"The 33"-Road Bike Racing - Team Discovery: Solvang photos

The Team Discovery web site has some cool photos of their training at Solvang.

http://team.discovery.com/slideshows/solvang/solvang.html

hummmm.....Lance with the Grand Tour group, not the Classics group???????????????????????


tomcat

that is some great photography of a sharp bunch of cyclists!

is it just me or does Lance look a little chunky in pic #4 /

Cool pics.... i cant believe how many guys are riding without gloves...? dont you wear yours...?

that is some great photography of a sharp bunch of cyclists!

The photog is out of NYC and is a really nice guy...I've met him a couple of times and he's always been super cool.

PJ

forget gloves...
why don't most wear helmets??

Kudos for lance, hincapie, danielson and a few others for setting a good example.

Wow amazing photos... I hope solvang looks that pretty in March... (but not that hilly) look at the first photo... amazing hill

You ride the 100miler you will get hills like shown in the photos I am told...My rides about Solvang were unorganized group rides..Tremendous country..
Great wine, great food, great cycling terrain...You get a taste of this country in the movie 'Sideways.'.

I better work on my hill work then to be ready for that...

Where in California is that? Northern? Southern? LA, SF?

forget gloves...
why don't most wear helmets??

Kudos for lance, hincapie, danielson and a few others for setting a good example.

I agree. I especially hate it when they let them ride without helmets in races. I know when they do that it's relatively reasonable, but come on. Kids are watching that stuff.

Where in California is that? Northern? Southern? LA, SF?

About an hour north of Santa Barbara.

I dont know about the helmets thing, but if you notice, its the big names that are wearing them. This leads me to think that those riders either know they are role models, or (probably more likely) there is some clause in their sponsorship contracts that requires them to do that.

Id be interested to really know though.

Not all cyclists are dare devils..I recall the Italian racer Petacchi bows out of races he feels not safe....Don't think he is just ditching a race he does not want to compete...His fear is genuine.? ......Did he not have some awful accident...Bet, Petacchi always wears a helmet...

They might figure that since they have to wear a helmet while racing, they might as well get used to them and wear them while training.

Wow ... that is some beautiful countryside. En mass, I think the Disco's outfits look kinda cool.

The Team Discovery web site has some cool photos of their training at Solvang.

http://team.discovery.com/slideshows/solvang/solvang.html

Thanks for posting; those are great pics.

It's their head. If they want to train without a helmet, let them. If they crash and die because of a preventable head injury, then that is the risk they took. Should "role models" not be allowed to smoke or eat junk because kids might do the same? If you want to wear your helmet all the time, that's great, but no one can tell someone else (save UCI or USCF) they must wear a helmet.

I suppose you think that it's ok for basketball playing roll models to jump into the stands and fight with the ticketholders, too!

There are helmet laws (for motorcycles) b/c some people are not smart enough to use a good thing when they see it.

It's their head. If they want to train without a helmet, let them. If they crash and die because of a preventable head injury, then that is the risk they took. Should "role models" not be allowed to smoke or eat junk because kids might do the same? If you want to wear your helmet all the time, that's great, but no one can tell someone else (save UCI or USCF) they must wear a helmet.

I guess you're right. When these guys don't wear helmets it's almost like seeing a NASCAR driver hop into a car and not wear his seat belt. It just sends a bad message like "I wouldn't wear this helmet if I didn't have to." Pro athletes are role models, no matter what Charles Barkley thinks. Jordan was always dressed up in suits because he knew that someone could see him for just 5 seconds and have a lifelong impression of him based on a seemingly meaningless segment of his life. Helmets are a personal choice, and I don't really want to get into that argument, but pro athletes are role models and should try to set a good example.

It is their choice, especially on training rides. It just really irks me that they let the riders do that in races.

I guess you're right. When these guys don't wear helmets it's almost like seeing a NASCAR driver hop into a car and not wear his seat belt. It just sends a bad message like "I wouldn't wear this helmet if I didn't have to." Pro athletes are role models, no matter what Charles Barkley thinks. Jordan was always dressed up in suits because he knew that someone could see him for just 5 seconds and have a lifelong impression of him based on a seemingly meaningless segment of his life. Helmets are a personal choice, and I don't really want to get into that argument, but pro athletes are role models and should try to set a good example.

It is their choice, especially on training rides. It just really irks me that they let the riders do that in races.

The UCI don't let them do it in races any more. Only in certain climbing finishes, 5km out or something like that from the line you can remove it.

First of all, there is a big difference between picking a fight in the stands and wearing a bike helmet. If Lance jumped off his bike and beat a spectator, then I would have a problem.

If the sport requires the equipment, ala MLB and batting helmets, that is one thing. A cyclist on a training ride is under no legal obligation to wear one, and it is his choice not to do so. If a parent can't sit their child down and tell them the importance of wearing a helmet, or that they shouldn't jump into the stands to fight if someone throws a drink on them, then it is a parenting problem, nothing more. Are we really so weak that we can't even look at people doing anything remotely dangerous, or something we don't agree with, without taking offense or thinking they should be somehow repremanded? What gives us the right to tell another person what they can or can't do, especially when what they're doing is perfectly legal?

Everything is dangerous to some degree. It is up to the individual to decide what risks they want to take, including "role models."

You do have a good point...

fair play to ya

Everything is dangerous to some degree. It is up to the individual to decide what risks they want to take, including "role models."

I agree.

While I wear a helmet when I ride (been hit by a car already) there are times when I spin to the post office or town hall or whatever without it. It's MY decision, albeit a calculated one.

I live in a no helmet law state ( which I support) for motorcyclists and while I feel it's their decision I am in favor of reducing injury awards if they are hurt because they don't have one on. Why should I have to pay an ungodly amount if I get in a wreck with a guy not wearing a helmet? You want to take some responsibility you need to take it the whole way through right? Funny thing though, CT has a seatbelt law for everyone.

PJ

Are those leg warmers or do they wear the shorts over the tights? Why do they do that? To show the advertising?

Everything is dangerous to some degree. It is up to the individual to decide what risks they want to take, including "role models."

Ah yes, but you're assuming a single concept of choice-conclusion. I could start to quote Kant here at length, but the point is that it's fine for the individual to make this choice but if (s)he sustains injury as a result then the correct course of action would be to leave the person by the side of the road so they and they alone could deal with the consequences. Naturally this doesn't happen. There are certain moral obligations that come into effect that ensure that the injured person receives medical treatment - usually at a cost to everyone else (not just monetary ... Kant would roll in his grave!). The result is that the injured person actually has a moral duty to wear a helmet in a society that will attempt to care for him/her if an injury results - not for him/herself, but on the grounds that his/her own stupidity should not impact the lives of others.

So, if you crash without wearing a helmet you can expect to see me ride on by ... :D

It's their head. If they want to train without a helmet, let them. If they crash and die because of a preventable head injury, then that is the risk they took. Should "role models" not be allowed to smoke or eat junk because kids might do the same? If you want to wear your helmet all the time, that's great, but no one can tell someone else (save UCI or USCF) they must wear a helmet.

I know it's a popular thing on these forums to state the obvious, but enough already.
Of course they can do whatever they want to do while training. Nobody started preaching about them HAVING to do anything. I just said kudos for the big names for setting better examples. The question was 'why'. Helmets don't weight much, they are required to wear them for racing, you can fit a warm hat underneath, it WOULD set a better example, why not then?

Are those leg warmers or do they wear the shorts over the tights? Why do they do that? To show the advertising?

Leg warmers,

In fact, I don't know anybody who races that even owns a pair of tights. Two pairs of shorts and two pairs of legwarmers is a more popular get-up for some reason. Granted, Colorado doesn't get THAT cold, so that may be why.

I think I like the colors. Didn't at first but who likes change. Lance looks a bit stressed IMO. Great pics.

Leg warmers,

In fact, I don't know anybody who races that even owns a pair of tights. Two pairs of shorts and two pairs of legwarmers is a more popular get-up for some reason. Granted, Colorado doesn't get THAT cold, so that may be why.

Thanks that's interesting. I think I've noticed that this trend has filtered down to the rec rider/wanna-be level.

Yes...very interesting. Tights are kind of expensive, but it's not like Lance et al. have to worry about price.

Where in California is that? Northern? Southern? LA, SF?

It's about mid-way between the two.

Check out the MONSTER burnout someone did in opposite lane picture 10. Get on it! :eek: