Cannondale: ³It's a better quality, nicer weld, with more patents.²

riggodeezil@hotmail.com

On May 29, 12:57*pm, N8N <njna...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On May 29, 11:29*am, riggodee...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> > On May 29, 9:47*am, N8N <njna...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >At least in my area (metro DC area) most
> > >drivers are incompetent and should not be on the road.
>
> > Driving on the Capital Beltway = Death Wish
>
> > Bicyclng in and around the Nation's Capital = Insane Death Wish
>
> > It helps if your are basically nuts...
>
> So I'm all good then. *If you can just help me get over my misanthropy
> I'll be set.
>
> BTW if you think the Beltway is bad, try driving the Anacostia Freeway
> when traffic is heavy but still moving quickly. *It's an experience
> not to be missed.
>
> nate

The old "It'll-Cost-Ya" Freeway...been there, done that...ain't goin'
back for more.

These days, I'm up and down MD Route 4 a lot....heading into the MD
"countryside". Also, a death trap. One of those old winding, hilly
country roads designed for about a tenth of the traffic they are
carrying and at half the speed. Ironically, parts of it would make a
great road for cycling-- semi-hilly, nice scenery, fairly wide
shoulders with "Share The Road" signs But, man, all it takes is one
idiot on his cell phone drinking a big gulp at 90 mph to cross the
line...

Frank Krygowski

On May 29, 11:29 am, riggodee...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>
> Bicyclng in and around the Nation's Capital = Insane Death Wish

I've been there, I've done that, & I have friends that do it all the
time - that is, almost every day. And no, they're not macho extreme
risk takers. They're just competent cyclists.

Don't be such a fearful wimp. If you can't handle it, learn the
skills, or admit that it's _your_ shortcoming.

- Frank Krygowski

Nate Nagel

Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On May 29, 11:29 am, riggodee...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>>
>>Bicyclng in and around the Nation's Capital = Insane Death Wish
>
>
> I've been there, I've done that, & I have friends that do it all the
> time - that is, almost every day. And no, they're not macho extreme
> risk takers. They're just competent cyclists.
>
> Don't be such a fearful wimp. If you can't handle it, learn the
> skills, or admit that it's _your_ shortcoming.
>
> - Frank Krygowski

Actually based on my observations, most of them DO have a death wish.

Based on your posts to rec.autos.driving, I have no problem believing
that the morons on bikes I see every day *are* your friends. Arrogand,
rude, and consistently in flagrant violation of the law.

nate

--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel

riggodeezil@hotmail.com

On May 29, 5:41 pm, Frank Krygowski <frkry...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On May 29, 11:29 am, riggodee...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
> > Bicyclng in and around the Nation's Capital = Insane Death Wish
>
> I've been there, I've done that, & I have friends that do it all the
> time - that is, almost every day. And no, they're not macho extreme
> risk takers. They're just competent cyclists.

They may be competent cyclists and totally macho-less...but they are,
indeed, risk-takers. No big deal, really...I count myself in all 3
categories as well.

>
> Don't be such a fearful wimp. If you can't handle it, learn the
> skills, or admit that it's _your_ shortcoming.

More useless insult-laden advice that will be totally ignored. Not
even original or very entertaining. Well done.

> - Frank Krygowski

Ryan Cousineau

In article <Eue%j.5498$Ri.1298@flpi146.ffdc.sbc.com>,
SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

> Not to defend cyclehelmets.org, it represents the worst kind of fake
> neo-con science, right up there with intelligent design and the denial
> of the human impact on global warming, but the emphasis by the media on
> helmets and the lack of reporting on other aspects of safe cycling can
> be annoying. Accidents where a helmet saved the cyclists life, or
> prevented serious injury, as well as stories where the lack of a helmet
> resulted in serious injury or death are popular newspaper stories. Just
> Google News "bicycle helmet saves life" and look at some of the results:
[...]
> Wearing a helmet is a good idea, but it's become a substitute for safe
> riding, especially by children and teens.

Not to be peevish Steven, but to use some medical jargon, what's the
Number Needed to Treat (NNT) for helmets?

I'll accept prevention of hospitalization or a substantial mitigation of
any injury serious enough to require hospitalization as therapeutic
benefits for this question.

The question is sincere inasmuch as I don't know the answer, but I'd
like to. However, I'm prepared to guess at the correct magnitude.

--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@gmail.com http://www.wiredcola.com/
"In other newsgroups, they killfile trolls."
"In rec.bicycles.racing, we coach them."

Ryan Cousineau

In article
<35757085-3d8d-444f-ab4e-bae7a6ea48ea@79g2000hsk.googlegroups.com>,
Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@gmail.com> wrote:

> On May 26, 3:38 pm, Ryan Cousineau <rcous...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > In article
> > <bc0feec9-ae62-4680-810e-3631dedef...@z72g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
> > Frank Krygowski <frkry...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Anyone who advocates a mandatory helmet law MUST believe that it's
> > > better for a person to not cycle, than for a person to cycle without a
> > > helmet. They MUST believe that cycling is very dangerous. Surely you
> > > can't disagree with that?
> >
> > Frank, I categorically oppose MHLs, but even I can disagree with that.
> > It's entirely possible (however ill-informed) to believe that helmets
> > transform a hazardous activity into a safe and healthy one.
>
> I'm not sure what you're disagreeing with. If, as you say, they
> believe cycling is "a hazardous activity," then you're confirming what
> I said - that they believe cycling is very dangerous. No?
>
> If someone advocates making bicycling without a helmet illegal, they
> must think it's better for a person to not cycle, than to cycle
> without a helmet. Isn't that exactly what such laws say?

I think you underestimate the enthusiasm which some parties have for
social engineering through legislation. The proverbial phrase is "if we
could save just one life..."

--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@gmail.com http://www.wiredcola.com/
"In other newsgroups, they killfile trolls."
"In rec.bicycles.racing, we coach them."

Tom Keats

In article <rcousine-8DFF37.02095631052008@[74.223.185.199.nw.nuvox.net]>,
Ryan Cousineau <rcousine@gmail.com> writes:
> In article <Eue%j.5498$Ri.1298@flpi146.ffdc.sbc.com>,
> SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
>
>> Not to defend cyclehelmets.org, it represents the worst kind of fake
>> neo-con science, right up there with intelligent design and the denial
>> of the human impact on global warming, but the emphasis by the media on
>> helmets and the lack of reporting on other aspects of safe cycling can
>> be annoying. Accidents where a helmet saved the cyclists life, or
>> prevented serious injury, as well as stories where the lack of a helmet
>> resulted in serious injury or death are popular newspaper stories. Just
>> Google News "bicycle helmet saves life" and look at some of the results:
> [...]
>> Wearing a helmet is a good idea, but it's become a substitute for safe
>> riding, especially by children and teens.
>
> Not to be peevish Steven,

It seems to me, /everybody's/ peevish about bicycle helmets.

Anyways, did you see the infomercial in the Friday May 30
Metro newspaper (pg 20) (metronews.ca) about the Adams Run Bike[tm]?

It's basically a pedalless bicycle-shaped scooter (juvenile
hobby horse,) so youngsters can get the feel of balancing and
directing a bike without the added complication of powering it.

If I had kids that I knew about, I just might be inclined to
set 'em up with this thing. But I'd sure supervise the heck
outa them.

I think it should certainly deprecate those stupid training
wheel thingies.

> but to use some medical jargon, what's the
> Number Needed to Treat (NNT) for helmets?
>
> I'll accept prevention of hospitalization or a substantial mitigation of
> any injury serious enough to require hospitalization as therapeutic
> benefits for this question.
>
> The question is sincere inasmuch as I don't know the answer, but I'd
> like to. However, I'm prepared to guess at the correct magnitude.

People associate bicycling with horseback riding.
It's pretty easy to fall off a horse and land on
yer head. But a bike ain't a horse (thank Goodness.)
In fact, unlike horseback riders, we cyclists generally
don't fall /off/ our mounts, we fall /with/ them.

Those rodeo bronco busters need helmets.
A Stetson just doesn't cut it.

Yeah, everybody's peeved about helmets.
At least the folks who make points one
way or another about 'em. Including myself.

I guess it's just one of those issues, like
abortion, and whatever Diet Coke is really
good for, besides making it explode w/ Mentos.


cheers,
Tom

--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

Nate Nagel

Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> In article
> <35757085-3d8d-444f-ab4e-bae7a6ea48ea@79g2000hsk.googlegroups.com>,
> Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>On May 26, 3:38 pm, Ryan Cousineau <rcous...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>In article
>>><bc0feec9-ae62-4680-810e-3631dedef...@z72g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
>>> Frank Krygowski <frkry...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Anyone who advocates a mandatory helmet law MUST believe that it's
>>>>better for a person to not cycle, than for a person to cycle without a
>>>>helmet. They MUST believe that cycling is very dangerous. Surely you
>>>>can't disagree with that?
>>>
>>>Frank, I categorically oppose MHLs, but even I can disagree with that.
>>>It's entirely possible (however ill-informed) to believe that helmets
>>>transform a hazardous activity into a safe and healthy one.
>>
>>I'm not sure what you're disagreeing with. If, as you say, they
>>believe cycling is "a hazardous activity," then you're confirming what
>>I said - that they believe cycling is very dangerous. No?
>>
>>If someone advocates making bicycling without a helmet illegal, they
>>must think it's better for a person to not cycle, than to cycle
>>without a helmet. Isn't that exactly what such laws say?
>
>
> I think you underestimate the enthusiasm which some parties have for
> social engineering through legislation. The proverbial phrase is "if we
> could save just one life..."
>

AKA "it's for the chiiiiiillllldrun." Having worked briefly in the
automotive industry I'm all too familiar with it.

nate

--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel

Frank Krygowski

On May 29, 10:09 pm, the anonymous riggodee...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On May 29, 5:41 pm, Frank Krygowski <frkry...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On May 29, 11:29 am, riggodee...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> > > Bicyclng in and around the Nation's Capital = Insane Death Wish
>
> > I've been there, I've done that, & I have friends that do it all the
> > time - that is, almost every day. And no, they're not macho extreme
> > risk takers. They're just competent cyclists.
>
> They may be competent cyclists and totally macho-less...but they are,
> indeed, risk-takers. No big deal, really...I count myself in all 3
> categories as well.

Everybody is a risk taker. Obviously, living invariably involves
risk. Deal with it.

> > Don't be such a fearful wimp. If you can't handle it, learn the
> > skills, or admit that it's _your_ shortcoming.
>
> More useless insult-laden advice that will be totally ignored. Not
> even original or very entertaining. Well done.

May I point out that you began this by calling my friends and I (and
others) insane? Most people would consider that an insult, and not an
original or entertaining one.

My advice stands: Cycling in DC can be done very safely. It merely
requires competence. Many people have that competence. If you don't
have it, you can learn. Start here: http://www.bikexprt.com/streetsmarts/usa/index.htm

Until you gain that competence, don't comment on that which you don't
understand. And don't belittle your betters.

- Frank Krygowski

Frank Krygowski

On May 31, 5:17 am, Ryan Cousineau <rcous...@gmail.com> wrote:
> In article
> <35757085-3d8d-444f-ab4e-bae7a6ea4...@79g2000hsk.googlegroups.com>,
> Frank Krygowski <frkry...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > If someone advocates making bicycling without a helmet illegal, they
> > must think it's better for a person to not cycle, than to cycle
> > without a helmet. Isn't that exactly what such laws say?
>
> I think you underestimate the enthusiasm which some parties have for
> social engineering through legislation. The proverbial phrase is "if we
> could save just one life..."

Perhaps I do underestimate the enthusiasm - but I see that as a
separate question. Again: Those with this enthusiasm must think it's
better for a person to not cycle, than to cycle without a helmet.
That's exactly what they're trying to pass into law.

- Frank Krygowski

Ozark Bicycle

On May 31, 11:23 am, Frank Krygowski <frkry...@gmail.com> blew hard:
> On May 29, 10:09 pm, the anonymous riggodee...@hotmail.com wrote:

<much snippage of Krygo-Krap>

> And don't belittle your betters.
>
> - Frank Krygowski

If you take your own advice, you won't be doing much belittling, will
you, Franky? And, since belittling is your major Usenet stock-in-
trade, you won't have much to say. eh?

riggodeezil@hotmail.com

On May 31, 12:23 pm, Frank Krygowski <frkry...@gmail.com> wrote:


> May I point out that you began this by calling my friends and I (and
> others) insane? Most people would consider that an insult, and not an
> original or entertaining one.

Nobody called you or your friends anything. You don't really have to
work so hard to invent insults. I'm betting you probably earn plenty
all day long without even breaking a sweat.

>
> My advice stands: Cycling in DC can be done very safely. It merely
> requires competence. Many people have that competence. If you don't
> have it, you can learn. Start here:http://www.bikexprt.com/streetsmarts/usa/index.ht

Your "advice" and falsely superior attitude is probably what keeps
more potential rec. cyclists on the couch than anything, traffic
included. So you can cycle comptently in DC, BFD. Tell that to the
paramedics after an Escalade doing 90 mph deposits your sorry ass in
the gutter.

> Until you gain that competence, don't comment on that which you don't
> understand. And don't belittle your betters.

The only thing you seem to be "better" at than anybody is being a
certified asshole. Nobody will stand in your way of that prize.

>
> - Frank Krygowski

BrandyCycles@gmail.com

On May 31, 6:17 pm, riggodee...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On May 31, 12:23 pm, Frank Krygowski <frkry...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > May I point out that you began this by calling my friends and I (and
> > others) insane? Most people would consider that an insult, and not an
> > original or entertaining one.

> Nobody called you or your friends anything. You don't really have to
> work so hard to invent insults. I'm betting you probably earn plenty
> all day long without even breaking a sweat.

Yeah, you did call him something. And me too. And everyone that rides
a bike in the DC area. You called us all insane. I don't really care
but others may not be so forgiving. If you call someone something
derogatory, at least have the decency to not try and weasel out of it
later.

> > My advice stands: Cycling in DC can be done very safely. It merely
> > requires competence. Many people have that competence. If you don't
> > have it, you can learn. Start here:http://www.bikexprt.com/streetsmarts/usa/index.ht
>
> Your "advice" and falsely superior attitude is probably what keeps
> more potential rec. cyclists on the couch than anything, traffic
> included. So you can cycle comptently in DC, BFD. Tell that to the
> paramedics after an Escalade doing 90 mph deposits your sorry ass in
> the gutter.

Doubt he is the reason for all the fat-asses driving a sofa instead of
riding. Your wishing him into the gutter is far worse than anything
he wrote to you. Your retort was classless and childish. He may have
been a tad haughty and curt but he did offer you a link to educational
materials which seemed sincere. Try and be more mature.

> > Until you gain that competence, don't comment on that which you don't
> > understand. And don't belittle your betters.
>
> The only thing you seem to be "better" at than anybody is being a
> certified asshole. Nobody will stand in your way of that prize.

Again, you go right for a childish and uncalled-for response. I will
not be umpiring the certified asshole contest, but I bet you at least
get a podium position yourself.

Zoot Katz

On Sat, 31 May 2008 15:17:05 -0700 (PDT), riggodeezil@hotmail.com
wrote, in part:

>
>Your "advice" and falsely superior attitude is probably what keeps
>more potential rec. cyclists on the couch than anything, traffic
>included.

Bull dadda. If some whimp's skin is too thin for Usenet then they'd
probably have a shit-hemmorage and totally disintegrate if a scud
jockey ever threatened them with expletives or a dirty look let alone
a brush-pass, thrown object, fists or weapon.

If they can't handle that kind of reality then they're better off
staying on the couch.

Frank is a realist. He is always saying, and I paraphrase here,
"Bicycling is not that dangerous. Don't make it out to be."
--
zk