paris-Roubaix, Milan-San Remo, Tour of Flanders,
Leige-Bastogne-Leige or Giro de Lobardia since about 1960, including
during the era of STI adoption. By contrast, in the years 1930 - 1960 >>>> average speeds increased around 30%. (Note: That does not mean that
STI is not tactically beneficial. That's a separate issue.)
But if not STI, what were the most significant tech developments
regarding bicycle race speeds?
Here�s my list:
Pedals & cranks, as opposed to scooting a �hobby horse� via feet on
the ground.
Tubular metal frames and wire tension (spoke) wheels.
Large driven wheels, to give a much higher effective �gear.� (The
Ordinary or Penny Farthing)
The �Safety Bicycle� with a diamond frame and chain drive, getting the >>>> rider down lower, to greatly reduce aero drag as well as pitchover on
braking.
Pneumatic tires. Hard tired �safeties� had terrible rolling
resistance.
The handlebar stem, invented by the heroic Major Taylor, to allow a
much more aero riding position.
Rim brakes, by whatever mechanism, as opposed to spoon brakes acting
on a tire.
Multiple gears, by whatever mechanism.
The derailleur, making multiple gears easy to shift, customizable and
light weight.
Recumbent geometry in some situations. Recumbents seem to be slower
uphill, but tend to be faster on level or downhills
Fully enclosed streamlined aero shells tremendously increased speed,
but at a great reduction in versatility and practicality.
Beyond those, ISTM that most developments have been chasing ever
diminishing returns.
..and yet people buy them and use them. What's your problem with that?
Good grief! It's a discussion of bike technology! I'm not saying I have
a problem with anything!
You're an angry, bitter man with an obsession. You should seek help.
Frank, Catrike is not your student and you cannot force your stupid
opinions on him. You are the bitter old man fighting to have your ideas >accepted and no one is going for it.
On Sat, 25 Jan 2025 12:12:31 -0500, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 1/25/2025 11:04 AM, cyclintom wrote:
Frank, using average speeds of flat races where the riders are in high
gear all of the time, the roads have been vastely degrading year to
year and the distances have been being reduced is hardly a way to
measure the effect of shifting components.
Are those all flat races? Really? And have the roads really degraded in
the past 40 years or so? I'd love to see your evidence on both points.
Of what use eould evidence be to you? You are even uaware that pros can
climb 5% grades in high gear! And many mountain passes have pretty long sections of 5%.
On 1/27/2025 6:12 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
Somebody told him that nobody likes braggarts and liars.
You reflexively cry "liar" anytime I mention having done something you
cannot or could never do.
You used to complain that I didn't provide
documentation. When I did provide documentation, you cried that I was
just bragging.
Don't take any silence on my part for some sort of surrender. Interpret
it as resolution to not waste as much of my time responding to closed
minded, bitter old fools.
But I'll admit, sometimes I slip up.
On Mon, 27 Jan 2025 19:39:50 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 1/27/2025 6:12 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
Somebody told him that nobody likes braggarts and liars.
You reflexively cry "liar" anytime I mention having done something you >>cannot or could never do.
Outside of standing in front of a classroom, something I am loath to
do, and a few other things where I got better results from doing
something different, what are some of the things you do that I cannot
do?
There are several people in RBT who have done things I cannot do. Tom
Kunick builds and rides bikes like I cannot do. Andrew Muzu rides
fixies, runs a bike shop, and rebuilds bikes like I cannot do. Junior >Carrington rides fixies and races bikes like I cannot do.
You see, unlike you, I am not afraid to admit to where I've been
bettered. It happens regularly to all of us.
There are many people who do things I cannot or could never do.
******** You are not on that list.
One the other hand, you and I both know I've done many things you
haven't done and cannot do.
You used to complain that I didn't provide
documentation. When I did provide documentation, you cried that I was
just bragging.
It's not documentation when you make claims about what you can do.
It's not documentation to relate what someone unknown person said
about you. It's not documentation when you post what you say to your >imaginary friends.
Do you even understand what documentation is?
At the bottom of this post is some of your bragging. None of it is >documented.
Now go ahead and snip out parts of this post you are unable to respond
to and tell me, *with documentation,* what are some of these things
you do that I cannot or could never do?
Don't take any silence on my part for some sort of surrender. Interpret
it as resolution to not waste as much of my time responding to closed >>minded, bitter old fools.
heh, heh, heh... A whole lot of projection there from RBT's official >resident closed minded bitter old fool.
But I'll admit, sometimes I slip up.
Krygowski's undocumented brags:
"Am I qualified to talk about such things? Yes, by virtue of attending >multiple classes at various levels for each of the programs described
above. I've also acted as an editorial consultant on two well known
books dealing with those matters. I've written many articles on those
and related topics, and had some of them reprinted by publications in
other states and one other country. I no longer maintain the teaching >certification, but I've taught many cycling classes, I've written
scripts for and appeared in televised instructional spots, I've been >interviewed for newspapers and TV on such matters, and I've spoken (by >request) at city, regional and statewide gatherings."
"I've written articles about dogs vs. bikes, and I
was once quoted on the issue in _Bicycling_ magazine."
"there are others who have examined my
bicycling qualifications, tested me and proclaimed that I do, indeed,
know what I'm talking about regarding bicycling."
"I've been riding with this club for 35 years now. I've given
workshops and classes on riding, including group riding. I've written >articles on it for the club newsletter and for other publications.
I've had other cycling instructors compliment my riding, and say they
learned and improved by watching me. Just last night, one member took
me aside and asked me to give tips to a new member who obviously
needed advice on group riding."
"I ride as a competent adult on normal roads. I've taught others to do
that, and I've been recognized for such work. The remarks I posted
above were not bragging."
--Frank Krygowski
On Tue, 28 Jan 2025 06:27:08 -0500, Catrike Ryder
<[email protected]> wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jan 2025 19:39:50 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 1/27/2025 6:12 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
Somebody told him that nobody likes braggarts and liars.
You reflexively cry "liar" anytime I mention having done something you
cannot or could never do.
Outside of standing in front of a classroom, something I am loath to
do, and a few other things where I got better results from doing
something different, what are some of the things you do that I cannot
do?
There are several people in RBT who have done things I cannot do. Tom
Kunick builds and rides bikes like I cannot do. Andrew Muzu rides
fixies, runs a bike shop, and rebuilds bikes like I cannot do. Junior
Carrington rides fixies and races bikes like I cannot do.
You see, unlike you, I am not afraid to admit to where I've been
bettered. It happens regularly to all of us.
There are many people who do things I cannot or could never do.
******** You are not on that list.
One the other hand, you and I both know I've done many things you
haven't done and cannot do.
You used to complain that I didn't provide
documentation. When I did provide documentation, you cried that I was
just bragging.
It's not documentation when you make claims about what you can do.
It's not documentation to relate what someone unknown person said
about you. It's not documentation when you post what you say to your
imaginary friends.
Do you even understand what documentation is?
At the bottom of this post is some of your bragging. None of it is
documented.
Now go ahead and snip out parts of this post you are unable to respond
to and tell me, *with documentation,* what are some of these things
you do that I cannot or could never do?
Don't take any silence on my part for some sort of surrender. Interpret
it as resolution to not waste as much of my time responding to closed
minded, bitter old fools.
heh, heh, heh... A whole lot of projection there from RBT's official
resident closed minded bitter old fool.
But I'll admit, sometimes I slip up.
Krygowski's undocumented brags:
"Am I qualified to talk about such things? Yes, by virtue of attending
multiple classes at various levels for each of the programs described
above. I've also acted as an editorial consultant on two well known
books dealing with those matters. I've written many articles on those
and related topics, and had some of them reprinted by publications in
other states and one other country. I no longer maintain the teaching
certification, but I've taught many cycling classes, I've written
scripts for and appeared in televised instructional spots, I've been
interviewed for newspapers and TV on such matters, and I've spoken (by
request) at city, regional and statewide gatherings."
"I've written articles about dogs vs. bikes, and I
was once quoted on the issue in _Bicycling_ magazine."
"there are others who have examined my
bicycling qualifications, tested me and proclaimed that I do, indeed,
know what I'm talking about regarding bicycling."
"I've been riding with this club for 35 years now. I've given
workshops and classes on riding, including group riding. I've written
articles on it for the club newsletter and for other publications.
I've had other cycling instructors compliment my riding, and say they
learned and improved by watching me. Just last night, one member took
me aside and asked me to give tips to a new member who obviously
needed advice on group riding."
"I ride as a competent adult on normal roads. I've taught others to do
that, and I've been recognized for such work. The remarks I posted
above were not bragging."
--Frank Krygowski
As I posted above.....
Now go ahead and snip out parts of this post you are unable to respond
to and tell me, *with documentation,* what are some of these things
you do that I cannot or could never do?
??????
..... apparently he's gone back into his bubble
On 1/30/2025 5:44 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jan 2025 06:27:08 -0500, Catrike Ryder
<[email protected]> wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jan 2025 19:39:50 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 1/27/2025 6:12 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
Somebody told him that nobody likes braggarts and liars.
You reflexively cry "liar" anytime I mention having done
something you
cannot or could never do.
Outside of standing in front of a classroom, something I
am loath to
do, and a few other things where I got better results
from doing
something different, what are some of the things you do
that I cannot
do?
There are several people in RBT who have done things I
cannot do. Tom
Kunick builds and rides bikes like I cannot do. Andrew
Muzu rides
fixies, runs a bike shop, and rebuilds bikes like I
cannot do. Junior
Carrington rides fixies and races bikes like I cannot do.
You see, unlike you, I am not afraid to admit to where
I've been
bettered. It happens regularly to all of us.
There are many people who do things I cannot or could
never do.
******** You are not on that list.
One the other hand, you and I both know I've done many
things you
haven't done and cannot do.
You used to complain that I didn't provide
documentation. When I did provide documentation, you
cried that I was
just bragging.
It's not documentation when you make claims about what
you can do.
It's not documentation to relate what someone unknown
person said
about you. It's not documentation when you post what you
say to your
imaginary friends.
Do you even understand what documentation is?
At the bottom of this post is some of your bragging. None
of it is
documented.
Now go ahead and snip out parts of this post you are
unable to respond
to and tell me, *with documentation,* what are some of
these things
you do that I cannot or could never do?
Don't take any silence on my part for some sort of
surrender. Interpret
it as resolution to not waste as much of my time
responding to closed
minded, bitter old fools.
heh, heh, heh... A whole lot of projection there from
RBT's official
resident closed minded bitter old fool.
But I'll admit, sometimes I slip up.
Krygowski's undocumented brags:
"Am I qualified to talk about such things? Yes, by virtue
of attending
multiple classes at various levels for each of the
programs described
above. I've also acted as an editorial consultant on two
well known
books dealing with those matters. I've written many
articles on those
and related topics, and had some of them reprinted by
publications in
other states and one other country. I no longer maintain
the teaching
certification, but I've taught many cycling classes, I've
written
scripts for and appeared in televised instructional
spots, I've been
interviewed for newspapers and TV on such matters, and
I've spoken (by
request) at city, regional and statewide gatherings."
"I've written articles about dogs vs. bikes, and I
was once quoted on the issue in _Bicycling_ magazine."
"there are others who have examined my
bicycling qualifications, tested me and proclaimed that I
do, indeed,
know what I'm talking about regarding bicycling."
"I've been riding with this club for 35 years now. I've
given
workshops and classes on riding, including group riding.
I've written
articles on it for the club newsletter and for other
publications.
I've had other cycling instructors compliment my riding,
and say they
learned and improved by watching me. Just last night, one
member took
me aside and asked me to give tips to a new member who
obviously
needed advice on group riding."
"I ride as a competent adult on normal roads. I've taught
others to do
that, and I've been recognized for such work. The remarks
I posted
above were not bragging."
--Frank Krygowski
As I posted above.....
Now go ahead and snip out parts of this post you are
unable to respond
to and tell me, *with documentation,* what are some of
these things
you do that I cannot or could never do?
??????
..... apparently he's gone back into his bubble
One persistent problem with trolls and other obnoxious
Usenet posters is this: When you ignore them, they think
they've somehow won.
Sorry to take away your reason for rising in the morning.
Now you'll have to find something else to do with your life.
On 1/30/2025 5:44 AM, floriduh dumbass wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jan 2025 06:27:08 -0500, Catrike Ryder
<[email protected]> wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jan 2025 19:39:50 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 1/27/2025 6:12 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
Somebody told him that nobody likes braggarts and liars.
You reflexively cry "liar" anytime I mention having done something you >>>> cannot or could never do.
Outside of standing in front of a classroom, something I am loath to
do, and a few other things where I got better results from doing
something different, what are some of the things you do that I cannot
do?
There are several people in RBT who have done things I cannot do. Tom
Kunick builds and rides bikes like I cannot do. Andrew Muzu rides
fixies, runs a bike shop, and rebuilds bikes like I cannot do. Junior
Carrington rides fixies and races bikes like I cannot do.
You see, unlike you, I am not afraid to admit to where I've been
bettered. It happens regularly to all of us.
There are many people who do things I cannot or could never do.
******** You are not on that list.
One the other hand, you and I both know I've done many things you
haven't done and cannot do.
You used to complain that I didn't provide
documentation. When I did provide documentation, you cried that I was
just bragging.
It's not documentation when you make claims about what you can do.
It's not documentation to relate what someone unknown person said
about you. It's not documentation when you post what you say to your
imaginary friends.
Do you even understand what documentation is?
At the bottom of this post is some of your bragging. None of it is
documented.
Now go ahead and snip out parts of this post you are unable to respond
to and tell me, *with documentation,* what are some of these things
you do that I cannot or could never do?
Don't take any silence on my part for some sort of surrender. Interpret >>>> it as resolution to not waste as much of my time responding to closed
minded, bitter old fools.
heh, heh, heh... A whole lot of projection there from RBT's official
resident closed minded bitter old fool.
But I'll admit, sometimes I slip up.
Krygowski's undocumented brags:
"Am I qualified to talk about such things? Yes, by virtue of attending
multiple classes at various levels for each of the programs described
above. I've also acted as an editorial consultant on two well known
books dealing with those matters. I've written many articles on those
and related topics, and had some of them reprinted by publications in
other states and one other country. I no longer maintain the teaching
certification, but I've taught many cycling classes, I've written
scripts for and appeared in televised instructional spots, I've been
interviewed for newspapers and TV on such matters, and I've spoken (by
request) at city, regional and statewide gatherings."
"I've written articles about dogs vs. bikes, and I
was once quoted on the issue in _Bicycling_ magazine."
"there are others who have examined my
bicycling qualifications, tested me and proclaimed that I do, indeed,
know what I'm talking about regarding bicycling."
"I've been riding with this club for 35 years now. I've given
workshops and classes on riding, including group riding. I've written
articles on it for the club newsletter and for other publications.
I've had other cycling instructors compliment my riding, and say they
learned and improved by watching me. Just last night, one member took
me aside and asked me to give tips to a new member who obviously
needed advice on group riding."
"I ride as a competent adult on normal roads. I've taught others to do
that, and I've been recognized for such work. The remarks I posted
above were not bragging."
--Frank Krygowski
As I posted above.....
Now go ahead and snip out parts of this post you are unable to respond
to and tell me, *with documentation,* what are some of these things
you do that I cannot or could never do?
??????
..... apparently he's gone back into his bubble
On 1/31/2025 9:24 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 1/30/2025 5:44 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jan 2025 06:27:08 -0500, Catrike Ryder
<[email protected]> wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jan 2025 19:39:50 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 1/27/2025 6:12 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
Somebody told him that nobody likes braggarts and liars.
You reflexively cry "liar" anytime I mention having done something you >>>>> cannot or could never do.
Outside of standing in front of a classroom, something I am loath to
do, and a few other things where I got better results from doing
something different, what are some of the things you do that I cannot
do?
There are several people in RBT who have done things I cannot do. Tom
Kunick builds and rides bikes like I cannot do. Andrew Muzu rides
fixies, runs a bike shop, and rebuilds bikes like I cannot do. Junior
Carrington rides fixies and races bikes like I cannot do.
You see, unlike you, I am not afraid to admit to where I've been
bettered. It happens regularly to all of us.
There are many people who do things I cannot or could never do.
******** You are not on that list.
One the other hand, you and I both know I've done many things you
haven't done and cannot do.
You used to complain that I didn't provide
documentation. When I did provide documentation, you cried that I was >>>>> just bragging.
It's not documentation when you make claims about what you can do.
It's not documentation to relate what someone unknown person said
about you. It's not documentation when you post what you say to your >>>> imaginary friends.
Do you even understand what documentation is?
At the bottom of this post is some of your bragging. None of it is
documented.
Now go ahead and snip out parts of this post you are unable to respond >>>> to and tell me, *with documentation,* what are some of these things
you do that I cannot or could never do?
Don't take any silence on my part for some sort of surrender.
Interpret
it as resolution to not waste as much of my time responding to closed >>>>> minded, bitter old fools.
heh, heh, heh... A whole lot of projection there from RBT's official >>>> resident closed minded bitter old fool.
But I'll admit, sometimes I slip up.
Krygowski's undocumented brags:
"Am I qualified to talk about such things? Yes, by virtue of attending >>>> multiple classes at various levels for each of the programs described
above. I've also acted as an editorial consultant on two well known
books dealing with those matters. I've written many articles on those
and related topics, and had some of them reprinted by publications in
other states and one other country. I no longer maintain the teaching
certification, but I've taught many cycling classes, I've written
scripts for and appeared in televised instructional spots, I've been
interviewed for newspapers and TV on such matters, and I've spoken (by >>>> request) at city, regional and statewide gatherings."
"I've written articles about dogs vs. bikes, and I
was once quoted on the issue in _Bicycling_ magazine."
"there are others who have examined my
bicycling qualifications, tested me and proclaimed that I do, indeed,
know what I'm talking about regarding bicycling."
"I've been riding with this club for 35 years now. I've given
workshops and classes on riding, including group riding. I've written
articles on it for the club newsletter and for other publications.
I've had other cycling instructors compliment my riding, and say they
learned and improved by watching me. Just last night, one member took
me aside and asked me to give tips to a new member who obviously
needed advice on group riding."
"I ride as a competent adult on normal roads. I've taught others to do >>>> that, and I've been recognized for such work. The remarks I posted
above were not bragging."
--Frank Krygowski
As I posted above.....
Now go ahead and snip out parts of this post you are unable to respond
to and tell me, *with documentation,* what are some of these things
you do that I cannot or could never do?
??????
..... apparently he's gone back into his bubble
One persistent problem with trolls and other obnoxious Usenet posters
is this: When you ignore them, they think they've somehow won.
Sorry to take away your reason for rising in the morning. Now you'll
have to find something else to do with your life.
" they think they've somehow won."
Won what? Are there prizes?
On 1/31/2025 9:24 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 1/30/2025 5:44 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jan 2025 06:27:08 -0500, Catrike Ryder
<[email protected]> wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jan 2025 19:39:50 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 1/27/2025 6:12 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
Somebody told him that nobody likes braggarts and liars.
You reflexively cry "liar" anytime I mention having done
something you
cannot or could never do.
Outside of standing in front of a classroom, something I
am loath to
do, and a few other things where I got better results
from doing
something different, what are some of the things you do
that I cannot
do?
There are several people in RBT who have done things I
cannot do. Tom
Kunick builds and rides bikes like I cannot do. Andrew
Muzu rides
fixies, runs a bike shop, and rebuilds bikes like I
cannot do. Junior
Carrington rides fixies and races bikes like I cannot do.
You see, unlike you, I am not afraid to admit to where
I've been
bettered. It happens regularly to all of us.
There are many people who do things I cannot or could
never do.
********�� You are not on that list.
One the other hand, you and I both know I've done many
things you
haven't done and cannot do.
You used to complain that I didn't provide
documentation. When I did provide documentation, you
cried that I was
just bragging.
It's not documentation when you make claims about what
you can do.
It's not documentation to relate what someone unknown
person said
about you.� It's not documentation when you post what you
say to your
imaginary friends.
Do you even understand what documentation is?
At the bottom of this post is some of your bragging. None
of it is
documented.
Now go ahead and snip out parts of this post you are
unable to respond
to and tell me, *with documentation,* what are some of
these things
you do that I cannot or could never do?
Don't take any silence on my part for some sort of
surrender. Interpret
it as resolution to not waste as much of my time
responding to closed
minded, bitter old fools.
heh, heh, heh...� A whole lot of projection there from
RBT's official
resident closed minded bitter old fool.
But I'll admit, sometimes I slip up.
Krygowski's undocumented brags:
"Am I qualified to talk about such things? Yes, by virtue
of attending
multiple classes at various levels for each of the
programs described
above. I've also acted as an editorial consultant on two
well known
books dealing with those matters. I've written many
articles on those
and related topics, and had some of them reprinted by
publications in
other states and one other country. I no longer maintain
the teaching
certification, but I've taught many cycling classes, I've
written
scripts for and appeared in televised instructional
spots, I've been
interviewed for newspapers and TV on such matters, and
I've spoken (by
request) at city, regional and statewide gatherings."
"I've written articles about dogs vs. bikes, and I
was once quoted on the issue in _Bicycling_ magazine."
"there are others who have examined my
bicycling qualifications, tested me and proclaimed that I
do, indeed,
know what I'm talking about regarding bicycling."
"I've been riding with this club for 35 years now. I've
given
workshops and classes on riding, including group riding.
I've written
articles on it for the club newsletter and for other
publications.
I've had other cycling instructors compliment my riding,
and say they
learned and improved by watching me. Just last night, one
member took
me aside and asked me to give tips to a new member who
obviously
needed advice on group riding."
"I ride as a competent adult on normal roads. I've taught
others to do
that, and I've been recognized for such work. The remarks
I posted
above were not bragging."
--Frank Krygowski
As I posted above.....
Now go ahead and snip out parts of this post you are
unable to respond
to and tell me, *with documentation,* what are some of
these things
you do that I cannot or could never do?
??????
.....� apparently he's gone back into his bubble
One persistent problem with trolls and other obnoxious
Usenet posters is this: When you ignore them, they think
they've somehow won.
Sorry to take away your reason for rising in the morning.
Now you'll have to find something else to do with your life.
" they think they've somehow won."
Won what? Are there prizes?
On 1/30/2025 5:44 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jan 2025 06:27:08 -0500, Catrike Ryder
<[email protected]> wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jan 2025 19:39:50 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 1/27/2025 6:12 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
Somebody told him that nobody likes braggarts and liars.
You reflexively cry "liar" anytime I mention having done something you >>>> cannot or could never do.
Outside of standing in front of a classroom, something I am loath to
do, and a few other things where I got better results from doing
something different, what are some of the things you do that I cannot
do?
There are several people in RBT who have done things I cannot do. Tom
Kunick builds and rides bikes like I cannot do. Andrew Muzu rides
fixies, runs a bike shop, and rebuilds bikes like I cannot do. Junior
Carrington rides fixies and races bikes like I cannot do.
You see, unlike you, I am not afraid to admit to where I've been
bettered. It happens regularly to all of us.
There are many people who do things I cannot or could never do.
******** You are not on that list.
One the other hand, you and I both know I've done many things you
haven't done and cannot do.
You used to complain that I didn't provide
documentation. When I did provide documentation, you cried that I was
just bragging.
It's not documentation when you make claims about what you can do.
It's not documentation to relate what someone unknown person said
about you. It's not documentation when you post what you say to your
imaginary friends.
Do you even understand what documentation is?
At the bottom of this post is some of your bragging. None of it is
documented.
Now go ahead and snip out parts of this post you are unable to respond
to and tell me, *with documentation,* what are some of these things
you do that I cannot or could never do?
Don't take any silence on my part for some sort of surrender. Interpret >>>> it as resolution to not waste as much of my time responding to closed
minded, bitter old fools.
heh, heh, heh... A whole lot of projection there from RBT's official
resident closed minded bitter old fool.
But I'll admit, sometimes I slip up.
Krygowski's undocumented brags:
"Am I qualified to talk about such things? Yes, by virtue of attending
multiple classes at various levels for each of the programs described
above. I've also acted as an editorial consultant on two well known
books dealing with those matters. I've written many articles on those
and related topics, and had some of them reprinted by publications in
other states and one other country. I no longer maintain the teaching
certification, but I've taught many cycling classes, I've written
scripts for and appeared in televised instructional spots, I've been
interviewed for newspapers and TV on such matters, and I've spoken (by
request) at city, regional and statewide gatherings."
"I've written articles about dogs vs. bikes, and I
was once quoted on the issue in _Bicycling_ magazine."
"there are others who have examined my
bicycling qualifications, tested me and proclaimed that I do, indeed,
know what I'm talking about regarding bicycling."
"I've been riding with this club for 35 years now. I've given
workshops and classes on riding, including group riding. I've written
articles on it for the club newsletter and for other publications.
I've had other cycling instructors compliment my riding, and say they
learned and improved by watching me. Just last night, one member took
me aside and asked me to give tips to a new member who obviously
needed advice on group riding."
"I ride as a competent adult on normal roads. I've taught others to do
that, and I've been recognized for such work. The remarks I posted
above were not bragging."
--Frank Krygowski
As I posted above.....
Now go ahead and snip out parts of this post you are unable to respond
to and tell me, *with documentation,* what are some of these things
you do that I cannot or could never do?
??????
..... apparently he's gone back into his bubble
One persistent problem with trolls and other obnoxious Usenet posters is >this: When you ignore them, they think they've somehow won.
Sorry to take away your reason for rising in the morning. Now you'll
have to find something else to do with your life.
Frank Krygowski
On Fri, 31 Jan 2025 09:30:25 -0600, AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:
On 1/31/2025 9:24 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 1/30/2025 5:44 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jan 2025 06:27:08 -0500, Catrike Ryder
<[email protected]> wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jan 2025 19:39:50 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 1/27/2025 6:12 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
Somebody told him that nobody likes braggarts and liars.
You reflexively cry "liar" anytime I mention having done
something you
cannot or could never do.
Outside of standing in front of a classroom, something I
am loath to
do, and a few other things where I got better results
from doing
something different, what are some of the things you do
that I cannot
do?
There are several people in RBT who have done things I
cannot do. Tom
Kunick builds and rides bikes like I cannot do. Andrew
Muzu rides
fixies, runs a bike shop, and rebuilds bikes like I
cannot do. Junior
Carrington rides fixies and races bikes like I cannot do.
You see, unlike you, I am not afraid to admit to where
I've been
bettered. It happens regularly to all of us.
There are many people who do things I cannot or could
never do.
******** You are not on that list.
One the other hand, you and I both know I've done many
things you
haven't done and cannot do.
You used to complain that I didn't provide
documentation. When I did provide documentation, you
cried that I was
just bragging.
It's not documentation when you make claims about what
you can do.
It's not documentation to relate what someone unknown
person said
about you. It's not documentation when you post what you
say to your
imaginary friends.
Do you even understand what documentation is?
At the bottom of this post is some of your bragging. None
of it is
documented.
Now go ahead and snip out parts of this post you are
unable to respond
to and tell me, *with documentation,* what are some of
these things
you do that I cannot or could never do?
Don't take any silence on my part for some sort of
surrender. Interpret
it as resolution to not waste as much of my time
responding to closed
minded, bitter old fools.
heh, heh, heh... A whole lot of projection there from
RBT's official
resident closed minded bitter old fool.
But I'll admit, sometimes I slip up.
Krygowski's undocumented brags:
"Am I qualified to talk about such things? Yes, by virtue
of attending
multiple classes at various levels for each of the
programs described
above. I've also acted as an editorial consultant on two
well known
books dealing with those matters. I've written many
articles on those
and related topics, and had some of them reprinted by
publications in
other states and one other country. I no longer maintain
the teaching
certification, but I've taught many cycling classes, I've
written
scripts for and appeared in televised instructional
spots, I've been
interviewed for newspapers and TV on such matters, and
I've spoken (by
request) at city, regional and statewide gatherings."
"I've written articles about dogs vs. bikes, and I
was once quoted on the issue in _Bicycling_ magazine."
"there are others who have examined my
bicycling qualifications, tested me and proclaimed that I
do, indeed,
know what I'm talking about regarding bicycling."
"I've been riding with this club for 35 years now. I've
given
workshops and classes on riding, including group riding.
I've written
articles on it for the club newsletter and for other
publications.
I've had other cycling instructors compliment my riding,
and say they
learned and improved by watching me. Just last night, one
member took
me aside and asked me to give tips to a new member who
obviously
needed advice on group riding."
"I ride as a competent adult on normal roads. I've taught
others to do
that, and I've been recognized for such work. The remarks
I posted
above were not bragging."
--Frank Krygowski
As I posted above.....
Now go ahead and snip out parts of this post you are
unable to respond
to and tell me, *with documentation,* what are some of
these things
you do that I cannot or could never do?
??????
..... apparently he's gone back into his bubble
One persistent problem with trolls and other obnoxious
Usenet posters is this: When you ignore them, they think
they've somehow won.
Sorry to take away your reason for rising in the morning.
Now you'll have to find something else to do with your life.
" they think they've somehow won."
Won what? Are there prizes?
https://i.etsystatic.com/14182764/r/il/0f9f1e/1194614598/il_fullxfull.1194614598_b8r8.jpg
--
C'est bon
Soloman
One persistent problem with trolls and other obnoxious Usenet posters is >this: When you ignore them, they think they've somehow won.
Sorry to take away your reason for rising in the morning. Now you'll
have to find something else to do with your life.
- Frank Krygowski
On Fri, 31 Jan 2025 10:24:14 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
One persistent problem with trolls and other obnoxious Usenet posters is
this: When you ignore them, they think they've somehow won.
Sorry to take away your reason for rising in the morning. Now you'll
have to find something else to do with your life.
This is a discussion group, Frank.
But hey, as long as you sit at the table, the game is still on.
On 1/31/2025 4:42 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
On Fri, 31 Jan 2025 10:24:14 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
One persistent problem with trolls and other obnoxious Usenet posters is >>> this: When you ignore them, they think they've somehow won.
Sorry to take away your reason for rising in the morning. Now you'll
have to find something else to do with your life.
This is a discussion group, Frank.
:-) Hey! After I've posted "this is a discussion group" dozens of
times, our tricycle rider has finally memorized it!
I've proven my teaching skills by getting even him to learn something! :-)
But hey, as long as you sit at the table, the game is still on.
Troll on.
On Fri, 31 Jan 2025 10:24:14 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 1/30/2025 5:44 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jan 2025 06:27:08 -0500, Catrike Ryder
<[email protected]> wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jan 2025 19:39:50 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 1/27/2025 6:12 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
Somebody told him that nobody likes braggarts and liars.
You reflexively cry "liar" anytime I mention having done something you >>>>> cannot or could never do.
Outside of standing in front of a classroom, something I am loath to
do, and a few other things where I got better results from doing
something different, what are some of the things you do that I cannot
do?
There are several people in RBT who have done things I cannot do. Tom
Kunick builds and rides bikes like I cannot do. Andrew Muzu rides
fixies, runs a bike shop, and rebuilds bikes like I cannot do. Junior
Carrington rides fixies and races bikes like I cannot do.
You see, unlike you, I am not afraid to admit to where I've been
bettered. It happens regularly to all of us.
There are many people who do things I cannot or could never do.
******** You are not on that list.
One the other hand, you and I both know I've done many things you
haven't done and cannot do.
You used to complain that I didn't provide
documentation. When I did provide documentation, you cried that I was >>>>> just bragging.
It's not documentation when you make claims about what you can do.
It's not documentation to relate what someone unknown person said
about you. It's not documentation when you post what you say to your
imaginary friends.
Do you even understand what documentation is?
At the bottom of this post is some of your bragging. None of it is
documented.
Now go ahead and snip out parts of this post you are unable to respond >>>> to and tell me, *with documentation,* what are some of these things
you do that I cannot or could never do?
Don't take any silence on my part for some sort of surrender. Interpret >>>>> it as resolution to not waste as much of my time responding to closed >>>>> minded, bitter old fools.
heh, heh, heh... A whole lot of projection there from RBT's official
resident closed minded bitter old fool.
But I'll admit, sometimes I slip up.
Krygowski's undocumented brags:
"Am I qualified to talk about such things? Yes, by virtue of attending >>>> multiple classes at various levels for each of the programs described
above. I've also acted as an editorial consultant on two well known
books dealing with those matters. I've written many articles on those
and related topics, and had some of them reprinted by publications in
other states and one other country. I no longer maintain the teaching
certification, but I've taught many cycling classes, I've written
scripts for and appeared in televised instructional spots, I've been
interviewed for newspapers and TV on such matters, and I've spoken (by >>>> request) at city, regional and statewide gatherings."
"I've written articles about dogs vs. bikes, and I
was once quoted on the issue in _Bicycling_ magazine."
"there are others who have examined my
bicycling qualifications, tested me and proclaimed that I do, indeed,
know what I'm talking about regarding bicycling."
"I've been riding with this club for 35 years now. I've given
workshops and classes on riding, including group riding. I've written
articles on it for the club newsletter and for other publications.
I've had other cycling instructors compliment my riding, and say they
learned and improved by watching me. Just last night, one member took
me aside and asked me to give tips to a new member who obviously
needed advice on group riding."
"I ride as a competent adult on normal roads. I've taught others to do >>>> that, and I've been recognized for such work. The remarks I posted
above were not bragging."
--Frank Krygowski
As I posted above.....
Now go ahead and snip out parts of this post you are unable to respond
to and tell me, *with documentation,* what are some of these things
you do that I cannot or could never do?
??????
..... apparently he's gone back into his bubble
One persistent problem with trolls and other obnoxious Usenet posters is
this: When you ignore them, they think they've somehow won.
But he did "win" didn't he? You made a point of accusing him, of
belong a coward for carrying a gun -, I understand perfectly legal
where he lives, and he replied, rather vigorously, and you don't make
that accusation any more.
Trik guy - 1
Frankie - 0
On Fri, 31 Jan 2025 10:24:14 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 1/30/2025 5:44 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jan 2025 06:27:08 -0500, Catrike Ryder
<[email protected]> wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jan 2025 19:39:50 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 1/27/2025 6:12 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
Somebody told him that nobody likes braggarts and liars.
You reflexively cry "liar" anytime I mention having done something you >>>>> cannot or could never do.
Outside of standing in front of a classroom, something I am loath to
do, and a few other things where I got better results from doing
something different, what are some of the things you do that I cannot
do?
There are several people in RBT who have done things I cannot do. Tom
Kunick builds and rides bikes like I cannot do. Andrew Muzu rides
fixies, runs a bike shop, and rebuilds bikes like I cannot do. Junior
Carrington rides fixies and races bikes like I cannot do.
You see, unlike you, I am not afraid to admit to where I've been
bettered. It happens regularly to all of us.
There are many people who do things I cannot or could never do.
******** You are not on that list.
One the other hand, you and I both know I've done many things you
haven't done and cannot do.
You used to complain that I didn't provide
documentation. When I did provide documentation, you cried that I was >>>>> just bragging.
It's not documentation when you make claims about what you can do.
It's not documentation to relate what someone unknown person said
about you. It's not documentation when you post what you say to your
imaginary friends.
Do you even understand what documentation is?
At the bottom of this post is some of your bragging. None of it is
documented.
Now go ahead and snip out parts of this post you are unable to respond >>>> to and tell me, *with documentation,* what are some of these things
you do that I cannot or could never do?
Don't take any silence on my part for some sort of surrender. Interpret >>>>> it as resolution to not waste as much of my time responding to closed >>>>> minded, bitter old fools.
heh, heh, heh... A whole lot of projection there from RBT's official
resident closed minded bitter old fool.
But I'll admit, sometimes I slip up.
Krygowski's undocumented brags:
"Am I qualified to talk about such things? Yes, by virtue of attending >>>> multiple classes at various levels for each of the programs described
above. I've also acted as an editorial consultant on two well known
books dealing with those matters. I've written many articles on those
and related topics, and had some of them reprinted by publications in
other states and one other country. I no longer maintain the teaching
certification, but I've taught many cycling classes, I've written
scripts for and appeared in televised instructional spots, I've been
interviewed for newspapers and TV on such matters, and I've spoken (by >>>> request) at city, regional and statewide gatherings."
"I've written articles about dogs vs. bikes, and I
was once quoted on the issue in _Bicycling_ magazine."
"there are others who have examined my
bicycling qualifications, tested me and proclaimed that I do, indeed,
know what I'm talking about regarding bicycling."
"I've been riding with this club for 35 years now. I've given
workshops and classes on riding, including group riding. I've written
articles on it for the club newsletter and for other publications.
I've had other cycling instructors compliment my riding, and say they
learned and improved by watching me. Just last night, one member took
me aside and asked me to give tips to a new member who obviously
needed advice on group riding."
"I ride as a competent adult on normal roads. I've taught others to do >>>> that, and I've been recognized for such work. The remarks I posted
above were not bragging."
--Frank Krygowski
As I posted above.....
Now go ahead and snip out parts of this post you are unable to respond
to and tell me, *with documentation,* what are some of these things
you do that I cannot or could never do?
??????
..... apparently he's gone back into his bubble
One persistent problem with trolls and other obnoxious Usenet posters is
this: When you ignore them, they think they've somehow won.
But he did "win" didn't he? You made a point of accusing him, of
belong a coward for carrying a gun -, I understand perfectly legal
where he lives, and he replied, rather vigorously, and you don't make
that accusation any more.
Trik guy - 1
Frankie - 0
On 1/31/2025 9:04 PM, John B. wrote:
On Fri, 31 Jan 2025 10:24:14 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 1/30/2025 5:44 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jan 2025 06:27:08 -0500, Catrike Ryder
<[email protected]> wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jan 2025 19:39:50 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 1/27/2025 6:12 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
Somebody told him that nobody likes braggarts and liars.
You reflexively cry "liar" anytime I mention having
done something you
cannot or could never do.
Outside of standing in front of a classroom, something
I am loath to
do, and a few other things where I got better results
from doing
something different, what are some of the things you do
that I cannot
do?
There are several people in RBT who have done things I
cannot do. Tom
Kunick builds and rides bikes like I cannot do. Andrew
Muzu rides
fixies, runs a bike shop, and rebuilds bikes like I
cannot do. Junior
Carrington rides fixies and races bikes like I cannot do.
You see, unlike you, I am not afraid to admit to where
I've been
bettered. It happens regularly to all of us.
There are many people who do things I cannot or could
never do.
******** You are not on that list.
One the other hand, you and I both know I've done many
things you
haven't done and cannot do.
You used to complain that I didn't provide
documentation. When I did provide documentation, you
cried that I was
just bragging.
It's not documentation when you make claims about what
you can do.
It's not documentation to relate what someone unknown
person said
about you. It's not documentation when you post what
you say to your
imaginary friends.
Do you even understand what documentation is?
At the bottom of this post is some of your bragging.
None of it is
documented.
Now go ahead and snip out parts of this post you are
unable to respond
to and tell me, *with documentation,* what are some of
these things
you do that I cannot or could never do?
Don't take any silence on my part for some sort of
surrender. Interpret
it as resolution to not waste as much of my time
responding to closed
minded, bitter old fools.
heh, heh, heh... A whole lot of projection there from
RBT's official
resident closed minded bitter old fool.
But I'll admit, sometimes I slip up.
Krygowski's undocumented brags:
"Am I qualified to talk about such things? Yes, by
virtue of attending
multiple classes at various levels for each of the
programs described
above. I've also acted as an editorial consultant on
two well known
books dealing with those matters. I've written many
articles on those
and related topics, and had some of them reprinted by
publications in
other states and one other country. I no longer
maintain the teaching
certification, but I've taught many cycling classes,
I've written
scripts for and appeared in televised instructional
spots, I've been
interviewed for newspapers and TV on such matters, and
I've spoken (by
request) at city, regional and statewide gatherings."
"I've written articles about dogs vs. bikes, and I
was once quoted on the issue in _Bicycling_ magazine."
"there are others who have examined my
bicycling qualifications, tested me and proclaimed that
I do, indeed,
know what I'm talking about regarding bicycling."
"I've been riding with this club for 35 years now. I've
given
workshops and classes on riding, including group
riding. I've written
articles on it for the club newsletter and for other
publications.
I've had other cycling instructors compliment my
riding, and say they
learned and improved by watching me. Just last night,
one member took
me aside and asked me to give tips to a new member who
obviously
needed advice on group riding."
"I ride as a competent adult on normal roads. I've
taught others to do
that, and I've been recognized for such work. The
remarks I posted
above were not bragging."
--Frank Krygowski
As I posted above.....
Now go ahead and snip out parts of this post you are
unable to respond
to and tell me, *with documentation,* what are some of
these things
you do that I cannot or could never do?
??????
..... apparently he's gone back into his bubble
One persistent problem with trolls and other obnoxious
Usenet posters is
this: When you ignore them, they think they've somehow won.
But he did "win" didn't he? You made a point of accusing
him, of
belong a coward for carrying a gun -, I understand
perfectly legal
where he lives, and he replied, rather vigorously, and you
don't make
that accusation any more.
Trik guy - 1
Frankie - 0
People do make individual decisions based on their
individual evaluations of their individual circumstances,
abilities etc. by their own individual criteria. And then
they live or die by those decisions.
https://cwbchicago.com/2025/01/garbage-collector-shoots-2- armed-robbers-outside-elementary-school-killing-1.html
In my personal opinion it is not morally superior do die
while being robbed. YMMV.
People do make individual decisions based on their individual
evaluations of their individual circumstances, abilities etc. by their
own individual criteria. And then they live or die by those decisions.
https://cwbchicago.com/2025/01/garbage-collector-shoots-2-armed-robbers- outside-elementary-school-killing-1.html
In my personal opinion it is not morally superior do die while being
robbed. YMMV.
2729 Center Rd, Youngstown, OH 44514 On Sun, 2 Feb 2025 12:43:08 -0500, Frank Krygowski <[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/1/2025 8:58 AM, AMuzi wrote:
People do make individual decisions based on their individual
evaluations of their individual circumstances, abilities etc. by their
own individual criteria.� And then they live or die by those decisions.
https://cwbchicago.com/2025/01/garbage-collector-shoots-2-armed-robbers-
outside-elementary-school-killing-1.html
In my personal opinion it is not morally superior do die while being
robbed. YMMV.
A parallel statement that might be made by other people about spiders, >snakes, ghosts, enclosed spaces, and dozens of other phobias. Requiring
a gun to ride on a quiet bike path where young mothers push kids in
strollers is paranoid. And if I lived somewhere where I needed a gun to
fend off armed robbers, I'd move.
On Mon Jan 27 11:03:35 2025 Zen Cycle wrote:
On 1/24/2025 10:00 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 1/24/2025 5:10 PM, Zen Cycle wrote:
I'd like to point out that integrated brake/shifter designs also
enhanced safety, eliminating the need to move the hands from a
position of control on the bars (Even bar-end shifters required moving >>>> your hand to a position with less control).
Yes, I suppose in a furious pack sprint that could be an issue.
It's an issue in general. I remember cases long ago on a steep climb
when a rider would have to reach down for a down tube shift and nearly
fall over.
Those of us who remember the "new bike vs. 1980s bike" comparison road
test, with young racers riding up a mountain, may recall that some of
the young guys said it was scary to take their hands off the lever to
shift.
Ah well. I've taken off both jackets and rain capes while riding. I even >>> drink from a water bottle while riding! But I'm not racing.
And some people never quite got the hang of being able to shift without
looking down at the lever lol....
In my experience, hardly anyone could shift without looking down to move their hands to the shift levers accurately. This was happening in the
heat of racing and you couldn't afford to miss a shift. And it was only a glance.
On Sun, 2 Feb 2025 12:43:08 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/1/2025 8:58 AM, AMuzi wrote:
People do make individual decisions based on their individual
evaluations of their individual circumstances, abilities etc. by their
own individual criteria.� And then they live or die by those decisions.
https://cwbchicago.com/2025/01/garbage-collector-shoots-2-armed-robbers- >>> outside-elementary-school-killing-1.html
In my personal opinion it is not morally superior do die while being
robbed. YMMV.
A parallel statement that might be made by other people about spiders, >>snakes, ghosts, enclosed spaces, and dozens of other phobias. Requiring
a gun to ride on a quiet bike path where young mothers push kids in >>strollers is paranoid. And if I lived somewhere where I needed a gun to >>fend off armed robbers, I'd move.
Well... Ohio is only 14 from the top of the list in Robbery Rate >https://www.statista.com/statistics/232564/robbery-rate-in-the-us-by-state/
But more perhaps more interesting is how do you know that you " needed
a gun to fend off armed robbers"?
Until you actually do need it?
On Sun, 2 Feb 2025 12:43:08 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/1/2025 8:58 AM, AMuzi wrote:
People do make individual decisions based on their individual
evaluations of their individual circumstances, abilities etc. by their
own individual criteria. And then they live or die by those decisions. >>>
https://cwbchicago.com/2025/01/garbage-collector-shoots-2-armed-robbers- >>> outside-elementary-school-killing-1.html
In my personal opinion it is not morally superior do die while being
robbed. YMMV.
A parallel statement that might be made by other people about spiders,
snakes, ghosts, enclosed spaces, and dozens of other phobias. Requiring
a gun to ride on a quiet bike path where young mothers push kids in
strollers is paranoid. And if I lived somewhere where I needed a gun to
fend off armed robbers, I'd move.
Well... Ohio is only 14 from the top of the list in Robbery Rate https://www.statista.com/statistics/232564/robbery-rate-in-the-us-by-state/
But more perhaps more interesting is how do you know that you " needed
a gun to fend off armed robbers"?
Until you actually do need it?
On 2/3/2025 9:21 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 2/2/2025 10:32 PM, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 2 Feb 2025 12:43:08 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/1/2025 8:58 AM, AMuzi wrote:
People do make individual decisions based on their
individual
evaluations of their individual circumstances,
abilities etc. by their
own individual criteria. And then they live or die by
those decisions.
https://cwbchicago.com/2025/01/garbage-collector-
shoots-2-armed- robbers-
outside-elementary-school-killing-1.html
In my personal opinion it is not morally superior do
die while being
robbed. YMMV.
A parallel statement that might be made by other people
about spiders,
snakes, ghosts, enclosed spaces, and dozens of other
phobias. Requiring
a gun to ride on a quiet bike path where young mothers
push kids in
strollers is paranoid. And if I lived somewhere where I
needed a gun to
fend off armed robbers, I'd move.
Well... Ohio is only 14 from the top of the list in
Robbery Rate
https://www.statista.com/statistics/232564/robbery-rate-
in-the-us-by- state/
But more perhaps more interesting is how do you know that
you " needed
a gun to fend off armed robbers"?
Until you actually do need it?
On one hand, Poland OH is largely bereft of violent crime:
https://www.city-data.com/crime/crime-Poland-Ohio.html
(compare to nearby Youngstown in 1st chart)
Youngstown has much more crime than Poland. So does
Philadelphia, Cleveland, DC, LA, Atlanta, Oklahoma City, etc
etc etc
But I've ridden in all of them, always unarmed. I've ridden
in most neighborhoods in Youngstown. The worst crime I ever
encountered was to have a cyclometer swiped, once in Poland
Township, once in Ireland.
After 70+ years of such experiences, am I really supposed to
pretend "This could be the day I'll have to blow somebody
away to save my life"?
No. At some point, repeatedly fearing something that has
never happened crosses over into phobia.
On 2/2/2025 10:32 PM, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 2 Feb 2025 12:43:08 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/1/2025 8:58 AM, AMuzi wrote:
People do make individual decisions based on their individual
evaluations of their individual circumstances, abilities etc. by their >>>> own individual criteria. And then they live or die by those decisions. >>>>
https://cwbchicago.com/2025/01/garbage-collector-shoots-2-armed-
robbers-
outside-elementary-school-killing-1.html
In my personal opinion it is not morally superior do die while being
robbed. YMMV.
A parallel statement that might be made by other people about spiders,
snakes, ghosts, enclosed spaces, and dozens of other phobias. Requiring
a gun to ride on a quiet bike path where young mothers push kids in
strollers is paranoid. And if I lived somewhere where I needed a gun to
fend off armed robbers, I'd move.
Well... Ohio is only 14 from the top of the list in Robbery Rate
https://www.statista.com/statistics/232564/robbery-rate-in-the-us-by-
state/
But more perhaps more interesting is how do you know that you " needed
a gun to fend off armed robbers"?
Until you actually do need it?
On one hand, Poland OH is largely bereft of violent crime:
https://www.city-data.com/crime/crime-Poland-Ohio.html
(compare to nearby Youngstown in 1st chart)
On 2/3/2025 9:21 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 2/2/2025 10:32 PM, John B. wrote:
On Sun, 2 Feb 2025 12:43:08 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/1/2025 8:58 AM, AMuzi wrote:
People do make individual decisions based on their individual
evaluations of their individual circumstances, abilities etc. by their >>>>> own individual criteria.� And then they live or die by those decisions. >>>>>
https://cwbchicago.com/2025/01/garbage-collector-shoots-2-armed-
robbers-
outside-elementary-school-killing-1.html
In my personal opinion it is not morally superior do die while being >>>>> robbed. YMMV.
A parallel statement that might be made by other people about spiders, >>>> snakes, ghosts, enclosed spaces, and dozens of other phobias. Requiring >>>> a gun to ride on a quiet bike path where young mothers push kids in
strollers is paranoid. And if I lived somewhere where I needed a gun to >>>> fend off armed robbers, I'd move.
Well... Ohio is only 14 from the top of the list in Robbery Rate
https://www.statista.com/statistics/232564/robbery-rate-in-the-us-by-
state/
But more perhaps more interesting is how do you know that you " needed
a gun to fend off armed robbers"?
Until you actually do need it?
On one hand, Poland OH is largely bereft of violent crime:
https://www.city-data.com/crime/crime-Poland-Ohio.html
(compare to nearby Youngstown in 1st chart)
Youngstown has much more crime than Poland. So does Philadelphia,
Cleveland, DC, LA, Atlanta, Oklahoma City, etc etc etc
But I've ridden in all of them, always unarmed. I've ridden in most >neighborhoods in Youngstown. The worst crime I ever encountered was to
have a cyclometer swiped, once in Poland Township, once in Ireland.
After 70+ years of such experiences, am I really supposed to pretend
"This could be the day I'll have to blow somebody away to save my life"?
No. At some point, repeatedly fearing something that has never happened >crosses over into phobia.
On 2/3/2025 8:54 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
Youngstown has much more crime than Poland. So does Philadelphia,
Cleveland, DC, LA, Atlanta, Oklahoma City, etc etc etc
But I've ridden in all of them, always unarmed. I've ridden in most
neighborhoods in Youngstown. The worst crime I ever encountered was to
have a cyclometer swiped, once in Poland Township, once in Ireland.
After 70+ years of such experiences, am I really supposed to pretend
"This could be the day I'll have to blow somebody away to save my life"?
No. At some point, repeatedly fearing something that has never
happened crosses over into phobia.
Yes, small but not zero.
p.s. nice snip.
Noone "wins" an argument about opinions. Is that what you think you're doing by arguing that Catrike shouldn't be carrying a gun despite a Constitutional Amendment giving him the right to do so? Your opinion appears to be counter to the Constitutionand you believe that you're winning something? Murder rates tend to be lowest in areas with the most highly rural populations so zsparate people and you don't have violent confrontations. Gun laws make little to no diffrence.
On 2/3/2025 12:55 PM, cyclintom wrote:
Noone "wins" an argument about opinions. Is that what you
think you're doing by arguing that Catrike shouldn't be
carrying a gun despite a Constitutional Amendment giving
him the right to do so? Your opinion appears to be counter
to the Constitution and you believe that you're winning
something? Murder rates tend to be lowest in areas with
the most highly rural populations so zsparate people and
you don't have violent confrontations. Gun laws make
little to no diffrence.
I'm just pointing out that almost all people who carry guns
do so because they are afraid. In nearly all cases, they are
afraid of things that never happen. That's phobia.
And I'm aware I'm violating my resolution to stop responding
to, um, a certain type of person. I'll try to do better.
On 2/3/2025 7:55 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 2/3/2025 12:55 PM, cyclintom wrote:
Noone "wins" an argument about opinions. Is that what you think
you're doing by arguing that Catrike shouldn't be carrying a gun
despite a Constitutional Amendment giving him the right to do so?
Your opinion appears to be counter to the Constitution and you
believe that you're winning something? Murder rates tend to be lowest
in areas with the most highly rural populations so zsparate people
and you don't have violent confrontations. Gun laws make little to no
diffrence.
I'm just pointing out that almost all people who carry guns do so
because they are afraid. In nearly all cases, they are afraid of
things that never happen. That's phobia.
And I'm aware I'm violating my resolution to stop responding to, um, a
certain type of person. I'll try to do better.
I post enough current successful defensive use videos to show that risks
are real (although situationally more or less) and that preparation and training may well be dispositive /in extremis/.
Fear? OK, perhaps. Rational risk assessment is another equally valid term.
On 2/3/2025 12:55 PM, cyclintom wrote:and you believe that you're winning something? Murder rates tend to be lowest in areas with the most highly rural populations so zsparate people and you don't have violent confrontations. Gun laws make little to no diffrence.
Noone "wins" an argument about opinions. Is that what you think you're doing by arguing that Catrike shouldn't be carrying a gun despite a Constitutional Amendment giving him the right to do so? Your opinion appears to be counter to the Constitution
I'm just pointing out that almost all people who carry guns do so
because they are afraid. In nearly all cases, they are afraid of things
that never happen. That's phobia.
And I'm aware I'm violating my resolution to stop responding to, um, a >certain type of person. I'll try to do better.
On 2/3/2025 10:12 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 2/3/2025 8:54 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
Youngstown has much more crime than Poland. So does Philadelphia,
Cleveland, DC, LA, Atlanta, Oklahoma City, etc etc etc
But I've ridden in all of them, always unarmed. I've ridden in most
neighborhoods in Youngstown. The worst crime I ever encountered was to
have a cyclometer swiped, once in Poland Township, once in Ireland.
After 70+ years of such experiences, am I really supposed to pretend
"This could be the day I'll have to blow somebody away to save my life"? >>>
No. At some point, repeatedly fearing something that has never
happened crosses over into phobia.
Yes, small but not zero.
p.s. nice snip.
Andrew, you've certainly been here long enough to understand the ancient >Usenet recommendation to trim content except what one's responding to.
I notice that practice has faded. We have posts that roll on for screen
after screen after screen, six or seven responses deep. But trimming is
still a good idea. As always, a person can scroll upward to see what was >posted. Usenet doesn't forget.
On 2/3/2025 9:04 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 2/3/2025 7:55 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 2/3/2025 12:55 PM, cyclintom wrote:
Noone "wins" an argument about opinions. Is that what you think
you're doing by arguing that Catrike shouldn't be carrying a gun
despite a Constitutional Amendment giving him the right to do so?
Your opinion appears to be counter to the Constitution and you
believe that you're winning something? Murder rates tend to be lowest
in areas with the most highly rural populations so zsparate people
and you don't have violent confrontations. Gun laws make little to no
diffrence.
I'm just pointing out that almost all people who carry guns do so
because they are afraid. In nearly all cases, they are afraid of
things that never happen. That's phobia.
And I'm aware I'm violating my resolution to stop responding to, um, a
certain type of person. I'll try to do better.
I post enough current successful defensive use videos to show that risks
are real (although situationally more or less) and that preparation and
training may well be dispositive /in extremis/.
Fear? OK, perhaps. Rational risk assessment is another equally valid term.
Or is it irrational risk assessment? Hey, let's see what the NRA says!
https://www.mediamatters.org/national-rifle-association/nra-commentary-admits-odds-needing-gun-defend-yourself-are-infinitesimal
On Mon, 3 Feb 2025 20:55:56 -0500, Frank Krygowskiand you believe that you're winning something? Murder rates tend to be lowest in areas with the most highly rural populations so zsparate people and you don't have violent confrontations. Gun laws make little to no diffrence.
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/3/2025 12:55 PM, cyclintom wrote:
Noone "wins" an argument about opinions. Is that what you think you're doing by arguing that Catrike shouldn't be carrying a gun despite a Constitutional Amendment giving him the right to do so? Your opinion appears to be counter to the Constitution
I'm just pointing out that almost all people who carry guns do so
because they are afraid. In nearly all cases, they are afraid of things >>that never happen. That's phobia.
And I'm aware I'm violating my resolution to stop responding to, um, a >>certain type of person. I'll try to do better.
... would you answer just a few little questions?
(1)
According to a new Washington Post-Ipsos poll released on
Monday....found that 32 percent of adults report owning guns.
Could you tell us what portion of these gun owners you interviewed to >determine how many actually carry a gun.
(2) Did you determine what, if anything, these gun carriers were
afraid of? Fear does very a great deal depending on circumstances you
know.
Or is just another example of Frankie blathering on about a subject
that he knows nothing about trying to impress the readers with his
vast knowledge?
Yet another Tom, as it were. Frank Kunchbrowski?
On Mon, 3 Feb 2025 21:18:05 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/3/2025 9:04 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 2/3/2025 7:55 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:Or is it irrational risk assessment? Hey, let's see what the NRA says!
On 2/3/2025 12:55 PM, cyclintom wrote:
Noone "wins" an argument about opinions. Is that what you think
you're doing by arguing that Catrike shouldn't be carrying a gun
despite a Constitutional Amendment giving him the right to do so?
Your opinion appears to be counter to the Constitution and you
believe that you're winning something? Murder rates tend to be lowest >>>>> in areas with the most highly rural populations so zsparate people
and you don't have violent confrontations. Gun laws make little to no >>>>> diffrence.
I'm just pointing out that almost all people who carry guns do so
because they are afraid. In nearly all cases, they are afraid of
things that never happen. That's phobia.
And I'm aware I'm violating my resolution to stop responding to, um, a >>>> certain type of person. I'll try to do better.
I post enough current successful defensive use videos to show that risks >>> are real (although situationally more or less) and that preparation and
training may well be dispositive /in extremis/.
Fear? OK, perhaps. Rational risk assessment is another equally valid term. >>
https://www.mediamatters.org/national-rifle-association/nra-commentary-admits-odds-needing-gun-defend-yourself-are-infinitesimal
Wet another Tommy Trick... changing the subject.
Or does your latest post explain fear and loathing among those who
elect to carrying a gun - a perfectly legal act in most? <many)?
States today.
On Mon, 3 Feb 2025 21:18:05 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/3/2025 9:04 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 2/3/2025 7:55 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:Or is it irrational risk assessment? Hey, let's see what the NRA says!
On 2/3/2025 12:55 PM, cyclintom wrote:
Noone "wins" an argument about opinions. Is that what you think
you're doing by arguing that Catrike shouldn't be carrying a gun
despite a Constitutional Amendment giving him the right to do so?
Your opinion appears to be counter to the Constitution and you
believe that you're winning something? Murder rates tend to be lowest >>>>> in areas with the most highly rural populations so zsparate people
and you don't have violent confrontations. Gun laws make little to no >>>>> diffrence.
I'm just pointing out that almost all people who carry guns do so
because they are afraid. In nearly all cases, they are afraid of
things that never happen. That's phobia.
And I'm aware I'm violating my resolution to stop responding to, um, a >>>> certain type of person. I'll try to do better.
I post enough current successful defensive use videos to show that risks >>> are real (although situationally more or less) and that preparation and
training may well be dispositive /in extremis/.
Fear? OK, perhaps. Rational risk assessment is another equally valid term. >>
https://www.mediamatters.org/national-rifle-association/nra-commentary-admits-odds-needing-gun-defend-yourself-are-infinitesimal
Wet another Tommy Trick... changing the subject.
Or does your latest post explain fear and loathing among those who
elect to carrying a gun - a perfectly legal act in most? <many)?
States today.
On Tue, 4 Feb 2025 05:11:44 -0500, zen cycle
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/4/2025 12:48 AM, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 3 Feb 2025 21:18:05 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/3/2025 9:04 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 2/3/2025 7:55 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 2/3/2025 12:55 PM, cyclintom wrote:
Noone "wins" an argument about opinions. Is that what you think
you're doing by arguing that Catrike shouldn't be carrying a gun >>>>>>> despite a Constitutional Amendment giving him the right to do so? >>>>>>> Your opinion appears to be counter to the Constitution and you
believe that you're winning something? Murder rates tend to be lowest >>>>>>> in areas with the most highly rural populations so zsparate people >>>>>>> and you don't have violent confrontations. Gun laws make little to no >>>>>>> diffrence.
I'm just pointing out that almost all people who carry guns do so
because they are afraid. In nearly all cases, they are afraid of
things that never happen. That's phobia.
And I'm aware I'm violating my resolution to stop responding to, um, a >>>>>> certain type of person. I'll try to do better.
I post enough current successful defensive use videos to show that risks >>>>> are real (although situationally more or less) and that preparation and >>>>> training may well be dispositive /in extremis/.
Fear? OK, perhaps. Rational risk assessment is another equally valid term.
Or is it irrational risk assessment? Hey, let's see what the NRA says! >>>>
https://www.mediamatters.org/national-rifle-association/nra-commentary-admits-odds-needing-gun-defend-yourself-are-infinitesimal
Wet another Tommy Trick... changing the subject.
Or does your latest post explain fear and loathing among those who
elect to carrying a gun - a perfectly legal act in most? <many)?
States today.
FFS...
Andrew mentioned he posted numerous examples of guns being used for self >>defense, Frank responded by posting a link showing the odds for needing
a gun for self defense are "infinitesimal".
It wasn't a change of subject, asshat.
Well, the discussion was centered on Frank's statement that people
that carried a gun are cowards
"I'm just pointing out that almost all people who carry guns do so
because they are afraid"
and suddenly he changes the subject to "infinitesimal".
That's not a change of subject?
On Tue, 4 Feb 2025 05:11:44 -0500, zen cycle
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/4/2025 12:48 AM, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 3 Feb 2025 21:18:05 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/3/2025 9:04 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 2/3/2025 7:55 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 2/3/2025 12:55 PM, cyclintom wrote:
Noone "wins" an argument about opinions. Is that what you think
you're doing by arguing that Catrike shouldn't be carrying a gun >>>>>>> despite a Constitutional Amendment giving him the right to do so? >>>>>>> Your opinion appears to be counter to the Constitution and you
believe that you're winning something? Murder rates tend to be lowest >>>>>>> in areas with the most highly rural populations so zsparate people >>>>>>> and you don't have violent confrontations. Gun laws make little to no >>>>>>> diffrence.
I'm just pointing out that almost all people who carry guns do so
because they are afraid. In nearly all cases, they are afraid of
things that never happen. That's phobia.
And I'm aware I'm violating my resolution to stop responding to, um, a >>>>>> certain type of person. I'll try to do better.
I post enough current successful defensive use videos to show that risks >>>>> are real (although situationally more or less) and that preparation and >>>>> training may well be dispositive /in extremis/.
Fear? OK, perhaps. Rational risk assessment is another equally valid term.
Or is it irrational risk assessment? Hey, let's see what the NRA says! >>>>
https://www.mediamatters.org/national-rifle-association/nra-commentary-admits-odds-needing-gun-defend-yourself-are-infinitesimal
Wet another Tommy Trick... changing the subject.
Or does your latest post explain fear and loathing among those who
elect to carrying a gun - a perfectly legal act in most? <many)?
States today.
FFS...
Andrew mentioned he posted numerous examples of guns being used for self
defense, Frank responded by posting a link showing the odds for needing
a gun for self defense are "infinitesimal".
It wasn't a change of subject, asshat.
Well, the discussion was centered on Frank's statement that people
that carried a gun are cowards
"I'm just pointing out that almost all people who carry guns do so
because they are afraid"
and suddenly he changes the subject to "infinitesimal".
That's not a change of subject?
On Mon, 3 Feb 2025 20:51:37 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/3/2025 10:12 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 2/3/2025 8:54 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
Youngstown has much more crime than Poland. So does Philadelphia,
Cleveland, DC, LA, Atlanta, Oklahoma City, etc etc etc
But I've ridden in all of them, always unarmed. I've ridden in most
neighborhoods in Youngstown. The worst crime I ever encountered was to >>>> have a cyclometer swiped, once in Poland Township, once in Ireland.
After 70+ years of such experiences, am I really supposed to pretend
"This could be the day I'll have to blow somebody away to save my life"? >>>>
No. At some point, repeatedly fearing something that has never
happened crosses over into phobia.
Yes, small but not zero.
p.s. nice snip.
Andrew, you've certainly been here long enough to understand the ancient
Usenet recommendation to trim content except what one's responding to.
I notice that practice has faded. We have posts that roll on for screen
after screen after screen, six or seven responses deep. But trimming is
still a good idea. As always, a person can scroll upward to see what was
posted. Usenet doesn't forget.
Snipping works well for people who don't have the backbone to reply to
all that the original poster said.
--
C'est bon
Soloman
Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
On Mon, 3 Feb 2025 20:51:37 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/3/2025 10:12 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 2/3/2025 8:54 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
Youngstown has much more crime than Poland. So does Philadelphia,
Cleveland, DC, LA, Atlanta, Oklahoma City, etc etc etc
But I've ridden in all of them, always unarmed. I've ridden in most
neighborhoods in Youngstown. The worst crime I ever encountered was to >>>>> have a cyclometer swiped, once in Poland Township, once in Ireland.
After 70+ years of such experiences, am I really supposed to pretend >>>>> "This could be the day I'll have to blow somebody away to save my life"? >>>>>
No. At some point, repeatedly fearing something that has never
happened crosses over into phobia.
Yes, small but not zero.
p.s. nice snip.
Andrew, you've certainly been here long enough to understand the ancient >>> Usenet recommendation to trim content except what one's responding to.
I notice that practice has faded. We have posts that roll on for screen
after screen after screen, six or seven responses deep. But trimming is
still a good idea. As always, a person can scroll upward to see what was >>> posted. Usenet doesn't forget.
Snipping works well for people who don't have the backbone to reply to
all that the original poster said.
--
C'est bon
Soloman
No it is good practice, makes posts more readable, I don�t trim enough
mainly by time it�s some monster thread when no one�s trimmed it�s
difficult to make a start frankly!
Roger Merriman
On 4 Feb 2025 12:43:35 GMT, Roger Merriman <[email protected]> wrote:
Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
On Mon, 3 Feb 2025 20:51:37 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/3/2025 10:12 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 2/3/2025 8:54 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
Youngstown has much more crime than Poland. So does Philadelphia,
Cleveland, DC, LA, Atlanta, Oklahoma City, etc etc etc
But I've ridden in all of them, always unarmed. I've ridden in most >>>>>> neighborhoods in Youngstown. The worst crime I ever encountered was to >>>>>> have a cyclometer swiped, once in Poland Township, once in Ireland. >>>>>>
After 70+ years of such experiences, am I really supposed to pretend >>>>>> "This could be the day I'll have to blow somebody away to save my life"? >>>>>>
No. At some point, repeatedly fearing something that has never
happened crosses over into phobia.
Yes, small but not zero.
p.s. nice snip.
Andrew, you've certainly been here long enough to understand the ancient >>>> Usenet recommendation to trim content except what one's responding to. >>>>
I notice that practice has faded. We have posts that roll on for screen >>>> after screen after screen, six or seven responses deep. But trimming is >>>> still a good idea. As always, a person can scroll upward to see what was >>>> posted. Usenet doesn't forget.
Snipping works well for people who don't have the backbone to reply to
all that the original poster said.
No it is good practice, makes posts more readable, I don’t trim enough
mainly by time it’s some monster thread when no one’s trimmed it’s
difficult to make a start frankly!
I'd argue that it's not a good practice when it's done specifically
not to have to reply to, or to take out of context, something in the
original post,
which is so often the case with Krygowski's snippage.
On 2/4/2025 12:48 AM, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 3 Feb 2025 21:18:05 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/3/2025 9:04 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 2/3/2025 7:55 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 2/3/2025 12:55 PM, cyclintom wrote:
Noone "wins" an argument about opinions. Is that what you think
you're doing by arguing that Catrike shouldn't be carrying a gun
despite a Constitutional Amendment giving him the right to do so?
Your opinion appears to be counter to the Constitution and you
believe that you're winning something? Murder rates tend to be lowest >>>>>> in areas with the most highly rural populations so zsparate people >>>>>> and you don't have violent confrontations. Gun laws make little to no >>>>>> diffrence.
I'm just pointing out that almost all people who carry guns do so
because they are afraid. In nearly all cases, they are afraid of
things that never happen. That's phobia.
And I'm aware I'm violating my resolution to stop responding to, um, a >>>>> certain type of person. I'll try to do better.
I post enough current successful defensive use videos to show that
risks
are real (although situationally more or less) and that preparation and >>>> training may well be dispositive /in extremis/.
Fear? OK, perhaps. Rational risk assessment is another equally valid
term.
Or is it irrational risk assessment? Hey, let's see what the NRA says!
https://www.mediamatters.org/national-rifle-association/nra-
commentary-admits-odds-needing-gun-defend-yourself-are-infinitesimal
Wet another Tommy Trick... changing the subject.
Or does your latest post explain fear and loathing among those who
elect to carrying a gun - a perfectly legal act in most? <many)?
States today.
FFS...
Andrew mentioned he posted numerous examples of guns being used for self defense, Frank responded by posting a link showing the odds for needing
a gun for self defense are "infinitesimal".
It wasn't a change of subject, asshat.
On 2/3/2025 9:04 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 2/3/2025 7:55 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 2/3/2025 12:55 PM, cyclintom wrote:
Noone "wins" an argument about opinions. Is that what
you think you're doing by arguing that Catrike shouldn't
be carrying a gun despite a Constitutional Amendment
giving him the right to do so? Your opinion appears to
be counter to the Constitution and you believe that
you're winning something? Murder rates tend to be lowest
in areas with the most highly rural populations so
zsparate people and you don't have violent
confrontations. Gun laws make little to no diffrence.
I'm just pointing out that almost all people who carry
guns do so because they are afraid. In nearly all cases,
they are afraid of things that never happen. That's phobia.
And I'm aware I'm violating my resolution to stop
responding to, um, a certain type of person. I'll try to
do better.
I post enough current successful defensive use videos to
show that risks are real (although situationally more or
less) and that preparation and training may well be
dispositive /in extremis/.
Fear? OK, perhaps. Rational risk assessment is another
equally valid term.
Or is it irrational risk assessment? Hey, let's see what the
NRA says!
https://www.mediamatters.org/national-rifle-association/nra- commentary-admits-odds-needing-gun-defend-yourself-are-
infinitesimal
Am 04.02.2025 um 13:59 schrieb Catrike Ryder:
On 4 Feb 2025 12:43:35 GMT, Roger Merriman <[email protected]> wrote:
Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
On Mon, 3 Feb 2025 20:51:37 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/3/2025 10:12 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 2/3/2025 8:54 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
Youngstown has much more crime than Poland. So does Philadelphia, >>>>>>> Cleveland, DC, LA, Atlanta, Oklahoma City, etc etc etc
But I've ridden in all of them, always unarmed. I've ridden in most >>>>>>> neighborhoods in Youngstown. The worst crime I ever encountered was to >>>>>>> have a cyclometer swiped, once in Poland Township, once in Ireland. >>>>>>>
After 70+ years of such experiences, am I really supposed to pretend >>>>>>> "This could be the day I'll have to blow somebody away to save my life"?
No. At some point, repeatedly fearing something that has never
happened crosses over into phobia.
Yes, small but not zero.
p.s. nice snip.
Andrew, you've certainly been here long enough to understand the ancient >>>>> Usenet recommendation to trim content except what one's responding to. >>>>>
I notice that practice has faded. We have posts that roll on for screen >>>>> after screen after screen, six or seven responses deep. But trimming is >>>>> still a good idea. As always, a person can scroll upward to see what was >>>>> posted. Usenet doesn't forget.
Snipping works well for people who don't have the backbone to reply to >>>> all that the original poster said.
No it is good practice, makes posts more readable, I don�t trim enough
mainly by time it�s some monster thread when no one�s trimmed it�s
difficult to make a start frankly!
I'd argue that it's not a good practice when it's done specifically
not to have to reply to, or to take out of context, something in the
original post,
I think this is a strawman.
which is so often the case with Krygowski's snippage.
Accusation without proof is libel.
On Fri, 31 Jan 2025 10:24:14 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
One persistent problem with trolls and other obnoxious Usenet posters is
this: When you ignore them, they think they've somehow won.
Sorry to take away your reason for rising in the morning. Now you'll
have to find something else to do with your life.
This is a discussion group, Frank.
But hey, as long as you sit at the table, the game is still on.
On Mon, 3 Feb 2025 20:55:56 -0500, Frank Krygowskiand you believe that you're winning something? Murder rates tend to be lowest in areas with the most highly rural populations so zsparate people and you don't have violent confrontations. Gun laws make little to no diffrence.
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/3/2025 12:55 PM, cyclintom wrote:
Noone "wins" an argument about opinions. Is that what you think you're doing by arguing that Catrike shouldn't be carrying a gun despite a Constitutional Amendment giving him the right to do so? Your opinion appears to be counter to the Constitution
I'm just pointing out that almost all people who carry guns do so
because they are afraid. In nearly all cases, they are afraid of things
that never happen. That's phobia.
And I'm aware I'm violating my resolution to stop responding to, um, a
certain type of person. I'll try to do better.
... would you answer just a few little questions?
(1)
According to a new Washington Post-Ipsos poll released on
Monday....found that 32 percent of adults report owning guns.
Could you tell us what portion of these gun owners you interviewed to determine how many actually carry a gun.
(2) Did you determine what, if anything, these gun carriers were
afraid of? Fear does very a great deal depending on circumstances you
know.
Or is just another example of Frankie blathering on about a subject
that he knows nothing about trying to impress the readers with his
vast knowledge?
Yet another Tom, as it were. Frank Kunchbrowski?
Am 04.02.2025 um 13:59 schrieb Catrike Ryder:
On 4 Feb 2025 12:43:35 GMT, Roger Merriman <[email protected]> wrote:
Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
On Mon, 3 Feb 2025 20:51:37 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/3/2025 10:12 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 2/3/2025 8:54 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
Youngstown has much more crime than Poland. So does Philadelphia, >>>>>>> Cleveland, DC, LA, Atlanta, Oklahoma City, etc etc etc
But I've ridden in all of them, always unarmed. I've ridden in most >>>>>>> neighborhoods in Youngstown. The worst crime I ever encountered
was to
have a cyclometer swiped, once in Poland Township, once in Ireland. >>>>>>>
After 70+ years of such experiences, am I really supposed to pretend >>>>>>> "This could be the day I'll have to blow somebody away to save my >>>>>>> life"?
No. At some point, repeatedly fearing something that has never
happened crosses over into phobia.
Yes, small but not zero.
p.s. nice snip.
Andrew, you've certainly been here long enough to understand the
ancient
Usenet recommendation to trim content except what one's responding to. >>>>>
I notice that practice has faded. We have posts that roll on for
screen
after screen after screen, six or seven responses deep. But
trimming is
still a good idea. As always, a person can scroll upward to see
what was
posted. Usenet doesn't forget.
Snipping works well for people who don't have the backbone to reply to >>>> all that the original poster said.
No it is good practice, makes posts more readable, I don’t trim enough >>> mainly by time it’s some monster thread when no one’s trimmed it’s >>> difficult to make a start frankly!
I'd argue that it's not a good practice when it's done specifically
not to have to reply to, or to take out of context, something in the
original post,
I think this is a strawman.
which is so often the case with Krygowski's snippage.
Accusation without proof is libel.
On Mon, 3 Feb 2025 20:55:56 -0500, Frank Krygowskiand you believe that you're winning something? Murder rates tend to be lowest in areas with the most highly rural populations so zsparate people and you don't have violent confrontations. Gun laws make little to no diffrence.
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/3/2025 12:55 PM, cyclintom wrote:
Noone "wins" an argument about opinions. Is that what you think you're doing by arguing that Catrike shouldn't be carrying a gun despite a Constitutional Amendment giving him the right to do so? Your opinion appears to be counter to the Constitution
I'm just pointing out that almost all people who carry guns do so
because they are afraid. In nearly all cases, they are afraid of things
that never happen. That's phobia.
And I'm aware I'm violating my resolution to stop responding to, um, a
certain type of person. I'll try to do better.
... would you answer just a few little questions?
(1)
According to a new Washington Post-Ipsos poll released on
Monday....found that 32 percent of adults report owning guns.
Could you tell us what portion of these gun owners you interviewed to determine how many actually carry a gun.
(2) Did you determine what, if anything, these gun carriers were
afraid of? Fear does very a great deal depending on circumstances you
know.
Or is just another example of Frankie blathering on about a subject
that he knows nothing about trying to impress the readers with his
vast knowledge?
On Tue, 4 Feb 2025 05:11:44 -0500, zen cycle
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/4/2025 12:48 AM, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 3 Feb 2025 21:18:05 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/3/2025 9:04 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 2/3/2025 7:55 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 2/3/2025 12:55 PM, cyclintom wrote:
Noone "wins" an argument about opinions. Is that what you think
you're doing by arguing that Catrike shouldn't be carrying a gun >>>>>>> despite a Constitutional Amendment giving him the right to do so? >>>>>>> Your opinion appears to be counter to the Constitution and you
believe that you're winning something? Murder rates tend to be lowest >>>>>>> in areas with the most highly rural populations so zsparate people >>>>>>> and you don't have violent confrontations. Gun laws make little to no >>>>>>> diffrence.
I'm just pointing out that almost all people who carry guns do so
because they are afraid. In nearly all cases, they are afraid of
things that never happen. That's phobia.
And I'm aware I'm violating my resolution to stop responding to, um, a >>>>>> certain type of person. I'll try to do better.
I post enough current successful defensive use videos to show that risks >>>>> are real (although situationally more or less) and that preparation and >>>>> training may well be dispositive /in extremis/.
Fear? OK, perhaps. Rational risk assessment is another equally valid term.
Or is it irrational risk assessment? Hey, let's see what the NRA says! >>>>
https://www.mediamatters.org/national-rifle-association/nra-commentary-admits-odds-needing-gun-defend-yourself-are-infinitesimal
Wet another Tommy Trick... changing the subject.
Or does your latest post explain fear and loathing among those who
elect to carrying a gun - a perfectly legal act in most? <many)?
States today.
FFS...
Andrew mentioned he posted numerous examples of guns being used for self
defense, Frank responded by posting a link showing the odds for needing
a gun for self defense are "infinitesimal".
It wasn't a change of subject, asshat.
Well, the discussion was centered on Frank's statement that people
that carried a gun are cowards
"I'm just pointing out that almost all people who carry guns do so
because they are afraid"
and suddenly he changes the subject to "infinitesimal".
That's not a change of subject?
On 2/3/2025 10:12 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 2/3/2025 8:54 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
Youngstown has much more crime than Poland. So does Philadelphia,
Cleveland, DC, LA, Atlanta, Oklahoma City, etc etc etc
But I've ridden in all of them, always unarmed. I've ridden in most
neighborhoods in Youngstown. The worst crime I ever encountered was
to have a cyclometer swiped, once in Poland Township, once in Ireland.
After 70+ years of such experiences, am I really supposed to pretend
"This could be the day I'll have to blow somebody away to save my life"? >>>
No. At some point, repeatedly fearing something that has never
happened crosses over into phobia.
Yes, small but not zero.
p.s. nice snip.
Andrew, you've certainly been here long enough to understand the ancient Usenet recommendation to trim content except what one's responding to.
I notice that practice has faded. We have posts that roll on for screen
after screen after screen, six or seven responses deep. But trimming is
still a good idea. As always, a person can scroll upward to see what was posted. Usenet doesn't forget.
On 2/4/2025 12:24 AM, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 3 Feb 2025 20:55:56 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/3/2025 12:55 PM, cyclintom wrote:
Noone "wins" an argument about opinions. Is that what you think
you're doing by arguing that Catrike shouldn't be carrying a gun
despite a Constitutional Amendment giving him the right to do so?
Your opinion appears to be counter to the Constitution and you
believe that you're winning something? Murder rates tend to be
lowest in areas with the most highly rural populations so zsparate
people and you don't have violent confrontations. Gun laws make
little to no diffrence.
I'm just pointing out that almost all people who carry guns do so
because they are afraid. In nearly all cases, they are afraid of things
that never happen. That's phobia.
And I'm aware I'm violating my resolution to stop responding to, um, a
certain type of person. I'll try to do better.
... would you answer just a few little questions?
(1)
According to a new Washington Post-Ipsos poll released on
Monday....found that 32 percent of adults report owning guns.
Could you tell us what portion of these gun owners you interviewed to
determine how many actually carry a gun.
(2) Did you determine what, if anything, these gun carriers were
afraid of? Fear does very a great deal depending on circumstances you
know.
Or is just another example of Frankie blathering on about a subject
that he knows nothing about trying to impress the readers with his
vast knowledge?
John, I don't see the point of your question #1. I didn't make any
claims about the number of people carrying guns. Why are you trying to
bring up that number?
On 2/3/2025 8:51 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 2/3/2025 10:12 AM, AMuzi wrote:
On 2/3/2025 8:54 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
Youngstown has much more crime than Poland. So does
Philadelphia, Cleveland, DC, LA, Atlanta, Oklahoma City,
etc etc etc
But I've ridden in all of them, always unarmed. I've
ridden in most neighborhoods in Youngstown. The worst
crime I ever encountered was to have a cyclometer
swiped, once in Poland Township, once in Ireland.
After 70+ years of such experiences, am I really
supposed to pretend "This could be the day I'll have to
blow somebody away to save my life"?
No. At some point, repeatedly fearing something that has
never happened crosses over into phobia.
Yes, small but not zero.
p.s. nice snip.
Andrew, you've certainly been here long enough to
understand the ancient Usenet recommendation to trim
content except what one's responding to.
I notice that practice has faded. We have posts that roll
on for screen after screen after screen, six or seven
responses deep. But trimming is still a good idea. As
always, a person can scroll upward to see what was posted.
Usenet doesn't forget.
I actually wish Andrew would practice it a bit more. Many
time his responses looks like he's responding to the last
point before his response, when in reality it's in reference
to a point a couple of paragraphs upthread. I wouldn't
expect the floriduh dumbass to to understand anything having
to do with (n)etiquette.
On Mon, 3 Feb 2025 20:51:37 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
I notice that practice has faded. We have posts that roll on for screen >>after screen after screen, six or seven responses deep. But trimming is >>still a good idea. As always, a person can scroll upward to see what was >>posted. Usenet doesn't forget.
Snipping works well for people who don't have the backbone to reply to
all that the original poster said.
cyclintom wrote:
Roger, there wasn't any problem actually shifting but grabbing the
lever in the heat of a bunch sprint was b\oth inconvenient and
dangerous. We're not talking about Frank being able to ride without
hands long nough to take a jacket off. Most riders had good enough
balance to do that.
We're talking about half a dozen riders or more trying to cross the
finish line first and trying to cut off others so they are weaving
all over the road.
Remember also the variant of bar-end shifters.
In my mind, the only people who really needed them was the sprinters.
I'm not a sprinter, and so I was never interested.
Smith
On Mon Feb 3 20:51:37 2025 Frank Krygowski wrote:
Andrew, you've certainly been here long enough to understand the ancient
Usenet recommendation to trim content except what one's responding to.
I notice that practice has faded. We have posts that roll on for screen
after screen after screen, six or seven responses deep. But trimming is
still a good idea. As always, a person can scroll upward to see what was
posted. Usenet doesn't forget.
Oh for God's sake stop your BS!
On Fri Jan 24 23:51:10 2025 Roger Merriman wrote:
Frank Krygowski <[email protected]> wrote:
In another forum, someone postulated that integrated brake & shiftOn a broader point bit like disks eventually coming to road, MTB had if not >> integrated brakes and shift levers that one didn?t need to move one?s hands >> or even shift finger positions, with thumb shifters.
levers (like STI) were the most significant bit of racing technology
ever designed for increasing speed. But that claim met with little
respect. One skeptic noted that there was no great increase in average
race speeds in Paris-Roubaix, Milan-San Remo, Tour of Flanders,
Leige-Bastogne-Leige or Giro de Lobardia since about 1960, including
during the era of STI adoption. By contrast, in the years 1930 - 1960
average speeds increased around 30%. (Note: That does not mean that STI
is not tactically beneficial. That's a separate issue.)
Ie it was being done on a related design so was inevitable just matter of
when.
But if not STI, what were the most significant tech developments
regarding bicycle race speeds?
Probably that one actually I believe that Penny farthings could shift,
Here?s my list:
Pedals & cranks, as opposed to scooting a ?hobby horse? via feet on the
ground.
where raced around Herne Hill which is old ish Velodrome in East London.
And they certainly could shift probably the biggest jump.
Don?t get me wrong been lots of improvements, some have been speed by
default even in the 90?s MTB didn?t really last long in races be that
frame/components etc. be that getting a double puncture, loosing the chain >> or something bending/snapping!
That?s certainly come a long way racers now expect their bikes to last the >> race and even over multiple runs!
Tubular metal frames and wire tension (spoke) wheels.I believe that bikes went to cranks as they didn?t have anything drive
Large driven wheels, to give a much higher effective ?gear.? (The
Ordinary or Penny Farthing)
chain as such yet.
The ?Safety Bicycle? with a diamond frame and chain drive, getting the
rider down lower, to greatly reduce aero drag as well as pitchover on
braking.
Pneumatic tires. Hard tired ?safeties? had terrible rolling resistance.
The handlebar stem, invented by the heroic Major Taylor, to allow a much >>> more aero riding position.
Rim brakes, by whatever mechanism, as opposed to spoon brakes acting on
a tire.
Multiple gears, by whatever mechanism.
The derailleur, making multiple gears easy to shift, customizable and
light weight.
Recumbent geometry in some situations. Recumbents seem to be slower
uphill, but tend to be faster on level or downhills
Fully enclosed streamlined aero shells tremendously increased speed, but >>> at a great reduction in versatility and practicality.
Beyond those, ISTM that most developments have been chasing ever
diminishing returns.
have been puttoing in big miles for 50 years. While Brifters were certainly and improvement it had absolutely no comparison to 28 mm tires. Many of the early carbon fiber bikes were unrideable with high pressure 23 mm tires.
Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> writes:
On Mon, 3 Feb 2025 20:51:37 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
[ ... ]
I notice that practice has faded. We have posts that roll on for screen >>>after screen after screen, six or seven responses deep. But trimming is >>>still a good idea. As always, a person can scroll upward to see what was >>>posted. Usenet doesn't forget.
Snipping works well for people who don't have the backbone to reply to
all that the original poster said.
Responding to all that the previous poster said, which is what I assume
you meant, would result in a literally exponential explosion of verbiage. >That way lies madness, no one has that sort of time.
Note that your reply was a single sentence that does not attempt to
reply to all that Mr. Krygowski said. Nothing wrong with that, but the >sentence refutes itself.
On 2/4/2025 12:24 AM, John B. wrote:and you believe that you're winning something? Murder rates tend to be lowest in areas with the most highly rural populations so zsparate people and you don't have violent confrontations. Gun laws make little to no diffrence.
On Mon, 3 Feb 2025 20:55:56 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/3/2025 12:55 PM, cyclintom wrote:
Noone "wins" an argument about opinions. Is that what you think you're doing by arguing that Catrike shouldn't be carrying a gun despite a Constitutional Amendment giving him the right to do so? Your opinion appears to be counter to the Constitution
I'm just pointing out that almost all people who carry guns do so
because they are afraid. In nearly all cases, they are afraid of things
that never happen. That's phobia.
And I'm aware I'm violating my resolution to stop responding to, um, a
certain type of person. I'll try to do better.
... would you answer just a few little questions?
(1)
According to a new Washington Post-Ipsos poll released on
Monday....found that 32 percent of adults report owning guns.
Could you tell us what portion of these gun owners you interviewed to
determine how many actually carry a gun.
(2) Did you determine what, if anything, these gun carriers were
afraid of? Fear does very a great deal depending on circumstances you
know.
Or is just another example of Frankie blathering on about a subject
that he knows nothing about trying to impress the readers with his
vast knowledge?
John, I don't see the point of your question #1. I didn't make any
claims about the number of people carrying guns. Why are you trying to
bring up that number?
As to what gun "protection" fans are afraid of, read the article I
linked in another post - the one the tricycle rider is purportedly
AFRAID to click! It quotes LaPierre listing the oh so scary things that >justify carrying a gun: "We know in the world that surrounds us there
are terrorists and there are home invaders, drug cartels, carjackers, >knockout gamers, and rapers, and haters, and campus killers, airport
killers, shopping mall killers..."
Remember, that guy is on your side of the argument, And yet, in the text
of the article, the NRA admits that the chance of needing a gun against
such things is beyond infinitesmal. And understand that we people who do
not have phobias about those terrible dangers do just fine. Exceptions
exist, but they are too rare to justify bothering with a gun - and
risking the chance that the gun will do more harm than good.
On 2/4/2025 2:23 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Fri Jan 24 23:51:10 2025 Roger Merriman wrote:
Frank Krygowski <[email protected]> wrote:
In another forum, someone postulated that integrated brake & shiftOn a broader point bit like disks eventually coming to road, MTB had if not >>> integrated brakes and shift levers that one didn?t need to move one?s hands >>> or even shift finger positions, with thumb shifters.
levers (like STI) were the most significant bit of racing technology
ever designed for increasing speed. But that claim met with little
respect. One skeptic noted that there was no great increase in average >>>> race speeds in Paris-Roubaix, Milan-San Remo, Tour of Flanders,
Leige-Bastogne-Leige or Giro de Lobardia since about 1960, including
during the era of STI adoption. By contrast, in the years 1930 - 1960 >>>> average speeds increased around 30%. (Note: That does not mean that STI >>>> is not tactically beneficial. That's a separate issue.)
Ie it was being done on a related design so was inevitable just matter of >>> when.
But if not STI, what were the most significant tech developments
regarding bicycle race speeds?
Probably that one actually I believe that Penny farthings could shift,
Here?s my list:
Pedals & cranks, as opposed to scooting a ?hobby horse? via feet on the >>>> ground.
where raced around Herne Hill which is old ish Velodrome in East London. >>> And they certainly could shift probably the biggest jump.
Don?t get me wrong been lots of improvements, some have been speed by
default even in the 90?s MTB didn?t really last long in races be that
frame/components etc. be that getting a double puncture, loosing the chain >>> or something bending/snapping!
That?s certainly come a long way racers now expect their bikes to last the >>> race and even over multiple runs!
Tubular metal frames and wire tension (spoke) wheels.I believe that bikes went to cranks as they didn?t have anything drive
Large driven wheels, to give a much higher effective ?gear.? (The
Ordinary or Penny Farthing)
chain as such yet.
The ?Safety Bicycle? with a diamond frame and chain drive, getting the >>>> rider down lower, to greatly reduce aero drag as well as pitchover on
braking.
Pneumatic tires. Hard tired ?safeties? had terrible rolling resistance. >>>>
The handlebar stem, invented by the heroic Major Taylor, to allow a much >>>> more aero riding position.
Rim brakes, by whatever mechanism, as opposed to spoon brakes acting on >>>> a tire.
Multiple gears, by whatever mechanism.
The derailleur, making multiple gears easy to shift, customizable and
light weight.
Recumbent geometry in some situations. Recumbents seem to be slower
uphill, but tend to be faster on level or downhills
Fully enclosed streamlined aero shells tremendously increased speed, but >>>> at a great reduction in versatility and practicality.
Beyond those, ISTM that most developments have been chasing ever
diminishing returns.
have been puttoing in big miles for 50 years. While Brifters were certainly and improvement it had absolutely no comparison to 28 mm tires. Many of the early carbon fiber bikes were unrideable with high pressure 23 mm tires.
Really? Hadn't noticed.
I was out on my 1988 Kestrel fixie with 22mm tubulars this
morning. Aside from the cold, everything else was fine.
On 2/4/2025 2:23 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Fri Jan 24 23:51:10 2025 Roger Merriman wrote:
Frank Krygowski <[email protected]> wrote:
In another forum, someone postulated that integrated brake & shiftOn a broader point bit like disks eventually coming to road, MTB had if not >>> integrated brakes and shift levers that one didn?t need to move one?s hands >>> or even shift finger positions, with thumb shifters.
levers (like STI) were the most significant bit of racing technology
ever designed for increasing speed. But that claim met with little
respect. One skeptic noted that there was no great increase in average >>>> race speeds in Paris-Roubaix, Milan-San Remo, Tour of Flanders,
Leige-Bastogne-Leige or Giro de Lobardia since about 1960, including
during the era of STI adoption. By contrast, in the years 1930 - 1960 >>>> average speeds increased around 30%. (Note: That does not mean that STI >>>> is not tactically beneficial. That's a separate issue.)
Ie it was being done on a related design so was inevitable just matter of >>> when.
But if not STI, what were the most significant tech developments
regarding bicycle race speeds?
Probably that one actually I believe that Penny farthings could shift,
Here?s my list:
Pedals & cranks, as opposed to scooting a ?hobby horse? via feet on the >>>> ground.
where raced around Herne Hill which is old ish Velodrome in East London. >>> And they certainly could shift probably the biggest jump.
Don?t get me wrong been lots of improvements, some have been speed by
default even in the 90?s MTB didn?t really last long in races be that
frame/components etc. be that getting a double puncture, loosing the chain >>> or something bending/snapping!
That?s certainly come a long way racers now expect their bikes to last the >>> race and even over multiple runs!
Tubular metal frames and wire tension (spoke) wheels.I believe that bikes went to cranks as they didn?t have anything drive
Large driven wheels, to give a much higher effective ?gear.? (The
Ordinary or Penny Farthing)
chain as such yet.
The ?Safety Bicycle? with a diamond frame and chain drive, getting the >>>> rider down lower, to greatly reduce aero drag as well as pitchover on
braking.
Pneumatic tires. Hard tired ?safeties? had terrible rolling resistance. >>>>
The handlebar stem, invented by the heroic Major Taylor, to allow a much >>>> more aero riding position.
Rim brakes, by whatever mechanism, as opposed to spoon brakes acting on >>>> a tire.
Multiple gears, by whatever mechanism.
The derailleur, making multiple gears easy to shift, customizable and
light weight.
Recumbent geometry in some situations. Recumbents seem to be slower
uphill, but tend to be faster on level or downhills
Fully enclosed streamlined aero shells tremendously increased speed, but >>>> at a great reduction in versatility and practicality.
Beyond those, ISTM that most developments have been chasing ever
diminishing returns.
have been puttoing in big miles for 50 years. While Brifters were
certainly and improvement it had absolutely no comparison to 28 mm
tires. Many of the early carbon fiber bikes were unrideable with high
pressure 23 mm tires.
Really? Hadn't noticed.
I was out on my 1988 Kestrel fixie with 22mm tubulars this
morning. Aside from the cold, everything else was fine.
On Tue, 4 Feb 2025 09:47:05 -0500, Frank KrygowskiConstitution and you believe that you're winning something? Murder rates tend to be lowest in areas with the most highly rural populations so zsparate people and you don't have violent confrontations. Gun laws make little to no diffrence.
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/4/2025 12:24 AM, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 3 Feb 2025 20:55:56 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/3/2025 12:55 PM, cyclintom wrote:
Noone "wins" an argument about opinions. Is that what you think you're doing by arguing that Catrike shouldn't be carrying a gun despite a Constitutional Amendment giving him the right to do so? Your opinion appears to be counter to the
I'm just pointing out that almost all people who carry guns do so
because they are afraid. In nearly all cases, they are afraid of things >>>> that never happen. That's phobia.
And I'm aware I'm violating my resolution to stop responding to, um, a >>>> certain type of person. I'll try to do better.
... would you answer just a few little questions?
(1)
According to a new Washington Post-Ipsos poll released on
Monday....found that 32 percent of adults report owning guns.
Could you tell us what portion of these gun owners you interviewed to
determine how many actually carry a gun.
(2) Did you determine what, if anything, these gun carriers were
afraid of? Fear does very a great deal depending on circumstances you
know.
Or is just another example of Frankie blathering on about a subject
that he knows nothing about trying to impress the readers with his
vast knowledge?
John, I don't see the point of your question #1. I didn't make any
claims about the number of people carrying guns. Why are you trying to
bring up that number?
As to what gun "protection" fans are afraid of, read the article I
linked in another post - the one the tricycle rider is purportedly
AFRAID to click! It quotes LaPierre listing the oh so scary things that
justify carrying a gun: "We know in the world that surrounds us there
are terrorists and there are home invaders, drug cartels, carjackers,
knockout gamers, and rapers, and haters, and campus killers, airport
killers, shopping mall killers..."
Remember, that guy is on your side of the argument, And yet, in the text
of the article, the NRA admits that the chance of needing a gun against
such things is beyond infinitesmal. And understand that we people who do
not have phobias about those terrible dangers do just fine. Exceptions
exist, but they are too rare to justify bothering with a gun - and
risking the chance that the gun will do more harm than good.
Nope. The article you references stated that “There are 318.9 million American citizens. The odds of you and me needing a gun to protect our
lives is not that much better than Colion the Incredible putting these
cards back in the exact order....”
Which is a bit different then your "NRA admits that the chance of
needing a gun...".
Or perhaps you don't understand the ratio of two specific individuals
among some 318.9 million inhabitants requiring a gun.
On 2/4/2025 6:27 PM, John B. wrote:Constitution and you believe that you're winning something? Murder rates tend to be lowest in areas with the most highly rural populations so zsparate people and you don't have violent confrontations. Gun laws make little to no diffrence.
On Tue, 4 Feb 2025 09:47:05 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/4/2025 12:24 AM, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 3 Feb 2025 20:55:56 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/3/2025 12:55 PM, cyclintom wrote:
Noone "wins" an argument about opinions. Is that what you think you're doing by arguing that Catrike shouldn't be carrying a gun despite a Constitutional Amendment giving him the right to do so? Your opinion appears to be counter to the
I'm just pointing out that almost all people who carry guns do so
because they are afraid. In nearly all cases, they are afraid of things >>>>> that never happen. That's phobia.
And I'm aware I'm violating my resolution to stop responding to, um, a >>>>> certain type of person. I'll try to do better.
... would you answer just a few little questions?
(1)
According to a new Washington Post-Ipsos poll released on
Monday....found that 32 percent of adults report owning guns.
Could you tell us what portion of these gun owners you interviewed to
determine how many actually carry a gun.
(2) Did you determine what, if anything, these gun carriers were
afraid of? Fear does very a great deal depending on circumstances you
know.
Or is just another example of Frankie blathering on about a subject
that he knows nothing about trying to impress the readers with his
vast knowledge?
John, I don't see the point of your question #1. I didn't make any
claims about the number of people carrying guns. Why are you trying to
bring up that number?
As to what gun "protection" fans are afraid of, read the article I
linked in another post - the one the tricycle rider is purportedly
AFRAID to click! It quotes LaPierre listing the oh so scary things that
justify carrying a gun: "We know in the world that surrounds us there
are terrorists and there are home invaders, drug cartels, carjackers,
knockout gamers, and rapers, and haters, and campus killers, airport
killers, shopping mall killers..."
Remember, that guy is on your side of the argument, And yet, in the text >>> of the article, the NRA admits that the chance of needing a gun against
such things is beyond infinitesmal. And understand that we people who do >>> not have phobias about those terrible dangers do just fine. Exceptions
exist, but they are too rare to justify bothering with a gun - and
risking the chance that the gun will do more harm than good.
Nope. The article you references stated that �There are 318.9 million
American citizens. The odds of you and me needing a gun to protect our
lives is not that much better than Colion the Incredible putting these
cards back in the exact order....�
Which is a bit different then your "NRA admits that the chance of
needing a gun...".
Or perhaps you don't understand the ratio of two specific individuals
among some 318.9 million inhabitants requiring a gun.
Chances are small with something like 340 million people,
400 million firearms and 365 days per year. Defensive use
of firearms is 1.5 million incidents per year.
https://reason.com/2022/09/09/the-largest-ever-survey-of-american-gun-owners-finds-that-defensive-use-of-firearms-is-common/
or maybe between 2.2 and 2.8 million
https://www.npr.org/2018/04/13/602143823/how-often-do-people-use-guns-in-self-defense
or maybe 1.8 million
https://www.legalreader.com/defensive-gun-use-statistics-americas-life-saving-gun-incidents-2024/
or between half a million and 2.8 million:
https://americangunfacts.com/guns-used-in-self-defense-stats/
But certainly not every firearm owner every day!
And also not never.
On Tue, 04 Feb 2025 17:45:35 -0500, Catrike RyderConstitution and you believe that you're winning something? Murder rates tend to be lowest in areas with the most highly rural populations so zsparate people and you don't have violent confrontations. Gun laws make little to no diffrence.
<[email protected]> wrote:
On Tue, 4 Feb 2025 09:47:05 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/4/2025 12:24 AM, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 3 Feb 2025 20:55:56 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/3/2025 12:55 PM, cyclintom wrote:
Noone "wins" an argument about opinions. Is that what you think you're doing by arguing that Catrike shouldn't be carrying a gun despite a Constitutional Amendment giving him the right to do so? Your opinion appears to be counter to the
I'm just pointing out that almost all people who carry guns do so
because they are afraid. In nearly all cases, they are afraid of things >>>>> that never happen. That's phobia.
And I'm aware I'm violating my resolution to stop responding to, um, a >>>>> certain type of person. I'll try to do better.
... would you answer just a few little questions?
(1)
According to a new Washington Post-Ipsos poll released on
Monday....found that 32 percent of adults report owning guns.
Could you tell us what portion of these gun owners you interviewed to
determine how many actually carry a gun.
(2) Did you determine what, if anything, these gun carriers were
afraid of? Fear does very a great deal depending on circumstances you
know.
Or is just another example of Frankie blathering on about a subject
that he knows nothing about trying to impress the readers with his
vast knowledge?
John, I don't see the point of your question #1. I didn't make any
claims about the number of people carrying guns. Why are you trying to >>>bring up that number?
As to what gun "protection" fans are afraid of, read the article I
linked in another post - the one the tricycle rider is purportedly
AFRAID to click! It quotes LaPierre listing the oh so scary things that >>>justify carrying a gun: "We know in the world that surrounds us there
are terrorists and there are home invaders, drug cartels, carjackers, >>>knockout gamers, and rapers, and haters, and campus killers, airport >>>killers, shopping mall killers..."
Remember, that guy is on your side of the argument, And yet, in the text >>>of the article, the NRA admits that the chance of needing a gun against >>>such things is beyond infinitesmal. And understand that we people who do >>>not have phobias about those terrible dangers do just fine. Exceptions >>>exist, but they are too rare to justify bothering with a gun - and >>>risking the chance that the gun will do more harm than good.
I guess Krygowski doesn't understand the meanng of "infinitesmal" any >>better than junior.
At any rate, if Krygowski is worried about that "the gun will do more
harm than good," he doesn't have to own one. In fact, I'd just as soon
he didn't for just that very reason.
As for justifying a gun, I only have to justify it to myself... and
I do.
As yet, I see no reason for me to not carry a gun on my bike rides, so
I will continue to do it, as I did today.
The point that I believe you are missing is that Frank interprets
everything in terms that he understands. He knows almost nothing about >firearms and hates them and thus, I believe, would have to be
terrified in order for him to carry a gun... I would even go a bit
further and say that even if in a dangerious situation would be even
more terrified of the gun and thus would be unlikely to arm himself in
any case.
So, in this case we have Frankie., the coward who is terrified of
firearms, disparaging others who may be (lets face it) braver then he.
On Tue, 4 Feb 2025 14:33:07 -0600, AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/4/2025 2:23 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Fri Jan 24 23:51:10 2025 Roger Merriman wrote:
Frank Krygowski <[email protected]> wrote:
In another forum, someone postulated that integrated brake & shiftOn a broader point bit like disks eventually coming to road, MTB had if not
levers (like STI) were the most significant bit of racing technology >>>>> ever designed for increasing speed. But that claim met with little
respect. One skeptic noted that there was no great increase in average >>>>> race speeds in Paris-Roubaix, Milan-San Remo, Tour of Flanders,
Leige-Bastogne-Leige or Giro de Lobardia since about 1960, including >>>>> during the era of STI adoption. By contrast, in the years 1930 - 1960 >>>>> average speeds increased around 30%. (Note: That does not mean that STI >>>>> is not tactically beneficial. That's a separate issue.)
integrated brakes and shift levers that one didn?t need to move one?s hands
or even shift finger positions, with thumb shifters.
Ie it was being done on a related design so was inevitable just matter of >>>> when.
But if not STI, what were the most significant tech developments
regarding bicycle race speeds?
Probably that one actually I believe that Penny farthings could shift, >>>> where raced around Herne Hill which is old ish Velodrome in East London. >>>> And they certainly could shift probably the biggest jump.
Here?s my list:
Pedals & cranks, as opposed to scooting a ?hobby horse? via feet on the >>>>> ground.
Don?t get me wrong been lots of improvements, some have been speed by
default even in the 90?s MTB didn?t really last long in races be that
frame/components etc. be that getting a double puncture, loosing the chain >>>> or something bending/snapping!
That?s certainly come a long way racers now expect their bikes to last the >>>> race and even over multiple runs!
Tubular metal frames and wire tension (spoke) wheels.I believe that bikes went to cranks as they didn?t have anything drive >>>> chain as such yet.
Large driven wheels, to give a much higher effective ?gear.? (The
Ordinary or Penny Farthing)
The ?Safety Bicycle? with a diamond frame and chain drive, getting the >>>>> rider down lower, to greatly reduce aero drag as well as pitchover on >>>>> braking.
Pneumatic tires. Hard tired ?safeties? had terrible rolling resistance. >>>>>
The handlebar stem, invented by the heroic Major Taylor, to allow a much >>>>> more aero riding position.
Rim brakes, by whatever mechanism, as opposed to spoon brakes acting on >>>>> a tire.
Multiple gears, by whatever mechanism.
The derailleur, making multiple gears easy to shift, customizable and >>>>> light weight.
Recumbent geometry in some situations. Recumbents seem to be slower
uphill, but tend to be faster on level or downhills
Fully enclosed streamlined aero shells tremendously increased speed, but >>>>> at a great reduction in versatility and practicality.
Beyond those, ISTM that most developments have been chasing ever
diminishing returns.
have been puttoing in big miles for 50 years. While Brifters were certainly and improvement it had absolutely no comparison to 28 mm tires. Many of the early carbon fiber bikes were unrideable with high pressure 23 mm tires.
Really? Hadn't noticed.
I was out on my 1988 Kestrel fixie with 22mm tubulars this
morning. Aside from the cold, everything else was fine.
When we first came back to Bangkok I was still running "sew-ups" and I
found them a real advantage when fixing a flat on busy city streets -
just pull the flat and push on the spare and give it a shot with the
CO2 inflator :-)
Both Catrike and John have made the point that you don't need a gun until you need a gun. Stop using your personal experiencees as proof that you're right.
All I know, actually, I can only assume,So you're _afraid_ the homeless guy might tear your jacket again. And
that if I'd shown a gun to the crepe who attacked me, there'd have
been no further problems between us.
I asked him to document some of
things and he qiuickly snipped and ran away.
So, in this case we have Frankie., the coward who is terrified of
firearms, disparaging others who may be (lets face it) braver then he.
Had he followed the rules, he'd be dead.
On 2/4/2025 2:36 PM, cyclintom wrote:
Both Catrike and John have made the point that you don't need a gun until you need a gun. Stop using your personal experiencees as proof that you're right.
As usual, I used data to prove I'm right. As usual, you didn't understand.
But speaking of personal experiences, do _you_ require packing a gun
before you'll go for a ride? As far as we can tell, only one person here
is that timid. You, Tom, are braver despite your complaints about
security in your own area.
On 2/4/2025 7:52 PM, John B. wrote:
So, in this case we have Frankie., the coward who is terrified of
firearms, disparaging others who may be (lets face it) braver then he.
No, John, I am not and never have been terrified of firearms. I'm not >particularly interested in shooting, but I have done a reasonable amount
of target shooting with friends and family. I have kept a gun in the
house, not one used for protection, but used for target shooting. I
don't do that any more because I'm just not that interested.
And I don't see how you can say that a person who refuses to ride a bike >without the "protection" of a gun is braver than I am.
People who carry guns for "protection" (a common motive) are almost by >definition afraid something will happen. That's not bravery. That's fear.
On 2/4/2025 7:54 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
All I know, actually, I can only assume,So you're _afraid_ the homeless guy might tear your jacket again. And
that if I'd shown a gun to the crepe who attacked me, there'd have
been no further problems between us.
you carry a gun because you're _afraid_.
On Wed, 5 Feb 2025 21:51:02 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/4/2025 7:52 PM, John B. wrote:
So, in this case we have Frankie., the coward who is terrified of
firearms, disparaging others who may be (lets face it) braver then he.
No, John, I am not and never have been terrified of firearms. I'm not >>particularly interested in shooting, but I have done a reasonable amount
of target shooting with friends and family. I have kept a gun in the
house, not one used for protection, but used for target shooting. I
don't do that any more because I'm just not that interested.
And I don't see how you can say that a person who refuses to ride a bike >>without the "protection" of a gun is braver than I am.
People who carry guns for "protection" (a common motive) are almost by >>definition afraid something will happen. That's not bravery. That's fear.
Stranger how your posts change over the years. I specifically remember
you recounting how you "had shot a.22 a few times" in an attempt to
justify your knowledge of firearms, and now you kept one in the house?
You brag that you always provide reference/proof. So where's the proof
for your statement above?
Were you lying then or are you lying now?
On 2/4/2025 9:37 AM, AMuzi wrote:
Had he followed the rules, he'd be dead.
We've been through all this before, of course. And we all know you,
Andrew, are the master at finding links to truly rare negative events.
But (again) if a person were to make their life decisions based on the >assumption that rare events would be happening to them, they'd be living
a weird life indeed.
Stay out of houses! People have died in them! >https://www.wtsp.com/article/news/local/pascocounty/man-hospitalized-serious-condition-car-crash-pasco-county/67-20eb0233-763f-42de-a617-a5db70dd1c1a
On Thu, 06 Feb 2025 06:43:54 -0500, Catrike Ryder
<[email protected]> wrote:
On Wed, 5 Feb 2025 21:51:02 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/4/2025 7:52 PM, John B. wrote:
So, in this case we have Frankie., the coward who is terrified of
firearms, disparaging others who may be (lets face it) braver then he.
No, John, I am not and never have been terrified of firearms. I'm not >>>particularly interested in shooting, but I have done a reasonable amount >>>of target shooting with friends and family. I have kept a gun in the >>>house, not one used for protection, but used for target shooting. I
don't do that any more because I'm just not that interested.
Krygowski has claimed that keeping a gun in your house makes it more
likely you'll get shot, and yet he says he's done it, so I guess his >>personal experience is evidence that his claim was wrong.
And I don't see how you can say that a person who refuses to ride a bike >>>without the "protection" of a gun is braver than I am.
Well, in spite of your brags about not being afraid you've guns,
you've shown no evidence of it.
People who carry guns for "protection" (a common motive) are almost by >>>definition afraid something will happen. That's not bravery. That's fear.
<shrug>
As a comment to the above I remember Frank stating, as proof that he
did know something about guns that "I've shot a .22 a few times" and
now "a few times" has grown into " I have kept a gun in the house, not
one used for protection, but used for target shooting."
Now Frankie so often tells that he documents everything and provides >preferences? But no reference found for keeping gun in his house.".
Strange how a gun in your pocket is cowardice and one in your house is
target practice?
Can he be lying?
On Wed, 5 Feb 2025 21:35:25 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
In the past, as has been noted, when I informally mention some things
I've done, Mr. Tricycle Rider claims they must be false if not
documented. When I've provided documentation, he's claimed my
documentation was bragging.
That's another lie. I never claimed they were false and you never
provided documentation.
On Wed, 5 Feb 2025 21:51:02 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/4/2025 7:52 PM, John B. wrote:
So, in this case we have Frankie., the coward who is terrified of
firearms, disparaging others who may be (lets face it) braver then he.
No, John, I am not and never have been terrified of firearms. I'm not
particularly interested in shooting, but I have done a reasonable amount
of target shooting with friends and family. I have kept a gun in the
house, not one used for protection, but used for target shooting. I
don't do that any more because I'm just not that interested.
And I don't see how you can say that a person who refuses to ride a bike
without the "protection" of a gun is braver than I am.
People who carry guns for "protection" (a common motive) are almost by
definition afraid something will happen. That's not bravery. That's fear.
Stranger how your posts change over the years. I specifically remember
you recounting how you "had shot a.22 a few times" in an attempt to
justify your knowledge of firearms, and now you kept one in the house?
On Thu, 06 Feb 2025 06:43:54 -0500, Catrike Ryder
<[email protected]> wrote:
On Wed, 5 Feb 2025 21:51:02 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/4/2025 7:52 PM, John B. wrote:
So, in this case we have Frankie., the coward who is terrified of
firearms, disparaging others who may be (lets face it) braver then he.
No, John, I am not and never have been terrified of firearms. I'm not
particularly interested in shooting, but I have done a reasonable amount >>> of target shooting with friends and family. I have kept a gun in the
house, not one used for protection, but used for target shooting. I
don't do that any more because I'm just not that interested.
Krygowski has claimed that keeping a gun in your house makes it more
likely you'll get shot, and yet he says he's done it, so I guess his
personal experience is evidence that his claim was wrong.
And I don't see how you can say that a person who refuses to ride a bike >>> without the "protection" of a gun is braver than I am.
Well, in spite of your brags about not being afraid you've guns,
you've shown no evidence of it.
People who carry guns for "protection" (a common motive) are almost by<shrug>
definition afraid something will happen. That's not bravery. That's fear. >>
As a comment to the above I remember Frank stating, as proof that he
did know something about guns that "I've shot a .22 a few times" and
now "a few times" has grown into " I have kept a gun in the house, not
one used for protection, but used for target shooting."
Now Frankie so often tells that he documents everything and provides preferences? But no reference found for keeping gun in his house.".
Strange how a gun in your pocket is cowardice and one in your house is
target practice?
Can he be lying?
On Wed, 5 Feb 2025 22:13:25 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/4/2025 9:37 AM, AMuzi wrote:
Had he followed the rules, he'd be dead.
We've been through all this before, of course. And we all know you,
Andrew, are the master at finding links to truly rare negative events.
But (again) if a person were to make their life decisions based on the
assumption that rare events would be happening to them, they'd be living
a weird life indeed.
Stay out of houses! People have died in them!
https://www.wtsp.com/article/news/local/pascocounty/man-hospitalized-serious-condition-car-crash-pasco-county/67-20eb0233-763f-42de-a617-a5db70dd1c1a
I've lived sort of an out of ordinary (not weird) life with several
rare events happening. Some, I was prepared to deal with, others, not
so much. At any rate, I've enjoyed my life immensely and wouldn't
change anything I've done. I'm still enjoying my life.
One thing I would absolutely not have done is to go into a life style
and profession where "rare events" where unlikely to occur. Being a
teacher or spending time in group think meetings is not for me.
I found classrooms to be colorless and monotonous as a student.
Although my mother and grandmother were teachers and encouraged me to
try it, the thought sickened me. I tried furthering my education in
things that interested me, but I simply couldn't tolerate the slow
moving classroom environment.
I preferred to work where I had to respond to things happening and was
judged every day, indeed, every minute by my performance. I did thirty
years moving up through that environment and then, perceiving that any further upward movement would be colorless and monotonous, I went off
looking for more stimulation. Among other things, I sold my home and
sold or gave away most everything I owned, traveled, wrote a book,
learned to scuba dive, bought a 36 foot boat and went sailing.
Need I repeat his nonsense about having a close friend who designed
guns for Ruger?
On 2/4/2025 9:37 AM, AMuzi wrote:
Had he followed the rules, he'd be dead.
We've been through all this before, of course. And we all
know you, Andrew, are the master at finding links to truly
rare negative events.
But (again) if a person were to make their life decisions
based on the assumption that rare events would be happening
to them, they'd be living a weird life indeed.
Stay out of houses! People have died in them! https://www.wtsp.com/article/news/local/pascocounty/man- hospitalized-serious-condition-car-crash-pasco- county/67-20eb0233-763f-42de-a617-a5db70dd1c1a
On 2/6/2025 6:35 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
On Wed, 5 Feb 2025 21:35:25 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
In the past, as has been noted, when I informally mention some things
I've done, Mr. Tricycle Rider claims they must be false if not
documented. When I've provided documentation, he's claimed my
documentation was bragging.
That's another lie. I never claimed they were false and you never
provided documentation.
Memory problems? Or still lying?
On 2/5/2025 10:33 PM, John B. wrote:
On Wed, 5 Feb 2025 21:51:02 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/4/2025 7:52 PM, John B. wrote:
So, in this case we have Frankie., the coward who is terrified of
firearms, disparaging others who may be (lets face it) braver then he.
No, John, I am not and never have been terrified of firearms. I'm not
particularly interested in shooting, but I have done a reasonable amount >>> of target shooting with friends and family. I have kept a gun in the
house, not one used for protection, but used for target shooting. I
don't do that any more because I'm just not that interested.
And I don't see how you can say that a person who refuses to ride a bike >>> without the "protection" of a gun is braver than I am.
People who carry guns for "protection" (a common motive) are almost by
definition afraid something will happen. That's not bravery. That's fear. >>
Stranger how your posts change over the years. I specifically remember
you recounting how you "had shot a.22 a few times" in an attempt to
justify your knowledge of firearms, and now you kept one in the house?
John, believe it or not I don't use this forum to post absolutely
everything I do. Heck, when I casually mention anything I do, you and
your timid buddy always claim I'm lying anyway.
The gun was no big deal. It wasn't even mine. A friend asked me to store
it for a while because he didn't want his inquisitive young son to find
it and horse around with it. It was a bit of a strange request, but I
took charge of it for a while. After a few years, I returned it.
If you expect everyone to report _everything_ here, you're way behind!
You've never told us what guns do you have in your house now. You never
told us the model of AR that you use. Come on, impress us! ;-)
On 2/6/2025 7:12 AM, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 06 Feb 2025 06:43:54 -0500, Catrike Ryder
<[email protected]> wrote:
On Wed, 5 Feb 2025 21:51:02 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/4/2025 7:52 PM, John B. wrote:
No, John, I am not and never have been terrified of firearms. I'm not
So, in this case we have Frankie., the coward who is terrified of
firearms, disparaging others who may be (lets face it) braver then he. >>>>
particularly interested in shooting, but I have done a reasonable amount >>>> of target shooting with friends and family. I have kept a gun in the
house, not one used for protection, but used for target shooting. I
don't do that any more because I'm just not that interested.
Krygowski has claimed that keeping a gun in your house makes it more
likely you'll get shot, and yet he says he's done it, so I guess his
personal experience is evidence that his claim was wrong.
And I don't see how you can say that a person who refuses to ride a bike >>>> without the "protection" of a gun is braver than I am.
Well, in spite of your brags about not being afraid you've guns,
you've shown no evidence of it.
People who carry guns for "protection" (a common motive) are almost by >>>> definition afraid something will happen. That's not bravery. That's fear. >>><shrug>
As a comment to the above I remember Frank stating, as proof that he
did know something about guns that "I've shot a .22 a few times" and
now "a few times" has grown into " I have kept a gun in the house, not
one used for protection, but used for target shooting."
Now Frankie so often tells that he documents everything and provides
preferences? But no reference found for keeping gun in his house.".
Strange how a gun in your pocket is cowardice and one in your house is
target practice?
Can he be lying?
John, your memory has gotten most of the above wrong.
Try doing direct quotes of what I actually said, rather than what you
pretend or imagine I said.
But we've been over this ground countless times. I'm wasting too much
time on you.
On 2/6/2025 8:11 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
On Wed, 5 Feb 2025 22:13:25 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/4/2025 9:37 AM, AMuzi wrote:
Had he followed the rules, he'd be dead.
We've been through all this before, of course. And we all know you,
Andrew, are the master at finding links to truly rare negative events.
But (again) if a person were to make their life decisions based on the
assumption that rare events would be happening to them, they'd be living >>> a weird life indeed.
Stay out of houses! People have died in them!
https://www.wtsp.com/article/news/local/pascocounty/man-hospitalized-serious-condition-car-crash-pasco-county/67-20eb0233-763f-42de-a617-a5db70dd1c1a
I've lived sort of an out of ordinary (not weird) life with several
rare events happening. Some, I was prepared to deal with, others, not
so much. At any rate, I've enjoyed my life immensely and wouldn't
change anything I've done. I'm still enjoying my life.
One thing I would absolutely not have done is to go into a life style
and profession where "rare events" where unlikely to occur. Being a
teacher or spending time in group think meetings is not for me.
I found classrooms to be colorless and monotonous as a student.
Although my mother and grandmother were teachers and encouraged me to
try it, the thought sickened me. I tried furthering my education in
things that interested me, but I simply couldn't tolerate the slow
moving classroom environment.
I preferred to work where I had to respond to things happening and was
judged every day, indeed, every minute by my performance. I did thirty
years moving up through that environment and then, perceiving that any
further upward movement would be colorless and monotonous, I went off
looking for more stimulation. Among other things, I sold my home and
sold or gave away most everything I owned, traveled, wrote a book,
learned to scuba dive, bought a 36 foot boat and went sailing.
:-) Or so you claim! Documentation? :-)
And you've still given no specifics on your "every minute" performance.
Short order cooks are judged minute by minute.
On 2/6/2025 8:22 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
Need I repeat his nonsense about having a close friend who designed
guns for Ruger?
I gave documentation on that to some folks here who might have
legitimate interests in it, and would be civilized enough not to disturb
my friend's privacy.
You don't qualify.
On 2/5/2025 9:13 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 2/4/2025 9:37 AM, AMuzi wrote:
Had he followed the rules, he'd be dead.
We've been through all this before, of course. And we all
know you, Andrew, are the master at finding links to truly
rare negative events.
But (again) if a person were to make their life decisions
based on the assumption that rare events would be happening
to them, they'd be living a weird life indeed.
Stay out of houses! People have died in them!
https://www.wtsp.com/article/news/local/pascocounty/man-
hospitalized-serious-condition-car-crash-pasco-
county/67-20eb0233-763f-42de-a617-a5db70dd1c1a
Not all that rare. Stabbings are prevalent on public transit
in large cities.
Yesterday for example: https://nypost.com/2025/02/05/us-news/bloody-outbreak-of-nyc-subway-crime-leaves-at-least-5-hurt-in-stabbings-slashings-and-a-beating-cops/
And defensive use of blades is regular (from what I see,
about 1 out of 50 or so).
Speaking of rare events, how many of the 400 million
firearms were used in magic spontaneous fatal negligent
discharges in the owner's home? Is it more than the 1 to 3
million defensive use incidents? Curious minds want to know.
AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/5/2025 9:13 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 2/4/2025 9:37 AM, AMuzi wrote:
Had he followed the rules, he'd be dead.
We've been through all this before, of course. And we all
know you, Andrew, are the master at finding links to truly
rare negative events.
But (again) if a person were to make their life decisions
based on the assumption that rare events would be happening
to them, they'd be living a weird life indeed.
Stay out of houses! People have died in them!
https://www.wtsp.com/article/news/local/pascocounty/man-
hospitalized-serious-condition-car-crash-pasco-
county/67-20eb0233-763f-42de-a617-a5db70dd1c1a
Not all that rare. Stabbings are prevalent on public transit
in large cities.
Yesterday for example:
https://nypost.com/2025/02/05/us-news/bloody-outbreak-of-nyc-subway-crime-leaves-at-least-5-hurt-in-stabbings-slashings-and-a-beating-cops/
And defensive use of blades is regular (from what I see,
about 1 out of 50 or so).
Speaking of rare events, how many of the 400 million
firearms were used in magic spontaneous fatal negligent
discharges in the owner's home? Is it more than the 1 to 3
million defensive use incidents? Curious minds want to know.
While American cities do have higher violent crime rates, New York seems to >have about 4 million folks using Transit per day, which though perhaps a
bit low for the size of New York, London is 24 million per day. Does seem a >bit more car centric from what I can gathered.
But either way that�s a lot of people, who one assumes aren�t expecting to >have to deal with crime.
Roger Merriman
AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/5/2025 9:13 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 2/4/2025 9:37 AM, AMuzi wrote:
Had he followed the rules, he'd be dead.
We've been through all this before, of course. And we all
know you, Andrew, are the master at finding links to truly
rare negative events.
But (again) if a person were to make their life decisions
based on the assumption that rare events would be happening
to them, they'd be living a weird life indeed.
Stay out of houses! People have died in them!
https://www.wtsp.com/article/news/local/pascocounty/man-
hospitalized-serious-condition-car-crash-pasco-
county/67-20eb0233-763f-42de-a617-a5db70dd1c1a
Not all that rare. Stabbings are prevalent on public transit
in large cities.
Yesterday for example:
https://nypost.com/2025/02/05/us-news/bloody-outbreak-of-nyc-subway-crime-leaves-at-least-5-hurt-in-stabbings-slashings-and-a-beating-cops/
And defensive use of blades is regular (from what I see,
about 1 out of 50 or so).
Speaking of rare events, how many of the 400 million
firearms were used in magic spontaneous fatal negligent
discharges in the owner's home? Is it more than the 1 to 3
million defensive use incidents? Curious minds want to know.
While American cities do have higher violent crime rates, New York seems to have about 4 million folks using Transit per day, which though perhaps a
bit low for the size of New York, London is 24 million per day. Does seem a bit more car centric from what I can gathered.
But either way that’s a lot of people, who one assumes aren’t expecting to
have to deal with crime.
Roger Merriman
On 6 Feb 2025 16:05:42 GMT, Roger Merriman <[email protected]> wrote:
AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/5/2025 9:13 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 2/4/2025 9:37 AM, AMuzi wrote:
Had he followed the rules, he'd be dead.
We've been through all this before, of course. And we all
know you, Andrew, are the master at finding links to truly
rare negative events.
But (again) if a person were to make their life decisions
based on the assumption that rare events would be happening
to them, they'd be living a weird life indeed.
Stay out of houses! People have died in them!
https://www.wtsp.com/article/news/local/pascocounty/man-
hospitalized-serious-condition-car-crash-pasco-
county/67-20eb0233-763f-42de-a617-a5db70dd1c1a
Not all that rare. Stabbings are prevalent on public transit
in large cities.
Yesterday for example:
https://nypost.com/2025/02/05/us-news/bloody-outbreak-of-nyc-subway-crime-leaves-at-least-5-hurt-in-stabbings-slashings-and-a-beating-cops/
And defensive use of blades is regular (from what I see,
about 1 out of 50 or so).
Speaking of rare events, how many of the 400 million
firearms were used in magic spontaneous fatal negligent
discharges in the owner's home? Is it more than the 1 to 3
million defensive use incidents? Curious minds want to know.
While American cities do have higher violent crime rates, New York seems to >> have about 4 million folks using Transit per day, which though perhaps a
bit low for the size of New York, London is 24 million per day. Does seem a >> bit more car centric from what I can gathered.
But either way thats a lot of people, who one assumes arent expecting to >> have to deal with crime.
Roger Merriman
Many, perhaps most people lock their doors even though they don't
really expect any strangers to come around and try to get in.
--
C'est bon
Soloman
On 2/6/2025 10:05 AM, Roger Merriman wrote:
AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/5/2025 9:13 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 2/4/2025 9:37 AM, AMuzi wrote:
Had he followed the rules, he'd be dead.
We've been through all this before, of course. And we all
know you, Andrew, are the master at finding links to truly
rare negative events.
But (again) if a person were to make their life decisions
based on the assumption that rare events would be happening
to them, they'd be living a weird life indeed.
Stay out of houses! People have died in them!
https://www.wtsp.com/article/news/local/pascocounty/man-
hospitalized-serious-condition-car-crash-pasco-
county/67-20eb0233-763f-42de-a617-a5db70dd1c1a
Not all that rare. Stabbings are prevalent on public transit
in large cities.
Yesterday for example:
https://nypost.com/2025/02/05/us-news/bloody-outbreak-of-nyc-subway-crime-leaves-at-least-5-hurt-in-stabbings-slashings-and-a-beating-cops/
And defensive use of blades is regular (from what I see,
about 1 out of 50 or so).
Speaking of rare events, how many of the 400 million
firearms were used in magic spontaneous fatal negligent
discharges in the owner's home? Is it more than the 1 to 3
million defensive use incidents? Curious minds want to know.
While American cities do have higher violent crime rates, New York seems to >> have about 4 million folks using Transit per day, which though perhaps a
bit low for the size of New York, London is 24 million per day. Does seem a >> bit more car centric from what I can gathered.
But either way that’s a lot of people, who one assumes aren’t expecting to
have to deal with crime.
Roger Merriman
My daughter has been riding more in Chicago's miserable
winter as the trains, even in her upscale neighborhood, are
more dangerous that being run down in a snowy street.
Several murders this year at her nearby train station.
On 2/6/2025 10:05 AM, Roger Merriman wrote:
AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/5/2025 9:13 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 2/4/2025 9:37 AM, AMuzi wrote:
Had he followed the rules, he'd be dead.
We've been through all this before, of course. And we all
know you, Andrew, are the master at finding links to truly
rare negative events.
But (again) if a person were to make their life decisions
based on the assumption that rare events would be happening
to them, they'd be living a weird life indeed.
Stay out of houses! People have died in them!
https://www.wtsp.com/article/news/local/pascocounty/man-
hospitalized-serious-condition-car-crash-pasco-
county/67-20eb0233-763f-42de-a617-a5db70dd1c1a
Not all that rare. Stabbings are prevalent on public transit
in large cities.
Yesterday for example:
https://nypost.com/2025/02/05/us-news/bloody-outbreak-of-nyc-subway-crime-leaves-at-least-5-hurt-in-stabbings-slashings-and-a-beating-cops/
And defensive use of blades is regular (from what I see,
about 1 out of 50 or so).
Speaking of rare events, how many of the 400 million
firearms were used in magic spontaneous fatal negligent
discharges in the owner's home? Is it more than the 1 to 3
million defensive use incidents? Curious minds want to know.
While American cities do have higher violent crime rates, New York seems to >> have about 4 million folks using Transit per day, which though perhaps a
bit low for the size of New York, London is 24 million per day. Does seem a >> bit more car centric from what I can gathered.
But either way that�s a lot of people, who one assumes aren�t expecting to >> have to deal with crime.
Roger Merriman
My daughter has been riding more in Chicago's miserable
winter as the trains, even in her upscale neighborhood, are
more dangerous that being run down in a snowy street.
Several murders this year at her nearby train station.
On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 10:46:38 -0600, AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/6/2025 10:05 AM, Roger Merriman wrote:
AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/5/2025 9:13 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 2/4/2025 9:37 AM, AMuzi wrote:
Had he followed the rules, he'd be dead.
We've been through all this before, of course. And we all
know you, Andrew, are the master at finding links to truly
rare negative events.
But (again) if a person were to make their life decisions
based on the assumption that rare events would be happening
to them, they'd be living a weird life indeed.
Stay out of houses! People have died in them!
https://www.wtsp.com/article/news/local/pascocounty/man-
hospitalized-serious-condition-car-crash-pasco-
county/67-20eb0233-763f-42de-a617-a5db70dd1c1a
Not all that rare. Stabbings are prevalent on public transit
in large cities.
Yesterday for example:
https://nypost.com/2025/02/05/us-news/bloody-outbreak-of-nyc-subway-crime-leaves-at-least-5-hurt-in-stabbings-slashings-and-a-beating-cops/
And defensive use of blades is regular (from what I see,
about 1 out of 50 or so).
Speaking of rare events, how many of the 400 million
firearms were used in magic spontaneous fatal negligent
discharges in the owner's home? Is it more than the 1 to 3
million defensive use incidents? Curious minds want to know.
While American cities do have higher violent crime rates, New York seems to >>> have about 4 million folks using Transit per day, which though perhaps a >>> bit low for the size of New York, London is 24 million per day. Does seem a >>> bit more car centric from what I can gathered.
But either way that’s a lot of people, who one assumes aren’t expecting to
have to deal with crime.
Roger Merriman
My daughter has been riding more in Chicago's miserable
winter as the trains, even in her upscale neighborhood, are
more dangerous that being run down in a snowy street.
Several murders this year at her nearby train station.
We may soon see some more changes in gun laws. I hope it does not go
towards allowing open carry, which I believe to be a very stupid to
do.
--
C'est bon
Soloman
On 2/6/2025 1:46 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 10:46:38 -0600, AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/6/2025 10:05 AM, Roger Merriman wrote:
AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/5/2025 9:13 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 2/4/2025 9:37 AM, AMuzi wrote:
Had he followed the rules, he'd be dead.
We've been through all this before, of course. And we all
know you, Andrew, are the master at finding links to truly
rare negative events.
But (again) if a person were to make their life decisions
based on the assumption that rare events would be happening
to them, they'd be living a weird life indeed.
Stay out of houses! People have died in them!
https://www.wtsp.com/article/news/local/pascocounty/man-
hospitalized-serious-condition-car-crash-pasco-
county/67-20eb0233-763f-42de-a617-a5db70dd1c1a
Not all that rare. Stabbings are prevalent on public transit
in large cities.
Yesterday for example:
https://nypost.com/2025/02/05/us-news/bloody-outbreak-of-nyc-subway-crime-leaves-at-least-5-hurt-in-stabbings-slashings-and-a-beating-cops/
And defensive use of blades is regular (from what I see,
about 1 out of 50 or so).
Speaking of rare events, how many of the 400 million
firearms were used in magic spontaneous fatal negligent
discharges in the owner's home? Is it more than the 1 to 3
million defensive use incidents? Curious minds want to know.
While American cities do have higher violent crime rates, New York seems to
have about 4 million folks using Transit per day, which though perhaps a >>>> bit low for the size of New York, London is 24 million per day. Does seem a
bit more car centric from what I can gathered.
But either way that�s a lot of people, who one assumes aren�t expecting to >>>> have to deal with crime.
Roger Merriman
My daughter has been riding more in Chicago's miserable
winter as the trains, even in her upscale neighborhood, are
more dangerous that being run down in a snowy street.
Several murders this year at her nearby train station.
We may soon see some more changes in gun laws. I hope it does not go
towards allowing open carry, which I believe to be a very stupid to
do.
--
C'est bon
Soloman
Depends, but I agree with you mostly.
If a guy can see your weapon in Chicago, he will steal it
just like telephones and purses.
On Thu, 06 Feb 2025 14:59:11 -0500, Catrike Ryder
<[email protected]> wrote:
On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 13:51:46 -0600, AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/6/2025 1:46 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 10:46:38 -0600, AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/6/2025 10:05 AM, Roger Merriman wrote:
AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/5/2025 9:13 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 2/4/2025 9:37 AM, AMuzi wrote:
Had he followed the rules, he'd be dead.
We've been through all this before, of course. And we all
know you, Andrew, are the master at finding links to truly
rare negative events.
But (again) if a person were to make their life decisions
based on the assumption that rare events would be happening
to them, they'd be living a weird life indeed.
Stay out of houses! People have died in them!
https://www.wtsp.com/article/news/local/pascocounty/man-
hospitalized-serious-condition-car-crash-pasco-
county/67-20eb0233-763f-42de-a617-a5db70dd1c1a
Not all that rare. Stabbings are prevalent on public transit
in large cities.
Yesterday for example:
https://nypost.com/2025/02/05/us-news/bloody-outbreak-of-nyc-subway-crime-leaves-at-least-5-hurt-in-stabbings-slashings-and-a-beating-cops/
And defensive use of blades is regular (from what I see,
about 1 out of 50 or so).
Speaking of rare events, how many of the 400 million
firearms were used in magic spontaneous fatal negligent
discharges in the owner's home? Is it more than the 1 to 3
million defensive use incidents? Curious minds want to know.
While American cities do have higher violent crime rates, New York seems to
have about 4 million folks using Transit per day, which though perhaps a >>>>>> bit low for the size of New York, London is 24 million per day. Does seem a
bit more car centric from what I can gathered.
But either way that�s a lot of people, who one assumes aren�t expecting to
have to deal with crime.
Roger Merriman
My daughter has been riding more in Chicago's miserable
winter as the trains, even in her upscale neighborhood, are
more dangerous that being run down in a snowy street.
Several murders this year at her nearby train station.
We may soon see some more changes in gun laws. I hope it does not go
towards allowing open carry, which I believe to be a very stupid to
do.
--
C'est bon
Soloman
Depends, but I agree with you mostly.
If a guy can see your weapon in Chicago, he will steal it
just like telephones and purses.
Exactly... and then he'll likely use it on you. I can understand open
carry out in the wild and/or when hunting, but not where there are
lots of people around.
Even Wyatt Earp didn't carry his pistol in a holster at the famous
"gunfight at the "O.K. Corral". (which didn't happen at the O.K.
corral :-)
On Fri, 07 Feb 2025 08:57:22 +0700, John B. <[email protected]>
wrote:
On Thu, 06 Feb 2025 10:53:20 -0500, Catrike Ryder
<[email protected]> wrote:
On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 09:44:59 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/6/2025 8:22 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
Need I repeat his nonsense about having a close friend who designed
guns for Ruger?
I gave documentation on that to some folks here who might have >>>>legitimate interests in it, and would be civilized enough not to disturb >>>>my friend's privacy.
You don't qualify.
<LOL>
Strange, I am always interested in guns and don't remember any >>documentation being given. Securest documentation?
As an aside Ruger has always begged about how their guns were designed
or developed. Why secrets?
Spelling Checker failed again -"Secret Documentation" :-)
On Fri, 07 Feb 2025 03:19:34 -0500, Catrike Ryder
<[email protected]> wrote:
On Fri, 07 Feb 2025 09:12:18 +0700, John B. <[email protected]>
wrote:
On Fri, 07 Feb 2025 08:57:22 +0700, John B. <[email protected]>
wrote:
On Thu, 06 Feb 2025 10:53:20 -0500, Catrike Ryder >>>><[email protected]> wrote:
On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 09:44:59 -0500, Frank Krygowski >>>>><[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/6/2025 8:22 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
Need I repeat his nonsense about having a close friend who designed >>>>>>> guns for Ruger?
I gave documentation on that to some folks here who might have >>>>>>legitimate interests in it, and would be civilized enough not to disturb >>>>>>my friend's privacy.
You don't qualify.
<LOL>
Strange, I am always interested in guns and don't remember any >>>>documentation being given. Securest documentation?
As an aside Ruger has always begged about how their guns were designed >>>>or developed. Why secrets?
Spelling Checker failed again -"Secret Documentation" :-)
Supposedly, according Krygowski's bullshit, the man was already well
know enough to have his name published in a magazine article, but
naming him in a obscure Usenet group would violate his privacy.
"He designed a gun for Ruger, doing the entire design pretty much
solo. It included some features for which he received a patent. No, I
won't violate his privacy, but I've seen his name (related to this) in
a magazine article."
--Frank Krygowski >>https://groups.google.com/g/rec.bicycles.tech/c/Zu_BtGgv8Fs/m/K7AvAhPZBQAJ
If the guy received a patent how does Frank think he is going to
protect the bloke's privacy as patents are freely available.
In fumblingly around on the web I discovered that >https://www.thesaurus.com/browse/lie
there are 141 ways to denote a liar.
and only 40 ways to denote the truth. >https://www.thesaurus.com/browse/tell-the-truth
(:-)
I also discovered two conventional responses to Frankie's posts:
'I believe there might be some discrepancies between what you're
saying and the facts. '
'It seems that the information provided may not fully align with the
actual circumstances. '
(:-)
On Fri, 07 Feb 2025 09:10:49 +0700, John B. <[email protected]>
wrote:
On Thu, 06 Feb 2025 14:59:11 -0500, Catrike Ryder
<[email protected]> wrote:
On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 13:51:46 -0600, AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/6/2025 1:46 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 10:46:38 -0600, AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>
On 2/6/2025 10:05 AM, Roger Merriman wrote:
AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/5/2025 9:13 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 2/4/2025 9:37 AM, AMuzi wrote:
Had he followed the rules, he'd be dead.
We've been through all this before, of course. And we all
know you, Andrew, are the master at finding links to truly
rare negative events.
But (again) if a person were to make their life decisions
based on the assumption that rare events would be happening
to them, they'd be living a weird life indeed.
Stay out of houses! People have died in them!
https://www.wtsp.com/article/news/local/pascocounty/man-
hospitalized-serious-condition-car-crash-pasco-
county/67-20eb0233-763f-42de-a617-a5db70dd1c1a
Not all that rare. Stabbings are prevalent on public transit
in large cities.
Yesterday for example:
https://nypost.com/2025/02/05/us-news/bloody-outbreak-of-nyc-subway-crime-leaves-at-least-5-hurt-in-stabbings-slashings-and-a-beating-cops/
And defensive use of blades is regular (from what I see,
about 1 out of 50 or so).
Speaking of rare events, how many of the 400 million
firearms were used in magic spontaneous fatal negligent
discharges in the owner's home? Is it more than the 1 to 3
million defensive use incidents? Curious minds want to know.
While American cities do have higher violent crime rates, New York seems to
have about 4 million folks using Transit per day, which though perhaps a
bit low for the size of New York, London is 24 million per day. Does seem a
bit more car centric from what I can gathered.
But either way that’s a lot of people, who one assumes aren’t expecting to
have to deal with crime.
Roger Merriman
My daughter has been riding more in Chicago's miserable
winter as the trains, even in her upscale neighborhood, are
more dangerous that being run down in a snowy street.
Several murders this year at her nearby train station.
We may soon see some more changes in gun laws. I hope it does not go >>>>> towards allowing open carry, which I believe to be a very stupid to
do.
--
C'est bon
Soloman
Depends, but I agree with you mostly.
If a guy can see your weapon in Chicago, he will steal it
just like telephones and purses.
Exactly... and then he'll likely use it on you. I can understand open
carry out in the wild and/or when hunting, but not where there are
lots of people around.
Even Wyatt Earp didn't carry his pistol in a holster at the famous
"gunfight at the "O.K. Corral". (which didn't happen at the O.K.
corral :-)
Indeed. Hollywood's western movies and TV shows were mostly bullshit.
There were no fast draw contests, nor fast draw holsters. Wild Bill
Hickock often carried his guns in a sash tied around his waist. He
carried several different guns, but there's no record of him ever
carring a Colt Single Action .45, the gun most often associated with
"cowboy" movies. His most famous guns were 1851 colt Navy .36 caliber
cap and ball.
--
C'est bon
Soloman
On Fri, 07 Feb 2025 09:10:49 +0700, John B. <[email protected]>
wrote:
On Thu, 06 Feb 2025 14:59:11 -0500, Catrike Ryder
<[email protected]> wrote:
On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 13:51:46 -0600, AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/6/2025 1:46 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 10:46:38 -0600, AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>
On 2/6/2025 10:05 AM, Roger Merriman wrote:
AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/5/2025 9:13 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 2/4/2025 9:37 AM, AMuzi wrote:
Had he followed the rules, he'd be dead.
We've been through all this before, of course. And we all
know you, Andrew, are the master at finding links to truly
rare negative events.
But (again) if a person were to make their life decisions
based on the assumption that rare events would be happening
to them, they'd be living a weird life indeed.
Stay out of houses! People have died in them!
https://www.wtsp.com/article/news/local/pascocounty/man-
hospitalized-serious-condition-car-crash-pasco-
county/67-20eb0233-763f-42de-a617-a5db70dd1c1a
Not all that rare. Stabbings are prevalent on public transit
in large cities.
Yesterday for example:
https://nypost.com/2025/02/05/us-news/bloody-outbreak-of-nyc-subway-crime-leaves-at-least-5-hurt-in-stabbings-slashings-and-a-beating-cops/
And defensive use of blades is regular (from what I see,
about 1 out of 50 or so).
Speaking of rare events, how many of the 400 million
firearms were used in magic spontaneous fatal negligent
discharges in the owner's home? Is it more than the 1 to 3
million defensive use incidents? Curious minds want to know.
While American cities do have higher violent crime rates, New York seems to
have about 4 million folks using Transit per day, which though perhaps a
bit low for the size of New York, London is 24 million per day. Does seem a
bit more car centric from what I can gathered.
But either way thats a lot of people, who one assumes arent expecting to
have to deal with crime.
Roger Merriman
My daughter has been riding more in Chicago's miserable
winter as the trains, even in her upscale neighborhood, are
more dangerous that being run down in a snowy street.
Several murders this year at her nearby train station.
We may soon see some more changes in gun laws. I hope it does not go >>>>> towards allowing open carry, which I believe to be a very stupid to
do.
--
C'est bon
Soloman
Depends, but I agree with you mostly.
If a guy can see your weapon in Chicago, he will steal it
just like telephones and purses.
Exactly... and then he'll likely use it on you. I can understand open
carry out in the wild and/or when hunting, but not where there are
lots of people around.
Even Wyatt Earp didn't carry his pistol in a holster at the famous
"gunfight at the "O.K. Corral". (which didn't happen at the O.K.
corral :-)
Indeed. Hollywood's western movies and TV shows were mostly bullshit.
There were no fast draw contests, nor fast draw holsters. Wild Bill
Hickock often carried his guns in a sash tied around his waist. He
carried several different guns, but there's no record of him ever
carring a Colt Single Action .45, the gun most often associated with
"cowboy" movies. His most famous guns were 1851 colt Navy .36 caliber
cap and ball.
--
C'est bon
Soloman
Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
On Fri, 07 Feb 2025 09:10:49 +0700, John B. <[email protected]>
wrote:
On Thu, 06 Feb 2025 14:59:11 -0500, Catrike Ryder
<[email protected]> wrote:
On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 13:51:46 -0600, AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/6/2025 1:46 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 10:46:38 -0600, AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>
On 2/6/2025 10:05 AM, Roger Merriman wrote:
AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/5/2025 9:13 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 2/4/2025 9:37 AM, AMuzi wrote:
Had he followed the rules, he'd be dead.
We've been through all this before, of course. And we all
know you, Andrew, are the master at finding links to truly >>>>>>>>>> rare negative events.
But (again) if a person were to make their life decisions
based on the assumption that rare events would be happening >>>>>>>>>> to them, they'd be living a weird life indeed.
Stay out of houses! People have died in them!
https://www.wtsp.com/article/news/local/pascocounty/man-
hospitalized-serious-condition-car-crash-pasco-
county/67-20eb0233-763f-42de-a617-a5db70dd1c1a
Not all that rare. Stabbings are prevalent on public transit >>>>>>>>> in large cities.
Yesterday for example:
https://nypost.com/2025/02/05/us-news/bloody-outbreak-of-nyc-subway-crime-leaves-at-least-5-hurt-in-stabbings-slashings-and-a-beating-cops/
And defensive use of blades is regular (from what I see,
about 1 out of 50 or so).
Speaking of rare events, how many of the 400 million
firearms were used in magic spontaneous fatal negligent
discharges in the owner's home? Is it more than the 1 to 3
million defensive use incidents? Curious minds want to know. >>>>>>>>>
While American cities do have higher violent crime rates, New York seems to
have about 4 million folks using Transit per day, which though perhaps a
bit low for the size of New York, London is 24 million per day. Does seem a
bit more car centric from what I can gathered.
But either way that?s a lot of people, who one assumes aren?t expecting to
have to deal with crime.
Roger Merriman
My daughter has been riding more in Chicago's miserable
winter as the trains, even in her upscale neighborhood, are
more dangerous that being run down in a snowy street.
Several murders this year at her nearby train station.
We may soon see some more changes in gun laws. I hope it does not go >>>>>> towards allowing open carry, which I believe to be a very stupid to >>>>>> do.
--
C'est bon
Soloman
Depends, but I agree with you mostly.
If a guy can see your weapon in Chicago, he will steal it
just like telephones and purses.
Exactly... and then he'll likely use it on you. I can understand open
carry out in the wild and/or when hunting, but not where there are
lots of people around.
Even Wyatt Earp didn't carry his pistol in a holster at the famous
"gunfight at the "O.K. Corral". (which didn't happen at the O.K.
corral :-)
Indeed. Hollywood's western movies and TV shows were mostly bullshit.
There were no fast draw contests, nor fast draw holsters. Wild Bill
Hickock often carried his guns in a sash tied around his waist. He
carried several different guns, but there's no record of him ever
carring a Colt Single Action .45, the gun most often associated with
"cowboy" movies. His most famous guns were 1851 colt Navy .36 caliber
cap and ball.
--
C'est bon
Soloman
Well yes entertainment is entrainment rather than a documentary!
Roger Merriman
On Tue Feb 4 17:54:59 2025 Catrike Ryder wrote:
On Tue, 4 Feb 2025 14:33:07 -0600, AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/4/2025 2:23 PM, cyclintom wrote:
have been puttoing in big miles for 50 years. While Brifters were certainly and improvement it had absolutely no comparison to 28 mm tires. Many of the early carbon fiber bikes were unrideable with high pressure 23 mm tires.
Really? Hadn't noticed.
I was out on my 1988 Kestrel fixie with 22mm tubulars this
morning. Aside from the cold, everything else was fine.
I was out on a 50 mile ride today, too. Temperatures were near 80 and
my neuropathy was almost nonexistant, so I left the cane in it's tube
for the entire ride. I didn't need to shoot anyone, either, so I left
the gun it's tube for the entire ride, too.
If you haven't ridden your Kestrel with 28 mm tubeless how can you compare them?
Catrike: You're insulting Krygowski, it is his claim that anyone that has a gun is authorized to kill people by the dozens.
On Tue Feb 4 17:54:59 2025 Catrike Ryder wrote:
On Tue, 4 Feb 2025 14:33:07 -0600, AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/4/2025 2:23 PM, cyclintom wrote:
have been puttoing in big miles for 50 years. While Brifters were certainly and improvement it had absolutely no comparison to 28 mm tires. Many of the early carbon fiber bikes were unrideable with high pressure 23 mm tires.
Really? Hadn't noticed.
I was out on my 1988 Kestrel fixie with 22mm tubulars this
morning. Aside from the cold, everything else was fine.
I was out on a 50 mile ride today, too. Temperatures were near 80 and
my neuropathy was almost nonexistant, so I left the cane in it's tube
for the entire ride. I didn't need to shoot anyone, either, so I left
the gun it's tube for the entire ride, too.
If you haven't ridden your Kestrel with 28 mm tubeless how can you compare them?
Catrike: You're insulting Krygowski, it is his claim that anyone that has a gun is authorized to kill people by the dozens.
On Wed Feb 5 22:13:25 2025 Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 2/4/2025 9:37 AM, AMuzi wrote:
Had he followed the rules, he'd be dead.
We've been through all this before, of course. And we all know you,
Andrew, are the master at finding links to truly rare negative events.
But (again) if a person were to make their life decisions based on the
assumption that rare events would be happening to them, they'd be living
a weird life indeed.
Stay out of houses! People have died in them!
https://www.wtsp.com/article/news/local/pascocounty/man-hospitalized-serious-condition-car-crash-pasco-county/67-20eb0233-763f-42de-a617-a5db70dd1c1a
Frank, when I said that mRNA vaccines are dangerous you called negetive effects a "truly rare event" But now we know that vvirtually EVERYONE had temporary lethal to permanently catastrophic effects. The problem with you is that you see nothing andknow nothing and do not believe the vaste majority who do. It is good that you're a lazy do nothing or you might have died from myocaditis after yoyur shots. Then it would have been the fault of someone else.
On 2/10/2025 5:19 PM, cyclintom wrote:know nothing and do not believe the vaste majority who do. It is good that you're a lazy do nothing or you might have died from myocaditis after yoyur shots. Then it would have been the fault of someone else.
On Wed Feb 5 22:13:25 2025 Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 2/4/2025 9:37 AM, AMuzi wrote:
Had he followed the rules, he'd be dead.
We've been through all this before, of course. And we all know you,
Andrew, are the master at finding links to truly rare negative events.
But (again) if a person were to make their life decisions based on the
assumption that rare events would be happening to them, they'd be living >>> a weird life indeed.
Stay out of houses! People have died in them!
https://www.wtsp.com/article/news/local/pascocounty/man-hospitalized-serious-condition-car-crash-pasco-county/67-20eb0233-763f-42de-a617-a5db70dd1c1a
Frank, when I said that mRNA vaccines are dangerous you called negetive effects a "truly rare event" But now we know that vvirtually EVERYONE had temporary lethal to permanently catastrophic effects. The problem with you is that you see nothing and
I shouldn't but I just can't help myself.
Please define "temporary lethal".
On 2/10/2025 5:19 PM, cyclintom wrote:
Frank, when I said that mRNA vaccines are dangerous you called negetive effects a "truly rare event" But now we know that vvirtually EVERYONE had temporary lethal to permanently catastrophic effects.
I shouldn't but I just can't help myself.
Please define "temporary lethal".
On Thu Feb 6 17:08:19 2025 Roger Merriman wrote:
Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
On 6 Feb 2025 16:05:42 GMT, Roger Merriman <[email protected]> wrote:
AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/5/2025 9:13 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 2/4/2025 9:37 AM, AMuzi wrote:
Had he followed the rules, he'd be dead.
We've been through all this before, of course. And we all
know you, Andrew, are the master at finding links to truly
rare negative events.
But (again) if a person were to make their life decisions
based on the assumption that rare events would be happening
to them, they'd be living a weird life indeed.
Stay out of houses! People have died in them!
https://www.wtsp.com/article/news/local/pascocounty/man-
hospitalized-serious-condition-car-crash-pasco-
county/67-20eb0233-763f-42de-a617-a5db70dd1c1a
Not all that rare. Stabbings are prevalent on public transit
in large cities.
Yesterday for example:
https://nypost.com/2025/02/05/us-news/bloody-outbreak-of-nyc-subway-crime-leaves-at-least-5-hurt-in-stabbings-slashings-and-a-beating-cops/
And defensive use of blades is regular (from what I see,
about 1 out of 50 or so).
Speaking of rare events, how many of the 400 million
firearms were used in magic spontaneous fatal negligent
discharges in the owner's home? Is it more than the 1 to 3
million defensive use incidents? Curious minds want to know.
While American cities do have higher violent crime rates, New York seems to
have about 4 million folks using Transit per day, which though perhaps a >>>> bit low for the size of New York, London is 24 million per day. Does seem a
bit more car centric from what I can gathered.
But either way thats a lot of people, who one assumes arent expecting to >>>> have to deal with crime.
Roger Merriman
Many, perhaps most people lock their doors even though they don't
really expect any strangers to come around and try to get in.
--
C'est bon
Soloman
In a similar manner, doors unless proper security doors and frames offer
near zero protection from being forcibly opened, I?ve had to open doors/key >> safes/medication cabinets none take more than a minute and that?s hardly
rushed job.
Did hear last century of one fellow postie who cam upon a bloke slumped by >> the door, with the home owner, as he?d discovered that a proper security
door and frame is like running into a wall, home owner was mostly amused,
police and ambulance on way to collect the foolish lad!
If someone forcibly opens either the front or rear door they will make
enough noise and be delayed long enough to meet a .38 bullet in the
chest. Oh wait, you limies believe that guns are dangerous.
cyclintom <[email protected]> wrote:
On Thu Feb 6 17:08:19 2025 Roger Merriman wrote:
Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
On 6 Feb 2025 16:05:42 GMT, Roger Merriman <[email protected]> wrote:
AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/5/2025 9:13 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 2/4/2025 9:37 AM, AMuzi wrote:
Had he followed the rules, he'd be dead.
We've been through all this before, of course. And we all
know you, Andrew, are the master at finding links to truly
rare negative events.
But (again) if a person were to make their life decisions
based on the assumption that rare events would be happening
to them, they'd be living a weird life indeed.
Stay out of houses! People have died in them!
https://www.wtsp.com/article/news/local/pascocounty/man-
hospitalized-serious-condition-car-crash-pasco-
county/67-20eb0233-763f-42de-a617-a5db70dd1c1a
Not all that rare. Stabbings are prevalent on public transit
in large cities.
Yesterday for example:
https://nypost.com/2025/02/05/us-news/bloody-outbreak-of-nyc-subway-crime-leaves-at-least-5-hurt-in-stabbings-slashings-and-a-beating-cops/
And defensive use of blades is regular (from what I see,
about 1 out of 50 or so).
Speaking of rare events, how many of the 400 million
firearms were used in magic spontaneous fatal negligent
discharges in the owner's home? Is it more than the 1 to 3
million defensive use incidents? Curious minds want to know.
While American cities do have higher violent crime rates, New York seems to
have about 4 million folks using Transit per day, which though perhaps a >>>>> bit low for the size of New York, London is 24 million per day. Does seem a
bit more car centric from what I can gathered.
But either way thats a lot of people, who one assumes arent expecting to >>>>> have to deal with crime.
Roger Merriman
Many, perhaps most people lock their doors even though they don't
really expect any strangers to come around and try to get in.
--
C'est bon
Soloman
In a similar manner, doors unless proper security doors and frames offer >>> near zero protection from being forcibly opened, I?ve had to open doors/key >>> safes/medication cabinets none take more than a minute and that?s hardly >>> rushed job.
Did hear last century of one fellow postie who cam upon a bloke slumped by >>> the door, with the home owner, as he?d discovered that a proper security >>> door and frame is like running into a wall, home owner was mostly amused, >>> police and ambulance on way to collect the foolish lad!
If someone forcibly opens either the front or rear door they will make
enough noise and be delayed long enough to meet a .38 bullet in the
chest. Oh wait, you limies believe that guns are dangerous.
It does make a noise, but opening a door takes a matter of few seconds, ie >any intruder would be within the property sub 10s even opening doors at
work as folks have lost keys so on so hardly something I�m doing fast if >anything trying to cause minimal damage but even so that�s sub 30s
Much like the quick draw myth if that is something your scared about you�d >need a security door which will slow down even a tooled up and determined >intruder.
Guns absolutely are dangerous that rather is the point of them ie they are >weapons, a weapon that wasn�t dangerous wouldn�t be much of weapon now
would it!
I think UK gun crime is quite favourable comparison to the US!
Roger Merriman
cyclintom <[email protected]> wrote:
On Thu Feb 6 17:08:19 2025 Roger Merriman wrote:
Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
On 6 Feb 2025 16:05:42 GMT, Roger Merriman <[email protected]> wrote:
AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/5/2025 9:13 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 2/4/2025 9:37 AM, AMuzi wrote:
Had he followed the rules, he'd be dead.
We've been through all this before, of course. And we all
know you, Andrew, are the master at finding links to truly
rare negative events.
But (again) if a person were to make their life decisions
based on the assumption that rare events would be happening
to them, they'd be living a weird life indeed.
Stay out of houses! People have died in them!
https://www.wtsp.com/article/news/local/pascocounty/man-
hospitalized-serious-condition-car-crash-pasco-
county/67-20eb0233-763f-42de-a617-a5db70dd1c1a
Not all that rare. Stabbings are prevalent on public transit
in large cities.
Yesterday for example:
https://nypost.com/2025/02/05/us-news/bloody-outbreak-of-nyc-subway-crime-leaves-at-least-5-hurt-in-stabbings-slashings-and-a-beating-cops/
And defensive use of blades is regular (from what I see,
about 1 out of 50 or so).
Speaking of rare events, how many of the 400 million
firearms were used in magic spontaneous fatal negligent
discharges in the owner's home? Is it more than the 1 to 3
million defensive use incidents? Curious minds want to know.
While American cities do have higher violent crime rates, New York seems to
have about 4 million folks using Transit per day, which though perhaps a >>>>> bit low for the size of New York, London is 24 million per day. Does seem a
bit more car centric from what I can gathered.
But either way thats a lot of people, who one assumes arent expecting to >>>>> have to deal with crime.
Roger Merriman
Many, perhaps most people lock their doors even though they don't
really expect any strangers to come around and try to get in.
--
C'est bon
Soloman
In a similar manner, doors unless proper security doors and frames offer >>> near zero protection from being forcibly opened, I?ve had to open doors/key >>> safes/medication cabinets none take more than a minute and that?s hardly >>> rushed job.
Did hear last century of one fellow postie who cam upon a bloke slumped by >>> the door, with the home owner, as he?d discovered that a proper security >>> door and frame is like running into a wall, home owner was mostly amused, >>> police and ambulance on way to collect the foolish lad!
If someone forcibly opens either the front or rear door they will make
enough noise and be delayed long enough to meet a .38 bullet in the
chest. Oh wait, you limies believe that guns are dangerous.
It does make a noise, but opening a door takes a matter of few seconds, ie any intruder would be within the property sub 10s even opening doors at
work as folks have lost keys so on so hardly something I’m doing fast if anything trying to cause minimal damage but even so that’s sub 30s
Much like the quick draw myth if that is something your scared about you’d need a security door which will slow down even a tooled up and determined intruder.
Guns absolutely are dangerous that rather is the point of them ie they are weapons, a weapon that wasn’t dangerous wouldn’t be much of weapon now would it!
I think UK gun crime is quite favourable comparison to the US!
Roger Merriman
On 2/11/2025 5:48 AM, Roger Merriman wrote:
cyclintom <[email protected]> wrote:
On Thu Feb 6 17:08:19 2025 Roger Merriman wrote:
Catrike Ryder <[email protected]> wrote:
On 6 Feb 2025 16:05:42 GMT, Roger Merriman <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>
AMuzi <[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/5/2025 9:13 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 2/4/2025 9:37 AM, AMuzi wrote:
Had he followed the rules, he'd be dead.
We've been through all this before, of course. And we all
know you, Andrew, are the master at finding links to truly
rare negative events.
But (again) if a person were to make their life decisions
based on the assumption that rare events would be happening
to them, they'd be living a weird life indeed.
Stay out of houses! People have died in them!
https://www.wtsp.com/article/news/local/pascocounty/man-
hospitalized-serious-condition-car-crash-pasco-
county/67-20eb0233-763f-42de-a617-a5db70dd1c1a
Not all that rare. Stabbings are prevalent on public transit
in large cities.
Yesterday for example:
https://nypost.com/2025/02/05/us-news/bloody-outbreak-of-nyc-subway-crime-leaves-at-least-5-hurt-in-stabbings-slashings-and-a-beating-cops/
And defensive use of blades is regular (from what I see,
about 1 out of 50 or so).
Speaking of rare events, how many of the 400 million
firearms were used in magic spontaneous fatal negligent
discharges in the owner's home? Is it more than the 1 to 3
million defensive use incidents? Curious minds want to know.
While American cities do have higher violent crime rates, New York seems to
have about 4 million folks using Transit per day, which though perhaps a >>>>>> bit low for the size of New York, London is 24 million per day. Does seem a
bit more car centric from what I can gathered.
But either way thats a lot of people, who one assumes arent expecting to >>>>>> have to deal with crime.
Roger Merriman
Many, perhaps most people lock their doors even though they don't
really expect any strangers to come around and try to get in.
--
C'est bon
Soloman
In a similar manner, doors unless proper security doors and frames offer >>>> near zero protection from being forcibly opened, I?ve had to open doors/key
safes/medication cabinets none take more than a minute and that?s hardly >>>> rushed job.
Did hear last century of one fellow postie who cam upon a bloke slumped by >>>> the door, with the home owner, as he?d discovered that a proper security >>>> door and frame is like running into a wall, home owner was mostly amused, >>>> police and ambulance on way to collect the foolish lad!
If someone forcibly opens either the front or rear door they will make
enough noise and be delayed long enough to meet a .38 bullet in the
chest. Oh wait, you limies believe that guns are dangerous.
It does make a noise, but opening a door takes a matter of few seconds, ie >> any intruder would be within the property sub 10s even opening doors at
work as folks have lost keys so on so hardly something I’m doing fast if >> anything trying to cause minimal damage but even so that’s sub 30s
Much like the quick draw myth if that is something your scared about you’d >> need a security door which will slow down even a tooled up and determined
intruder.
Guns absolutely are dangerous that rather is the point of them ie they are >> weapons, a weapon that wasn’t dangerous wouldn’t be much of weapon now >> would it!
I think UK gun crime is quite favourable comparison to the US!
Roger Merriman
Goes both ways. Home invasions are typically very quick,
violent and chaotic, making general rules undependable:
https://www.kake.com/news/mother-shoots-home-intruder-to-protect-her-3-children-sheriff-says/article_d90ccaca-fe94-5a25-afad-5537e4d0ef9b.html
https://cwbchicago.com/2025/01/man-found-tied-up-dead-in-norwood-park-home.html
On 2/10/2025 5:19 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Wed Feb 5 22:13:25 2025 Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 2/4/2025 9:37 AM, AMuzi wrote:
Had he followed the rules, he'd be dead.
We've been through all this before, of course. And we all know you,
Andrew, are the master at finding links to truly rare negative events.
But (again) if a person were to make their life decisions based on the
assumption that rare events would be happening to them, they'd be living >>> a weird life indeed.
Stay out of houses! People have died in them!
https://www.wtsp.com/article/news/local/pascocounty/man-hospitalized-
serious-condition-car-crash-pasco-county/67-20eb0233-763f-42de-a617-
a5db70dd1c1a
Frank, when I said that mRNA vaccines are dangerous you called
negetive effects a "truly rare event" But now we know that vvirtually
EVERYONE had temporary lethal to permanently catastrophic effects. The
problem with you is that you see nothing and know nothing and do not
believe the vaste majority who do. It is good that you're a lazy do
nothing or you might have died from myocaditis after yoyur shots. Then
it would have been the fault of someone else.
I shouldn't but I just can't help myself.
Please define "temporary lethal".
On Wed Feb 5 21:53:40 2025 Frank Krygowski wrote:matters.
On 2/4/2025 7:54 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
All I know, actually, I can only assume,So you're _afraid_ the homeless guy might tear your jacket again. And
that if I'd shown a gun to the crepe who attacked me, there'd have
been no further problems between us.
you carry a gun because you're _afraid_.
Frank, you don't carry a gun because you are afraid and somehow believe that the cops will surely be in the right place at the right time to prevent some thief from making you look like the utter fool you show us you are with every posting on these
On 2/10/2025 6:12 PM, cyclintom wrote:uncles never carried guns. And although they were not as improsing as me they were extraordinarily dangerous. As a kid, one of my unclkes was a professional boxer. Another I watch pick up an older style refrigerator full of food. And I was present when
On Wed Feb 5 21:39:27 2025 Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 2/4/2025 2:36 PM, cyclintom wrote:
Both Catrike and John have made the point that you don't need a gun until you need a gun. Stop using your personal experiencees as proof that you're right.
As usual, I used data to prove I'm right. As usual, you didn't understand. >>>
But speaking of personal experiences, do _you_ require packing a gun
before you'll go for a ride? As far as we can tell, only one person here >>> is that timid. You, Tom, are braver despite your complaints about
security in your own area.
Frank, I am a large impressive person. People, even those who might be bent on violence stay well away from me. In youger days I have hurt people quite violently and I suppose that shows in my demeaner. So no, I don't carry a gun as my father and
in Arizona is not high. My Federal Agent retiree friend even travels with his gun in Italy. Since he arrested Chinese spies there when he was in NCIS he has special dispensation.
So, no, I don't carry a gun. But neither am I worried about those who do. Several of my friends are never without a gun. Cops legally carry guns 24/7 even retired simply by qualifying at the pistol range. EVERYONE in Arizona is armed. The murder rate
You have a fear of guns and I suppose that is normal to those who have no experience with them. But in case you didn't know it - Florida is a dangerous place. If Catrike wants to carry a gun, what does it matter to you?
I'm in Florida now. I've been riding here for several days. I've ridden
in city centers, in suburbs and on one bike trail, all with no fear.
I'll continue doing it with no gun. I'm not timid enough to need one.
Again, only one person here is so fearful as to require a gun while
riding.
Those who carry guns almost always carry because they're afraid
of something.
On 2/10/2025 7:25 PM, cyclintom wrote:matters.
On Wed Feb 5 21:53:40 2025 Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 2/4/2025 7:54 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
All I know, actually, I can only assume,So you're _afraid_ the homeless guy might tear your jacket again. And
that if I'd shown a gun to the crepe who attacked me, there'd have
been no further problems between us.
you carry a gun because you're _afraid_.
Frank, you don't carry a gun because you are afraid and somehow believe that the cops will surely be in the right place at the right time to prevent some thief from making you look like the utter fool you show us you are with every posting on these
Tom, I don't carry a gun because I am _not_ afraid. You don't carry a
gun because _you_ are not afraid. That's true of almost everyone posting >here.
On Wed, 12 Feb 2025 03:44:17 -0500, Catrike Ryderuncles never carried guns. And although they were not as improsing as me they were extraordinarily dangerous. As a kid, one of my unclkes was a professional boxer. Another I watch pick up an older style refrigerator full of food. And I was present when
<[email protected]> wrote:
On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 21:23:44 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/10/2025 6:12 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Wed Feb 5 21:39:27 2025 Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 2/4/2025 2:36 PM, cyclintom wrote:
Both Catrike and John have made the point that you don't need a gun until you need a gun. Stop using your personal experiencees as proof that you're right.
As usual, I used data to prove I'm right. As usual, you didn't understand.
But speaking of personal experiences, do _you_ require packing a gun >>>>> before you'll go for a ride? As far as we can tell, only one person here >>>>> is that timid. You, Tom, are braver despite your complaints about
security in your own area.
Frank, I am a large impressive person. People, even those who might be bent on violence stay well away from me. In youger days I have hurt people quite violently and I suppose that shows in my demeaner. So no, I don't carry a gun as my father and
rate in Arizona is not high. My Federal Agent retiree friend even travels with his gun in Italy. Since he arrested Chinese spies there when he was in NCIS he has special dispensation.
So, no, I don't carry a gun. But neither am I worried about those who do. Several of my friends are never without a gun. Cops legally carry guns 24/7 even retired simply by qualifying at the pistol range. EVERYONE in Arizona is armed. The murder
You have a fear of guns and I suppose that is normal to those who have no experience with them. But in case you didn't know it - Florida is a dangerous place. If Catrike wants to carry a gun, what does it matter to you?
It matters to him because most everything other people do matters to a >>narcissist. What I do matters even more to him because I laugh at him
about it.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/j_soloman/53145141933/
I'm in Florida now. I've been riding here for several days. I've ridden >>>in city centers, in suburbs and on one bike trail, all with no fear.
I'll continue doing it with no gun. I'm not timid enough to need one.
<sigh> More Krygowski undocumented brags.
Again, only one person here is so fearful as to require a gun while >>>riding.
As if what a half dozen old geysers do is significant.
On the other hand, there are enough people interested enough to do it
to create a market.
https://www.outdoorlife.com/story/gear/top-concealed-carry-options-for-hikers-runners-cyclists/
https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2018/12/16/pistol-cycling/
https://thegunzone.com/can-you-carry-a-concealed-weapon-while-riding-a-bicycle/
https://aliengearholsters.com/blogs/blog/concealed-carry-for-bicycle-commuters-and-recreational-cyclist
https://concealedcarryandrew.com/how-to-carry-a-pistol-on-a-bicycle/
Those who carry guns almost always carry because they're afraid
of something.
Those who carry stones to throw almost always carry them because
they're afraid of puppydogs.
More to the point, "How would he know?"
Stop and think. Fear and bravery? How does one develop a reasonable
sense of danger without expiring fear? But from Frank's posts over the
years it seem that the most dangerous thing he's done is walk into a
class room.
Fear or terror' The usually learns about fear and terror is to
experience dangerious acts, objects or creatures (including humans).
Combat solders all experience fear in combat. Yes it gets easier to
"live with" but it never goes away.
So what is Frank, background that qualifies him to common on the
matter? Was he in the military and spent time in combat? He's never
mentioned it and from other posts it would seem likely that
the"combat" experience world have come from trying to run away to
Canada to avoid the draft.
In short, good old Frank is simply making up, what seem to him to be
insults to spread among his readers, not realizing that he is just
exposing his own shortcomings.
On 2/10/2025 6:46 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 2/10/2025 5:19 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Wed Feb 5 22:13:25 2025 Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 2/4/2025 9:37 AM, AMuzi wrote:
Had he followed the rules, he'd be dead.
We've been through all this before, of course. And we all know you,
Andrew, are the master at finding links to truly rare negative events. >>>>
But (again) if a person were to make their life decisions based on the >>>> assumption that rare events would be happening to them, they'd be
living
a weird life indeed.
Stay out of houses! People have died in them!
https://www.wtsp.com/article/news/local/pascocounty/man-
hospitalized- serious-condition-car-crash-pasco-
county/67-20eb0233-763f-42de-a617- a5db70dd1c1a
Frank, when I said that mRNA vaccines are dangerous you called
negetive effects a "truly rare event" But now we know that vvirtually
EVERYONE had temporary lethal to permanently catastrophic effects.
The problem with you is that you see nothing and know nothing and do
not believe the vaste majority who do. It is good that you're a lazy
do nothing or you might have died from myocaditis after yoyur shots.
Then it would have been the fault of someone else.
I shouldn't but I just can't help myself.
:-) I sympathize! Tom's nonsense is amazingly tempting.
Please define "temporary lethal".
Obviously, the person is only dead for a little while. :-)
On 2/11/2025 9:26 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 2/10/2025 6:46 PM, AMuzi wrote:
On 2/10/2025 5:19 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Wed Feb 5 22:13:25 2025 Frank Krygowski� wrote:
On 2/4/2025 9:37 AM, AMuzi wrote:
Had he followed the rules, he'd be dead.
We've been through all this before, of course. And we all know you,
Andrew, are the master at finding links to truly rare negative events. >>>>>
But (again) if a person were to make their life decisions based on the >>>>> assumption that rare events would be happening to them, they'd be
living
a weird life indeed.
Stay out of houses! People have died in them!
https://www.wtsp.com/article/news/local/pascocounty/man-
hospitalized- serious-condition-car-crash-pasco-
county/67-20eb0233-763f-42de-a617- a5db70dd1c1a
Frank, when I said that mRNA vaccines are dangerous you called
negetive effects a "truly rare event" But now we know that vvirtually
EVERYONE had temporary lethal to permanently catastrophic effects.
The problem with you is that you see nothing and know nothing and do
not believe the vaste majority who do. It is good that you're a lazy
do nothing or you might have died from myocaditis after yoyur shots.
Then it would have been the fault of someone else.
I shouldn't but I just can't help myself.
:-)� I sympathize! Tom's nonsense is amazingly tempting.
Please define "temporary lethal".
Obviously, the person is only dead for a little while. :-)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4rR-OsTNCg
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pete_HegsethOn Thu, 13 Feb 2025 10:18:36 +0700, John B. <[email protected]> wrote:uncles never carried guns. And although they were not as improsing as me they were extraordinarily dangerous. As a kid, one of my unclkes was a professional boxer. Another I watch pick up an older style refrigerator full of food. And I was present when
On Wed, 12 Feb 2025 09:14:09 -0500, Catrike Ryder
<[email protected]> wrote:
On Wed, 12 Feb 2025 17:16:12 +0700, John B. <[email protected]>
wrote:
On Wed, 12 Feb 2025 03:44:17 -0500, Catrike Ryder >>><[email protected]> wrote:
On Tue, 11 Feb 2025 21:23:44 -0500, Frank Krygowski >>>><[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/10/2025 6:12 PM, cyclintom wrote:
On Wed Feb 5 21:39:27 2025 Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 2/4/2025 2:36 PM, cyclintom wrote:
Both Catrike and John have made the point that you don't need a gun until you need a gun. Stop using your personal experiencees as proof that you're right.
As usual, I used data to prove I'm right. As usual, you didn't understand.
But speaking of personal experiences, do _you_ require packing a gun >>>>>>> before you'll go for a ride? As far as we can tell, only one person here
is that timid. You, Tom, are braver despite your complaints about >>>>>>> security in your own area.
Frank, I am a large impressive person. People, even those who might be bent on violence stay well away from me. In youger days I have hurt people quite violently and I suppose that shows in my demeaner. So no, I don't carry a gun as my father and
rate in Arizona is not high. My Federal Agent retiree friend even travels with his gun in Italy. Since he arrested Chinese spies there when he was in NCIS he has special dispensation.
So, no, I don't carry a gun. But neither am I worried about those who do. Several of my friends are never without a gun. Cops legally carry guns 24/7 even retired simply by qualifying at the pistol range. EVERYONE in Arizona is armed. The murder
You have a fear of guns and I suppose that is normal to those who have no experience with them. But in case you didn't know it - Florida is a dangerous place. If Catrike wants to carry a gun, what does it matter to you?
It matters to him because most everything other people do matters to a >>>>narcissist. What I do matters even more to him because I laugh at him >>>>about it.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/j_soloman/53145141933/
I'm in Florida now. I've been riding here for several days. I've ridden >>>>>in city centers, in suburbs and on one bike trail, all with no fear. >>>>>I'll continue doing it with no gun. I'm not timid enough to need one.
<sigh> More Krygowski undocumented brags.
Again, only one person here is so fearful as to require a gun while >>>>>riding.
As if what a half dozen old geysers do is significant.
On the other hand, there are enough people interested enough to do it >>>>to create a market.
https://www.outdoorlife.com/story/gear/top-concealed-carry-options-for-hikers-runners-cyclists/
https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2018/12/16/pistol-cycling/
https://thegunzone.com/can-you-carry-a-concealed-weapon-while-riding-a-bicycle/
https://aliengearholsters.com/blogs/blog/concealed-carry-for-bicycle-commuters-and-recreational-cyclist
https://concealedcarryandrew.com/how-to-carry-a-pistol-on-a-bicycle/
Those who carry guns almost always carry because they're afraid
of something.
Those who carry stones to throw almost always carry them because >>>>they're afraid of puppydogs.
More to the point, "How would he know?"
Stop and think. Fear and bravery? How does one develop a reasonable
sense of danger without expiring fear? But from Frank's posts over the >>>years it seem that the most dangerous thing he's done is walk into a >>>class room.
Fear or terror' The usually learns about fear and terror is to
experience dangerious acts, objects or creatures (including humans). >>>Combat solders all experience fear in combat. Yes it gets easier to
"live with" but it never goes away.
So what is Frank, background that qualifies him to common on the
matter? Was he in the military and spent time in combat? He's never >>>mentioned it and from other posts it would seem likely that
the"combat" experience world have come from trying to run away to
Canada to avoid the draft.
In short, good old Frank is simply making up, what seem to him to be >>>insults to spread among his readers, not realizing that he is just >>>exposing his own shortcomings.
After two and a half years of him complaining about me carrying a gun
on my bike rides, he hasn't provided any reason as to why I shouldn't,
so I do, like I did just yesterday.
Two and a half years ago I innocently posted an opinion and a
preference. He disagreed, but instead of simply disagreeing, he
insulted me and thus, picked a fight. Now, he realizes his mistake,
and is afraid to reply directly to me like a man, so instead, he
claims victim hood and talks about me to third parties, much like a
snotty, bratty, little twelve year old girl would do.
It think he imagines his childish insults hurt my feelings as much as
my fighting back has hurt him.
Some years ago a good friend, one Wayne Berg, set out on a single
handed circumnavigation in a 35 ft. Cat., and a couple of years later
came home.
The interesting thing, here, is that he never talked much abut it. But
then other then his jobs he never talked much about... Drilling
Manager for the Malaysian National Oil Administration, the Vietnamese
Oil Group, or any of the other companies he'd worked for over twenty
or thirty years. I guess he reckoned that he did it so what was the
sense in talking abut it.
Frank. on the other hand rides a bicycle to the Library and back home
aging and writes a 5 column dissertation about the amazing feat he has >accomplished.
The difference, I suggest, between a bloke that accomplishes things
and another that talks about things.
On Tue Feb 11 21:26:17 2025 Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 2/10/2025 6:46 PM, AMuzi wrote:
Please define "temporary lethal".
Obviously, the person is only dead for a little while. :-)
Tell me Frank, if you do not die from a condition that will eventually kill you was it lethal or not?
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 715 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 21:12:44 |
| Calls: | 12,104 |
| Calls today: | 4 |
| Files: | 15,004 |
| Messages: | 6,518,112 |
