I appreciate your passion around this. I really do.

Maybe a better analogy would have been crosswalks, but then you would not have been able to compare your cause to that of Rosa Parks. At crosswalks, pedestrians have the right of way. It is within my rights to enter a crosswalk at any time and expect that traffic will stop so I can proceed safely. However, there are times when it is not the best idea to simply enter the crosswalk, so I choose to wait a few seconds (or even a minute) and walk across the street when it is safe.

Cycling is a much bigger part of your life than mine. I ride for fun and exercise as part of everything else I do. When I need to turn left, I typically go to the stoplight crosswalk and wait, crossing with the other lanes when they get the green. Believe it or not, I have never had a negative incident doing this. Sure, it adds a few seconds to my ride, but I am not worried about KOM's on strava, just getting in a nice workout.

drn92

Perhaps that was the case, but I don't think anyone is arguing that the cyclist didn't have the right to go into the lane to avoid it if it was.

But, this thread wouldn't even exist if the cyclist in question had merely said something like "I had to avoid some crap in the shoulder" instead of responding with an F-bomb when approached about it at the light.

It is the latter action that got the guy labeled as a D-bag, not the former. That point seems to be continually lost in all of this. I've found that if you're in the right on something and are confronted about it, it's far more effective to calmly explain WHY you are right than to respond with a middle finger and an F-bomb. That just reinforces in the person questioning you their opinion that you are wrong. Plus, they also think you're an a-hole as well. That's just a lose-lose result :-/

BTW, I defy anyone to attempt the "control and release" technique (as described) on that stretch of CA-1 I linked to earlier...and live to tell about it. Seriously.

---

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/

I get that. Until I started regularly commuting - when time began to matter and "fastest" became the predominant factor in route selection, not "least traffic" - I was fine with riding in the predominant style - deferential to the "real" users of the roadways, motorists. But once I researched and learned how to manage traffic better I discovered the joy of being able to ride safely and comfortably in all kinds of traffic. That's not about gaining a few seconds. It's priceless. Prior to that, I had no idea it was always there for me to learn, or how much it would make cycling better.

---

SAVE YOUR LIFE: Know the bike-car crash types and how to avoid them

Tom - I think the cyclist was upset about being harassed. I think Duff was upset about what he perceived to be the cyclist's poor actions.

Again, I think had Duff just signaled and passed, and maybe avoided the cyclist earlier (an aware motorist will see a cyclist, or anything else, for that matter), and changed lanes. With more of a gap between said cyclist and the motorist behind Duff, that motorist, too, would have had ample opportunity to signal and change lanes.

I think we've been ingrained to believe that we're lesser road users, and should be 'out of the way'. My argument has been consistent throughout this thread - that the cyclist was doing what was safest for him, at that time, it's the prerogative of other road users, since they're behind said cyclist, to accommodate and avoid. The actions of Duff, and his defenders in here, are what I find so upsetting.

We need to re think, before we can re zoom.

---

Richard Wharton, USAC L1 since 1997.
Technology, Application, Attention, Success
http://www.onlinebikecoach.com, http://www.cyclingcenterdallas.com
#whareagle, #leavewithnothingleft, #knowyournumbers, #numbersdontlie

Thank you. You make my point.

What everyone seems to do when something like this happens is replay the event with themselves placed differently and nothing else changing. What they overlook is the effect their different placement might have on the situation. Sure, a few inches further left in the bike lane probably wouldn't have mattered in terms of affecting anything, other than making it more likely that you were hit, but we're talking about riding much further left, and that makes a huge difference. Let me explain why.

Rewind the tape 10-20 seconds back from the honk. Put yourself into the head of the texting idiot. He's thinking about what to text, or reading a text. But he can't do that more than a few seconds at a time, or he'll drift off course. Maybe he does drift a little, but he catches himself because he looks up in time and corrects for the drift. No matter how engrossed he was in his texting,or whatever, he had to have been making a correction check every few seconds or he would have crashed long before he reached you.

Now, this is the part most don't realize. Every time a distracted driver glances up for one of his frequent and and necessary course checks/corrections what does he see? In your case, an empty road ahead. Sure you were up ahead in the bike lane, but is that relevant to a driver engrossed in texting? No. Why should it be? You're not in his lane. Back to texting he goes.

But consider what the situation would be had you been riding conspicuously squarely placed in the lane, near the left tire track - directly in front of the driver. If he's going 40 and you're going 15, a differential of 25 mph, he's closing at 36 feet per second. 20 seconds back is 720 feet. Maybe he wouldn't notice you during a course check 20 seconds before reaching you, but at the next course check around 3-5 seconds later he might. The next one about 12 seconds back (420 feet) he's less likely to miss you. When he glances up 5-8 seconds back he's less than 300 feet back. Now it's practically impossible for him to miss you. That's what cause the WTF moment that causes him to delay continuing with the texting and instead focus on his driving, at least until he figures out what to do about the cyclist in his way.

More to the point, if it's me with a mirror I've been watching all this and I see one of two things: this guy noticed me and is slowing down, or he's barreling along and I need to take an extra measure to grab his attention. Maybe I look back. Maybe I zig zig. Maybe I issue a slow/stop arm signal. In my experience I almost never have to do this - just being in the lane is enough. But on the rare occasion the driver is not slowing down for some reason, a gesture like that is all it takes. They react, instantly. In theory I might still not be noticed, at which I can bail into the bike lane, shoulder or onto the sidewalk or beyond, but in ten years I've never come close to having to resort to such extreme measures, and I don't expect to, based on how early motorists reliably react to my presence in their path.

---

SAVE YOUR LIFE: Know the bike-car crash types and how to avoid them

... and I would argue that it is EXACTLY BECAUSE you were in that bike lane, separated by MAGIC FORCE FIELD PERCEPTION PAINT, that said motorist literally didn't consider you, and wantonly drifted in to 'your' lane.

Had you been 18" further over, you would still have been on the shoulder, or in the bike lane, which is NOT the road.

Had you been SIX FEET to the left, occupying the space, the driver would have probably had an inner moment of "WTF" and suppressed road rage, BUT... BUT.... He or she would've figured out that said lane couldn't be shared, and he/she needed to tap the brakes, alerting every driver behind, then signaled, again, alerting every driver behind, and changed lanes.

I'm really relieved that your 'Far to the Right as PRACTICAL' and not PRACTICABLE has left you with so few close calls. You're probably a great and competent cyclist. But go find Kate Johnson in Kaneohe and practice with her out on some roads. Preston Tyree, the sort-of-guru of cyclist education for the LAB for 15 years, heads over to Hawaii frequently.

When you hug the gutter, you limit your options. Wouldn't you WANT 5' on EACH SIDE of your wheels, instead of 2? When you hug the gutter, you invite split-lane passes and punishment passes. But when you occupy the lane, just like any other driver of a vehicle on the road, well, you're acting like traffic, you're not causing it.

How many in here post GoPro vids of rides that have no drama? Kinda boring, isn't it? And if there IS drama, look back at it reflectively, instead of immediately fingering a cause. Think about the moments leading up to the event, the surrounding environment and atmosphere, and traffic conditions. Then think about what your constant presence in the lane will do to surrounding motorists. I think the GoPro footage will surprise you.

Better yet - someone go out between traffic herds and measure some stripes and the space between stripes, and then count how far back someone changes lanes when you're in the gutter, vs being in the lane.

Drivers don't turn their ignitions over with the intent to kill. Those that do, are at the mercy of the DA and courts. Motorists seeing a cyclist in the lane, acting responsibly, tend to avoid said cyclist like the plague. I've even had motorists pull up beside me at lights and thank me for signaling and waiting my turn in the queue. It's the first time they've seen it happen. Kinda sad, really.

---

Richard Wharton, USAC L1 since 1997.
Technology, Application, Attention, Success
http://www.onlinebikecoach.com, http://www.cyclingcenterdallas.com
#whareagle, #leavewithnothingleft, #knowyournumbers, #numbersdontlie

+1.

95 - IM me via fb or offlist. Thx.

---

Richard Wharton, USAC L1 since 1997.
Technology, Application, Attention, Success
http://www.onlinebikecoach.com, http://www.cyclingcenterdallas.com
#whareagle, #leavewithnothingleft, #knowyournumbers, #numbersdontlie

A big pet peeve of mine is people relying on turn signals as if they mean something.

What does it mean if you see a turn signal is on? The driver might turn or move laterally.
What does it mean if a you see a turn signal is off? The driver might turn or move laterally.

Look, I don't mean to discourage proper turn signal use. It can be very helpful and useful, and it's a great habit to always signal before turning or changing lanes, but let's not pretend failure to use turn signals is any less safe than, say, relying on others to use turn signals properly. What these guys are doing in this video in terms of signaling is far better than what most cyclists do. It's not a perfect video, but no video is. Why focus on the imperfections?

---

SAVE YOUR LIFE: Know the bike-car crash types and how to avoid them

No one is missing that point.

The point you're missing is a bicyclist should never have to defend why he's in the road rather than the shoulder.

White guy: Hey, you should be in the back of the bus.
Black guy: Fuck you

Are you going to recommend the black guy should point out there happens to be no seats available in the back of the bus? Of course not, because you're not a racist asshole. You're going to recognize that the asshole in this case is the white guy because he believes blacks belong in the back and he has the audacity to be vocal about it.

Motorist: Hey, you should be on the on the shoulder.
Bicyclist: Fuck you

What's the difference? Who's the asshole?

Oh, you think the difference is that there is no safety issue in the bus, but there is one in the road situation. Well, that's why we're going on and on here about explaining why use of the full lane is often safer, and may very well have been in this case, and that it's no justification to tell the cyclist he shouldn't be in the road.

Once a racist recognizes and accepts it's normal and reasonable for blacks to be in the front of the bus, it ceases to be an issue.
Once a motorist recognizes and accepts it's normal, safe and reasonable for bicyclists to use lanes on the roadway, it ceases to be an issue too.

The only question is whether this is a societal change you want to foster or hinder.

---

SAVE YOUR LIFE: Know the bike-car crash types and how to avoid them

I think you are mistaken - I think that its fairly well evidenced that motorists do not see motorbikes and cars irrespective of their position and this is in part due to the profile that both cyclists and motorcyclists present to drivers and the frequency with which they encounter them on their respective routes

In order for your guy to look up whilst texting and to register that you're in front of him - firstly you have to believe that in that 1-2 second glance that he's taking everything in, that he recognises the upright profile of the cyclist and does not see straight through them, and that he's sub consciously aware that he should expect to see bikes / motorbikes in that position. to do this at the best of time's requires little distraction, the classic example is a cyclist / motorcyclists travelling in a straight path and a car turning in front of them

The immediate response 9 times out of 10 is the driver claiming they never saw them, and that's actually quite possible, clearly they are not paying enough attention but as they scan the road at speed and they are not focused, they see a profile, glance over it, make the turn and get broadsided because they do not expect to see the bike / motorbike in that position at that time - they simply do not perceive them

now we can all sit here and agree that the driver in those instances is a f**king idiot who's not paying attention, however the reason that the cyclist won't get to participate in that discussion is that they're dead

I've spent weeks riding with Met Police officers in the UK, advanced riders and diplomatic corp members and every single one of them says you are invisible - you can be bang in the middle of the lane and they will not see you and the academic research indicates that this is true - studies in Australia and the UK

now defensive motorbike riding be it the institute of advanced motorists, ROSPA in the UK or another organisation that uses the "road craft" methodology is very different from riding a bicycle

on a motorbike the trick is to "make progress" and to remove your self from risk in a safe and controlled manner following the system, on a bike however, you have none of the advantages, you can not advance yourself out of trouble, you are less visible, and far more vulnerable and being bang in the middle of a lane with a vehicle behind you, with a driver thats not paying attention and who's not expecting to see you is a recipe for disaster

no one denies the cyclists legal right to be in the bike lane, the evidence suggests that IF you choose to exercise that right it should be with the full knowledge that no matter where you put yourself in the lane a give proportion of road users will simply never see you - the video's I responded to earlier clearly make the point

aside from the shitty signals - we can argue the merit of them, but without them the drivers in the lane have no indication that the cyclist is looking to change lane as opposed to swerving, the truth is that at the timing I provided on the video referenced 1.36 I think, the cyclist moves out and the vehicle behind him is quite a big pick up (I'm doing this from memory I looked at it hours ago and cant quite remember)

If I recall that vehicle is less than a 100 feet, assuming that the cyclist is going 15 mph perhaps? the drivers doing 25-40? lets say 32, the closing speed is 17 mph or 25 feet per second - glancing at phone - 2 seconds, if they see you time to decide to hit brakes >1 second - result, you're f**ked - you are left with a little over 1 second to stop or not close 25 feet to hit the cyclist - this does not work out well for the bloke on a bike

This militant cyclist inferiority complex is something to behold. Many on here just do not agree that taking the lane on that stretch of Hwy 1 was the safest choice when there is ample and clear shoulder. If there is any "lesser" connotation it has to do with ~20lb bike being taken out by a ~5000lb piece of metal traveling at a greater speed. Get over yourself as you have convinced few here that impeding cars and trucks riding a bike at slower speed on a four-lane highway when there is another option is the safest choice no matter how upset you may be.

Is this all there is to it?



Link:
https://www.facebook.com/...2tn%22%3A%22R3%22%7D

---

SAVE YOUR LIFE: Know the bike-car crash types and how to avoid them

1. I don't do triathlons.

2. Most of my cycling are NOT recreational.

3. The cyclist in question endangered himself.

4. His right to be in the road doesn't change the fact stated in number 3.

5. I'm done here. In the words of your hero, Fuck off.

6. Did someone really equate cycling to racial segregation in the 60s?

---

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb

At this point (your post), I'm going to look into the cycle smart stuff. Billdsd and the other guy have very good arguments. I've always been an edge hugger, effectively trying to hide from the cars, and now I realize that I've actually been hiding. I'm especially impressed by the point that the best place to be with respect to a distracted driver behind you is in the middle. They will never see you on the edge.

---

________
It doesn't really matter what Phil is saying, the music of his voice is the appropriate soundtrack for a bicycle race. HTupolev

Yes that happens, but context is important. When a motorist pulling out of a sidestreet briefly glances in one direction to make sure it's clear that's one thing. When he briefly glances ahead to see if the road is clear that's totally different (see the link below about the rarity of motorcycle rear-enders).

That said I'm quite aware of the inattentional blindness phenomenon. But that's why I also know the crucial role that relevance plays in determining what we notice. That's why I want to be as relevant as I can to motorists. In the famous gorilla experiment the gorilla is irrelevant to the participant who is counting basketball passes - that's why the gorilla is unnoticed despite how visible he is. The distinction between a bicyclist off to the side on the shoulder and a bicyclist in the motorist's path is relevance - relevance that makes inattentional blindness much less likely..

But it's still possible. That's why I monitor rearward with a mirror.

Not really. I expect him to take in the minimum... is there anything in my path ahead of me? Anything there, including a bicyclist, results in an affirmative response to that very basic query. A bicyclist off to the side in a bike lane or shoulder does not.

I suspect, and verified, that rear-ending motorcycles is rare. This affirms my personal observation that motorcycles and bicycles in front of motorists tends to grab their attention.

Again, the left cross context which is the most common type of motorcycle crash is very different.

I presume you mean travel lane, not bike lane. Well, there were a few earlier in this discussion that at least questioned the cyclist's legal right to be in the travel lane. But what is being denied is the safety reasoning for giving cyclists the right to be in the traffic lane, and the right of cyclists to decide when it's safe to exercise that right. That right to decide is not being respected by Duffy and all of his supporters here.

Despite that video I'm quite confident that the proportion is vanishingly small, and with a mirror I can easily address and manage those anomalies anyway.

As to the video I posted there is no doubt they could do even better but the point is that it's easy to ride in traffic on roads like that. But yeah, I tend to signal more and longer, and wait until motorists explicitly yield to me before I move. But that doesn't make it difficult, dangerous or challenging to ride in such traffic.

Good talking to you. Actually, all of the discussions in this thread are refreshingly intelligent, honest and respectful. Kudos to all!

---

SAVE YOUR LIFE: Know the bike-car crash types and how to avoid them

You keep clinging to the idea that a cyclist simply riding in the road is endangering himself. That's just sad.

Look how dangerous it is!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=140j_8sBOeo


No. Motorist/cyclist segregation was compared to white/black segregation. There are differences. There are similarities. One of the similarities is how there is a feedback loop between discrimination in the law and discrimination in society, and how it affects people's psyches. That effect is playing a role here, but probably deserves a thread of its own.

---

SAVE YOUR LIFE: Know the bike-car crash types and how to avoid them

You keep clinging to the idea that the cyclist was "simply" taking the lane and that all other factors are irrelevant.

It's like saying I want to go outside wearing only shorts and completely ignoring the fact that -31 degrees outside

---

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb

The most common bike deaths we saw in Florida when I lived there were not cyclist, but people just riding bikes. Often those who couldn't drive because they didn't have licenses (illegal immigrants, suspension, etc.). My observations were that people who weren't cyclist, but rode for these reasons didn't ride safe by any stretch of the imagination based on my observation. Often at night, often in dark clothing, sometimes with lights, and in such a way to suggest they were under the influence. So I agree cycling itself isn't anymore inherently dangerous than driving a car, handling heavy machinery, etc.

But you can certainly increase that risk, and I haven't seen any evidence presented so far that suggest riding in the middle of the lane reduces risk. In fact, I did a charity ride today with many cyclist. I didn't see anybody ride in the middle of the lane for an extended period of time, and we had up to 1000 people riding. An A group broke off which I kept with until the last 5 miles. None of us road in the middle. On heavier travelled roads, we all road to the right. When I fell out I was on a lesser travelled road with no bike or pull of lane, so I wanted to test this theory of yours. For about two miles I drove in the middle of the road. Here is what I found.

1. I slowed traffic frustrating drivers.
2. I got honked at by a line of cars.
3. When they passed (all but one of them), I got bad looks, or gestures of frustration.
4. One even whipped back into the lane after just passing me just feet in front of me, creating a pretty dangerous scenario.

Needless to say after about 10 cars passed, I concluded this experiment was a waste of time. I don't know how the hell anything you have posted so far promotes goodwill or safety for cyclist as a whole. It sounds pretty self centered to me.

---

---

"In the world I see you are stalking elk through the damp canyon forests around the ruins of Rockefeller Center. You'll wear leather clothes that will last you the rest of your life. You'll climb the wrist-thick kudzu vines that wrap the Sears Towers. And when you look down, you'll see tiny figures pounding corn, laying stripes of venison on the empty car pool lane of some abandoned superhighway." T Durden

Indeed. They are irrelevant. PCH is not a freeway. Stop acting like it is.

There are driveways. There are sidestreets. There is onstreet parking. There are pedestrians. There are red lights. This is not a freeway with free-flowing unencumbered traffic. A bicyclist in the travel lane is normal, safe and reasonable traffic here. The only problem is that you don't get that. You don't respect it.

As I've said before, if your complaint is that he swerved out of the shoulder onto the roadway without signaling or ample warning, then that's a legitimate complaint. So start a thread about that. But that's not what this thread is about. This thread is about your lack of respect for his decision to simply ride in the travel lane. He was doing nothing wrong or dangerous, but you still had the audacity to tell him otherwise. And you were surprised at his negative reaction.


No. You believe it's like that. And it's quite revealing that you think it is. But it's not. That's the point.

---

SAVE YOUR LIFE: Know the bike-car crash types and how to avoid them

Did you acknowledge the motorists who were behind you before they had a chance to get annoyed? Did you move aside when it was safe for them to pass? What exactly were you testing?

---

SAVE YOUR LIFE: Know the bike-car crash types and how to avoid them

---

Civilize the mind, but make savage the body.

- Chinese proverb

Your moving the goal post. This isn't what you have been arguing, nor does it sound like it was the actions of the cyclist in questions. To answer your questions, I wouldn't have felt right doing this, but the roads were pretty swagged, so I felt justified enough to do this. Yes, when the road allowed I did. When I turned pointing to a motorist and pointed at the damaged/cracked road on the right, they certainly didn't seem to care.


On another note, you guys aren't really good at this. I don't know what you do for a living, but the average Triathlete is pretty well off, and a professional. This translates to smart and data driven. Another forum I frequent is a gun forum that tends to have people on the lower spectrum, or blue collar people whose eyes would glaze over if given data and debate on "WHAT THEY KNOW TO BE TRUE". Your debate prowess is closer to theirs. Maybe it is time for you to go back to the hole you came from.

---

---

"In the world I see you are stalking elk through the damp canyon forests around the ruins of Rockefeller Center. You'll wear leather clothes that will last you the rest of your life. You'll climb the wrist-thick kudzu vines that wrap the Sears Towers. And when you look down, you'll see tiny figures pounding corn, laying stripes of venison on the empty car pool lane of some abandoned superhighway." T Durden

It is exactly what I've been arguing throughout this thread. I can't believe you missed it. Mirror. Timely acknowledgment. Control and release (and links describing it). Ringing any bells yet?

As to the cyclist we're discussing, yes, riding like that (or how you did) may result in some motorists getting upset. So what? I'll still defend his right to do it. Their unjustified anger is not reason to not do it.

I choose to go beyond that. As I've described upteen times here. But that's just what I choose to do (and recommend) in a world where I get harassed if I don't. It should not be required.

I already explained earlier today why there is so little data on this stuff, and what it would take to obtain it.

So we're left with trying it on our own. When I get the timing right I don't experience what you did. When I get it wrong I do. I can't emphasize enough how important it is to acknowledge motorists who we delay before they get annoyed to nip road rage in the bud.

---

SAVE YOUR LIFE: Know the bike-car crash types and how to avoid them

Holy crap - you're questioning Best Practices based on IQ and data driven results? HOLY CRAP. Dude, I wrote a book about power meters. I wrote THE book on CompuTrainers. I have been involved in FOUR FAILED POWER METER CORPORATIONS, something I actually take pride in, because if it's not done right, it shouldn't be done at all.

MY buzzwords are "Robust and Seamless". Robust data, seamless integration.

You want someone else to do all the work, and provide you with the data, and no go out and experience it or collect it yourself. GOOD LORD HOW LAZY.

Spend the $90 on a CyclingSavvy Course, swallow your pride, and learn something. I'm not giving it away - in fact, I'll sell my classes for $200 but will give you even more time out on the road, with more experience, in more traffic conditions. And guess what - NOTHING HAPPENS. THAT'S THE POINT.

More data.... Well, lessee. According to another study, bike crashes fall in to the following categories...

• "I just Fell - I don't know what happened..."
• "I hit/got hit by another cyclist..."
• "My incident involved another moving vehicle (car, truck, bus, van...)"
• "Squirrel!!!!" "DOG!!!" "DEER!" Boom.
• "That damned kid jumped out between two parked cars!" (Pedestrian).

Now - here are the %'s, in no particular order, for these causes. Match the % below to the cause correctly, and I'll give you your own, used, "Attabiker" award. Want a merit badge? Join the Boy Scouts.


Why won't I give the right answers out? Because someone, with much more engineering skill and bureaucratic patience than me, actually went through the trouble to unearth these causes through police and insurance reports. To get the answers in context, SIGN UP FOR THE FREAKING CLASS, BRING A BEGINNER'S MIND, and THINK LIKE AN OPEN DOOR.


18%, 14% 44%,


Here's another spot of data that I'll keep vague enough to titillate, but not give away.


45%
33%
22%


% of crashes that can be mitigated through ending 'edge' behavior...
% of crashes that can be mitigated by NOT acting like a pedestrian on a bike...
% of crashes that can be zeroed out by FOLLOWING THE RELEVANT LAW.


Again, think back to that 1.7 number I posted earlier. We're dealing with something as rare as catching a meteor in your palm. Then break THAT down further.


Get these right, and you'll get a big Jesus Thumbs Up.






Cycling is safe.
Cycling in the lane is safe(r).
Being Visible to other road users is safe(r).
Anecdotes and parables need to be left to religion and politics, not facts.
Traffic Engineers build roads for ALL users. Political interventions by APBP and NGB's and 501c3's and 4's add complexity and cost to infrastructure.
First come, First Served.
Overtake slower traffic safely.


If we DON'T do this, guess what, we're going to end up all being forced to wear one of these, for better or for worse.

---

Richard Wharton, USAC L1 since 1997.
Technology, Application, Attention, Success
http://www.onlinebikecoach.com, http://www.cyclingcenterdallas.com
#whareagle, #leavewithnothingleft, #knowyournumbers, #numbersdontlie

It seems to me that a key to the approach you suggest is a mirror. However, strong cultural reasons against using a mirror in the triathlon community (they are seen as uncool and also as a device used by cheaters in races (to look out for race marshals)). But now that I've reached the end of the thread, I'm going to ride down to the bike store and buy a mirror and go for a ride. For some reason I quit using one a last few years and just been hugging the white line and praying.

---

________
It doesn't really matter what Phil is saying, the music of his voice is the appropriate soundtrack for a bicycle race. HTupolev