[tomtom]

Get the fuck in

+1

Superb.

[Obi-Wan is lost...]

Nice afternoons work from our boys, lets not forget Froome. 

[Jaspersharpe]

Amazing stuff. First Tour winner to win gold the same year. Greatest ever GB Olympian. Have they closed the book on SPOTY yet?

[lagerstarfish]

I was running a group session at the time so missed the end of the event, but a helpful nurse popped in to let us know the good news

a pleasant interuption

[SA Chris]

Amazing stuff. First Tour winner to win gold the same year. Greatest ever GB Olympian. Have they closed the book on SPOTY yet?

If it's not him, there's no justice.

I also found out today he has the same birthday as me. And therefore clm (where is clm anyway).

[Obi-Wan is lost...]

And therefore clm (where is clm anyway).

He was in London for the end of the TT yesterday... #jealous

[casa]

He was great in the interview with Linekar last night, comes across really well 

[danm]

Yeah, his even handed comments regarding safety after the unfortunate fatality by the Olympic Park are just the sort of talk that might help change attitudes amongst Mondeo man and white van man. The man is a dude.

[Obi-Wan is lost...]

. The man is a dude.

He was tweeting some genius shots of them out on the piss at 2am this morning...

[Duma]

Yeah, his even handed comments regarding safety after the unfortunate fatality by the Olympic Park are just the sort of talk that might help change attitudes amongst Mondeo man and white van man. The man is a dude.

I've not seen the interview, but his support of compulsory helmet law that's being reported on the BBC is just knee jerk idiotic. Quite apart from the highly questionable ability of helmets to lessen yr chances of death (really think having a lid on will make the slightest difference when a juggernaut turns left onto you?), it's well known that the best way to increase safety of cyclists is to increase the number of cyclists - guess what's one of the most effective ways to reduce the number of cyclists?? that's right, introduce helmet law.

[tomtom]

Having seen his interview - I think his main point was that wearing helmets, stopping people listening to ipods etc. while riding and making decent lights compulsory (he mentioned all these) - took away the excuses people make for why cyclists may be responsible/partly responsible for what happens to them in accidents etc..

Personally, I think its deep seated, and I think the only thing that will change attitudes is economics. Change the law so its always the motorists fault if there is a collision (like the NL).

I started riding to work last year. But have stopped (I now walk) after a couple of rage/near miss incidents. My commute was piss - 80% bike lanes, one roundabout 2 traffic lights... but a incidents put me off. I guess I'm just not thick skinned enough.. Shame really. 

[fatdoc]

Fair enough.. But normal iPod ear buds and a will to exercise is my personal stance.... I always wear a helmet.. Hard to decide for all...

[Snoops]

 (really think having a lid on will make the slightest difference when a juggernaut turns left onto you?),

Yes. It will increase your chance of not having a permanent head injury if you pull through. Several times a year I have the pleasure of seeing cyclists in Sheffield in the Royal Hallamshire. There are exceptions, but most of the ones with brain contusions and questionable neurological prognoses weren't wearing a helmet.

[fatkid2000]

There's various view on the wearing of helmets.

One study found drivers get closer to you if you're wearing one & hence more likely to knock you off. Also a lot of major collision injuries are intra-abdominal or major pelvic injury - which cause death rather than head injuries.

My view having ridden for past 10 years or so & regularly commute. If a helmet may help then wear it. I've hit my head on a kerb - helmet cracked but my head was fine.

Having ridden in France where the cyclist is king of the road - drivers in the UK could do with taking a similar approach. Yes some cyclist take the piss - but on some junctions its often safer to run a red light rather than pull off sat next to some massive lorry.

Another thing that would help would be better road surfaces - Sheffield roads are appalling and you have to use alot of road to prevent your wheel disappearing down some huge pot hole.

Personally I don't know how people ride with ear phones in I can't - they fall out. I can understand fatdoc's view - but its still a bit stupid.

I hope that with the UKs success in cycling the average driver is a bit more considerate, however once the olympics is over the tossers driving buses will be back to there normal ways I fear,

[tomtom]

Friend of mine JL in Australia flipped over the bonnet of a car that pulled out on him two weeks ago, he landed back of the head against the kerb :-/ the main impact hit the base of his helmet and he ended up with 25 stitches on the base of his skull/back of head. A lucky man (apart from being twokked off by some halfwit).. and +1 for the Helmet.

When I do pull my finger out and ride it feels wrong without a helmet now..

I have dubious beleifs in the helmets make people drive closer to you - or helmets make you ride worse attitudes.. I think now they are so much the norm rather than the exception that people will not differentiate...

[Duma]

I have no problem with helmets, I have a problem with helmet law If it makes you feel safer, wear one. I own and use one, though not all the time. I'm all for anything that gets more people cycling, the issue is that Wiggins comments (and it sounds like they were mostly sensible) were basically reported as "wiggins supports mandatory helmets" all three links I noticed to the story were titled along those lines; and the main effect of such legislation would be to reduce the number of cyclists on the road, which starts a cycle of negative feedback - less cyclists, motorists less used to their presence, less likely to look out for them, more accidents, more perception of danger from prospective cyclists who are then less likely to cycle etc etc.
I think his points about lights (particularly)and ear phones are good ones, when driving through Bristol at dusk I'm often shocked by how hard to see an unlit cyclist is, and decent LEDs are tiny and dirt cheap these days. Also both these points are about reducing the chances of accidents, a much better approach than pushing the responsibility onto the cyclist for the results of accidents, as a helmet law would.

Oh and cycling helmets are DESIGNED to fail catastrophically in a crash, it's how they absorb impact, and they will do so at impact forces well below those which would cause serious head injuries. This is not to say that the reduction in impact forces obtained by a helmet in some crashes won't reduce the chances of injury, but people often equate the state of their helmet post impact with the assumed consequences of not wearing one.

[Clart]

Interesting discussion. Personally the main issue I see with road cycle safety is the increase width of the average car with no increase in road width. This results is less 'safe' space to over take cyclists. Rather than force cyclist to wear helmets lets force car manufactures to make smaller cars = extra lane on motor ways, more parking. I know it's never going to happen. There's some statistic somewhere about 4x4 ( ) along the lines that for every occupant they save another road user dies (pedestrian/ cyclist/ other vehicle drive (non-aligned chassis crumple zones)).

On the otherside of the fence I used to be a right little shit on a bike, riding around in the dark with no lights, carving cars up etc., not proud, fortunately I didn't ruin anyones life by causing them to crash into me.

[moose]

Rather than force cyclist to wear helmets lets force car manufactures to make smaller cars = extra lane on motor ways, more parking. I know it's never going to happen. There's some statistic somewhere about 4x4 ( ) along the lines that for every occupant they save another road user dies (pedestrian/ cyclist/ other vehicle drive (non-aligned chassis crumple zones)).

It's a bit off topic, but the width of cars is ridiculous now - it's almost impossible to use multi-storey carparks because of the number of cars occupying 1.5 bays.  And re 4x4s the last stats I saw, suggested that most SUVs style cars were dangerous for the occupants too.  They used to all do very poorly in the European NCAP tests and were prone to rolling over.  Partly due to being top-heavy and equipped with pseudo-off-roading tyres that were no ideal for the roads they spend 99% of their time on.

[dave]

All the arguments against wearing helmets could be applied to any safety device that causes a minor inconvenience to the user; car seatbelts, climbing helmets etc. Imagine if you get into a car and your mate refused to wear a seatbelt cos he thought it was less safe because it would cause him to drive in a cavalier fashion, and would entice other drivers to crash into him? You'd phone for the straitjacket.

[benpritch]

I think it is an interesting argument. A friend once hypothesised that if there was a large sharp spike protruding from the centre of every steering wheel nobody would drive recklessly?

Also it has been proven that pedestrian deaths decrease if there is no delineated pavement? No references sorry.

[SamT]

Also it has been proven that pedestrian deaths decrease if there is no delineated pavement? No references sorry.

thats Drachten in Holland - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drachten

I distinctly remember going to thailand with tales of crazy driving in my head, then after an hour or so on the road in the back of a tuctuc suddenly having an epiphany... its not that there are no rules..or indeed lots or rules that everyone ignores. .... There's ONE rule that everyone adheres to......"Do what you want, go where you want, JUST DONT HIT ANYTHING".... simples.  It seems to work. 

Here there are so many millions of road rules and protocols that the moment someone gets one wrong - carnage.

[Duma]

All the arguments against wearing helmets could be applied to any safety device that causes a minor inconvenience to the user; car seatbelts, climbing helmets etc. Imagine if you get into a car and your mate refused to wear a seatbelt cos he thought it was less safe because it would cause him to drive in a cavalier fashion, and would entice other drivers to crash into him? You'd phone for the straitjacket.

No they can't. Safety belt law did not reduce car traffic on the roads, as helmet laws have been shown to do for cycle traffic. Furthermore less cars on the roads make it safer for other road users, including motorists. Less cyclists on the roads make it more dangerous for the remaining cyclists, which discourages people further from cycling. Once again, I've nothing against helmets, I'm not arguing against wearing them, it is Helmet law that is a stupid idea.

[Fj]

bringing the topic back to the original subject, just back from holiday, here are a couple of my photos from rue du rivoli about 700m from the finish.

chasing Voigt about lap 4


leading out Cav on the final lap


what an amazing day!!!

[Oli]

Another quality comeback from Wiggo:

Piers Morgan @ Bradley Wiggins "I was very disappointed @bradwiggins didn't sing the anthem either. Show some respect to our monarch. Please!


Bradley Wiggins @ Piers Morgan " @Piersmorgan I was disappointed when you didn't go to jail for insider dealing or phone hacking. But you know, each to their own!

[Duma]

  

Top pics Fj, jealous!