midwesta wrote:
Well, he's kind of right. Soccer is THE most popular sport in the world. Basketball isn't. I would think that's pretty clear. Sorry, you kind of come off like a d-bag.
no, he kind of isn't right. No one is talking about popularity. He said basketball isn't a global sport and it is.
Sorry, you kind of come off like an incompetent fourth grader with no reading comprehension.
asdfasdf wrote:
You come off like VIPAM - insulting everyone who does not agree with his voodoo calcuator - not unlike you and your certainty about something that is hard to estimate.
In any case, hopefully the fact that I gave you the opportunity to let us know that you were an awesome cyclist (which I say in all honesty - Cat 1 is pretty out there), will calm you somewhat and increase the civility of this thread.
asdfasdf, your arguments and strong and I admire you for keeping your cool while under attack from someone who can't just have an intellectual discussion. Thanks for posting on this topic.
BUT, Vipam doesn't have a special calculator (that I know of) - that's Ventolin. And while the guy can be a bit ornery (I argue with him all the time), the man knows his track. I don't think he's into cycling per se, but I'm sure he'd enjoy the science of these discussions.
asdfasdf wrote:
You continue to come off as being generally unpleasant and egotistical so I am not sure what else to say.
We simply disagree about the time benefits of aero gear. But you seem so eager to assert that I am wrong.
My premise to explain our differences is that the time advantages of aero is hard to quantify - due to things like yaw angle, individual rider position, keeping atmostpheric conditions static, the fact that each aero benefit of a component is not a mere additive process, etc.
You on the other hand just state that your estimate is exactly correct and that is that. You linked to one article that backs you up, but you don't acknowledge that the conclusions therein are not accepted wholesale by the marketplace.
I might be wrong, I am ok with that. However, I am pretty happy with my time estimate on it and I think yours is high. I can have that opinion without categorically slamming your view.
You come off like VIPAM - insulting everyone who does not agree with his voodoo calcuator - not unlike you and your certainty about something that is hard to estimate.
In any case, hopefully the fact that I gave you the opportunity to let us know that you were an awesome cyclist (which I say in all honesty - Cat 1 is pretty out there), will calm you somewhat and increase the civility of this thread.
Not 'might'. You are wrong.
And that was the point all along. You are wrong about your assertion of aero equipment versus standard equipment.
It's not hard to estimate at all. Like I said, two minutes of googling will give you loads of wind tunnel and real world data. You can find data taken from various yaw angles with different speeds, different power outputs, various terrain, etc.
You can find data on how much time you can save on a climb by using a 15 lb pound over a 20 lb bike (another facet of your ridiculous assertion that a standard bike closely parallels a pro bike that you ignored).
I can't for the life of me figure out why you're so adamant about defending your erroneous position. Almost every frame maker there is now does wind tunnel tests. WHY would they do that if it didn't make a difference?!!!
Ignorance is like a virus and is easily spread. Especially among those in another sport who don't know any better.
And like I said, my being a Cat 1 has nothing to do with anything. That just means I never made it. Why that would be a boost to my ego is beyond me. Hell, I'm on letsrun. That's almost like hitting bottom. But hey, another good attempt at deflecting from the fact that you are
WRONG
the smartest letsrunner wrote:
asdfasdf, your arguments and strong and I admire you for keeping your cool while under attack from someone who can't just have an intellectual discussion. Thanks for posting on this topic.
He doesn't have an argument. He has his one personal anecdote.
Everything he said has been refuted and anyone who knows how to use google could do the same.
It's simple, there is a HUGE amount of difference between an aero setup and a standard setup.
It's like comparing a Camry to an F1 car.
the smartest letsrunner wrote:
BUT, Vipam doesn't have a special calculator (that I know of) - that's Ventolin. And while the guy can be a bit ornery (I argue with him all the time), the man knows his track. I don't think he's into cycling per se, but I'm sure he'd enjoy the science of these discussions.
As a long time letsrunner I am embarrassed by my error. Careless.
cat 6 wrote:
It's like comparing a Camry to an F1 car.
It's like comparing the *aerodynamics* of a Camry to an F1 car.
asdfsdf wrote:
the smartest letsrunner wrote:BUT, Vipam doesn't have a special calculator (that I know of) - that's Ventolin. And while the guy can be a bit ornery (I argue with him all the time), the man knows his track. I don't think he's into cycling per se, but I'm sure he'd enjoy the science of these discussions.
As a long time letsrunner I am embarrassed by my error. Careless.
Oh, look, you were wrong again.
cat 6 wrote:
asdfasdf wrote:Not 'might'. You are wrong.
And that was the point all along. You are wrong about your assertion of aero equipment versus standard equipment.
It's not hard to estimate at all. Like I said, two minutes of googling will give you loads of wind tunnel and real world data. You can find data taken from various yaw angles with different speeds, different power outputs, various terrain, etc.
You can find data on how much time you can save on a climb by using a 15 lb pound over a 20 lb bike (another facet of your ridiculous assertion that a standard bike closely parallels a pro bike that you ignored).
I can't for the life of me figure out why you're so adamant about defending your erroneous position. Almost every frame maker there is now does wind tunnel tests. WHY would they do that if it didn't make a difference?!!!
Ignorance is like a virus and is easily spread. Especially among those in another sport who don't know any better.
And like I said, my being a Cat 1 has nothing to do with anything. That just means I never made it. Why that would be a boost to my ego is beyond me. Hell, I'm on letsrun. That's almost like hitting bottom. But hey, another good attempt at deflecting from the fact that you are
WRONG
I have to admit I am losing steam.
Very briefly - my point about weight was that a pro will beat a non cyclist on a heavy bike. In that case, it is not about the bike (which is how this whole thing got started - I was refuting the myth perpetuated by armchair non-cyclists that being a good cyclist is all about the bike).
Of course all things being equal, a lighter bike, will climb faster.
Obviously, manufacturers do wind tunnel testing because aero is faster, and because they want it to become even faster. No argument there. Again, I don't say it does not make a difference, I just say it is not as big as a difference as you think.
As I noted earlier, I ride both a TT bike and a road bike on a daily basis with other decent riders and racers, so I don't consider myself a non-rider who is ignorant about the sport. If you are really worried about how people perceive the benefits of aero, I suggest you go to Slowtwitch and become a vocal proponent of the benefits - as a large community of people over there must be pretty ignorant about it too.
I am happy to take your knowledge and personal experience into account the next time I consider how much of an advantage an aero set up - just as I have done so every time I read something new about in the past.
All that being said, we aren't communicating very well. And by now we keep saying the same thing over and over so I am not really motivated to keep going on about it as it seems we have a blind spot for each other's reasoning.
fsadfads wrote:
Lumping Jordan in the "dbag" department may be a little harsh. Yes, he cheated on his wife, but other than that, and openly admitting he was hard on teammates at times, there are very few people who have ever really said much derogatory about him. I get the impression he's, overall, a fairly good guy, albeit a bit overly competitive.
One thing that happens far to often now a days is the gossip of someones personal life. For the same reason I don't watch the Jersey Shore I don't get into the media blow outs about athletes relationships. First and foremost who and the hell cars what so and so did in bed with whoever. Its not my business.
On Jordan anyone who grew up watching Jordan play can agree on one thing and thats he not only played basketball harder than anyone who ever touched the court but he made his teammates play to there potential. To quote Walter Sobchak "Am I wrong?" MJ was the most ferocious competitor i've ever seen. It was as if a tornado could touch down and the guy would play thru without blinking. Is there really such a thing as overly competitive? Maybe for someone who can't seem to win, but I think Jordan knew a thing or two about winning.
As for the dude passing Lance Armstrong at the finish line big deal & good for him. I am sure Lance Armstrong didn't lose any sleep that night reliving the awful moment. I have passed a guy way better than me in races in the last 25 meters too but shit happens and people have bad races. I surely didn't celebrate beating someone who already beat themselves. I'll stop ranting for now lol sorry for the long winded bs
asdfsdf wrote:
Very briefly - my point about weight was that a pro will beat a non cyclist on a heavy bike. In that case, it is not about the bike (which is how this whole thing got started - I was refuting the myth perpetuated by armchair non-cyclists that being a good cyclist is all about the bike).
Of course all things being equal, a lighter bike, will climb faster.
Obviously, manufacturers do wind tunnel testing because aero is faster, and because they want it to become even faster. No argument there. Again, I don't say it does not make a difference, I just say it is not as big as a difference as you think.
As I noted earlier, I ride both a TT bike and a road bike on a daily basis with other decent riders and racers, so I don't consider myself a non-rider who is ignorant about the sport. If you are really worried about how people perceive the benefits of aero, I suggest you go to Slowtwitch and become a vocal proponent of the benefits - as a large community of people over there must be pretty ignorant about it too.
I am happy to take your knowledge and personal experience into account the next time I consider how much of an advantage an aero set up - just as I have done so every time I read something new about in the past.
All that being said, we aren't communicating very well. And by now we keep saying the same thing over and over so I am not really motivated to keep going on about it as it seems we have a blind spot for each other's reasoning.
Of course, all things being equal, a regular bike DOES NOT COMPARE to a high end bike. At least we've gotten that out of the way. Regardless of what your point was, your attempt at making that point was erroneous.
As for the aero, tt's a WAY bigger difference than what you think.
You riding on a daily basis is just as irrelevant as me NOT riding on a daily basis. It has nothing to do with knowledge of the sport.
You said 1-1:30 minutes over a 40k. That is wrong. Flat out wrong.
That's really all there is to it. There is no reasoning to take into account. You don't have to take any of "my" knowledge into account in the first place. Go do your own research. It's obvious you haven't since your entire premise rests on what YOU think based on YOUR riding with some half-hearted attempts at saying people on other websites might agree with you.
cat 6 wrote:
You riding on a daily basis is just as irrelevant as me NOT riding on a daily basis. It has nothing to do with knowledge of the sport.
I'm just observing you two argue since the topic is interesting to me, and I need to point out that you basically suggested he's an outsider to the sport. So the fact that he rides a lot and takes it seriously is in fact pretty relevant to your ad hominem attack.
It seems to me like there is room for debate on how much differences there is between bikes. Also seems that of course certain interests (people who sell bikes) are going to have a bias toward exaggerating those differences. That much is self-evident. Same thing happens in all sports: shoes in running, suits in swimming, clubs in golf - all sports.
Sounds like you think the difference for a given cyclist is big. Other guy thinks it's big but not as big as you'd suppose. Why all the anger?
the smartest letsrunner wrote:
cat 6 wrote:You riding on a daily basis is just as irrelevant as me NOT riding on a daily basis. It has nothing to do with knowledge of the sport.
I'm just observing you two argue since the topic is interesting to me, and I need to point out that you basically suggested he's an outsider to the sport. So the fact that he rides a lot and takes it seriously is in fact pretty relevant to your ad hominem attack.
It seems to me like there is room for debate on how much differences there is between bikes. Also seems that of course certain interests (people who sell bikes) are going to have a bias toward exaggerating those differences. That much is self-evident. Same thing happens in all sports: shoes in running, suits in swimming, clubs in golf - all sports.
Sounds like you think the difference for a given cyclist is big. Other guy thinks it's big but not as big as you'd suppose. Why all the anger?
I never suggested that for a second. If I did, you'll be sure and copy and paste it, yeah? Same for the ad-hom. A c&p will do nicely.
I did suggest that he not talk about things he doesn't know so that those that ARE outside the sport not believe erroneous information. But that's a bit different, isn't it?
It's not anger. It's just incorrect information. Incorrect information that he is vehemently defending.
Now, you go ahead and go read things a bit more closely before making another asinine opening paragraph like you did here, m'kay?
the smartest letsrunner wrote:
And seriously consider changing your handle.
It's just too blatantly ridiculous to even be ironic at this point. This has been pointed out before when you've made inane posts.