cyclintom

I got a private email asking me why I'm so negative and that's somewhat puzzling to me.

In fact I'm POSITIVE about nearly everything.

I'm positive that Jonathan Page with a cyclocross bike from 1980 could win at the nationals from any of the stateside competition (granted good health) using the best cyclocross bike in the world today.

I'm positive that buying a new super-duper bike won't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. Your riding ability is what it's all about and not the latest fad component.

I'm positive that the technological mythology is bad for cycling in general though perhaps good for bicycle manufacturers. I'm not against technological improvements but let's not pretend that every improvement since good clincher tires hasn't been tiny incremental improvements that you can find justifications for only on a race course.

I'm positive that Joe Average can get a 1980 Schwinn World and convert it to be a fun riding cyclocross bike without EVER using a single carbon component. And I object when he comes on here and is told that he has to have Brifters, high Zoot wheels and a lot less weight on the bike.

I'm positive that there's absolutely nothing wrong with Richy Rich showing up on an Empella all carbon bike with all carbon wheels and the $120 tubulars. And I'm equally certain the the guy on the Schwinn World is going to have just as much fun and that if he's a stronger rider he will beat Richy in the sprint.

I'm positive that mythology works against cycling and that we need to have all sorts of positive attitudes that tells us that putting BETTER BEARINGS in the bottom bracket and the wheels are things that are cheap, easy and VERY effective while having the world's most expensive bike isn't.

I'm positive that 1500 gram wheels that cost double what that Schwinn World cost new aren't an advancement but a racing trick that should have been limited to the racing world and somehow has been worked into the recreational world and far too often described as "necessary".

The fact is that the ONLY thing I'm negative on is the idea that bicycling should be some sort of egotistical, overly expensive and exclusive boys club.

Up cycling!

C Law

You're a grouch.

Accept it. Embrace it. Enjoy it.

Never Apologize. Never Explain.

cyclintom

https://www.swapmeetdave.com/Humor/Cats/Jolene.htm
https://www.swapmeetdave.com/Humor/Cats/******.htm
https://www.swapmeetdave.com/Humor/Cats7/StrTongue.htm

jhota

i may not agree with you, but i think you can state whatever opinion you want.

i mean, you're wrong, but who cares?

but seriously, whoever sent you the PM needs to get a grip. it's the internet, for goodness sakes! everybody has an opinion, and just because you consistently disagree with someone doesn't make them "negative." maybe to them, you are negative.

just ignore the PM, man. even though you are wrong. sometimes.

v1nce

@ Cyclintom, i am positive i like your attitude Sir. Retrogrouches and sanity will previal in the end! Sodd the OCP to hell. Right on and Ride on!

radical_edward

Arguing on the internet is weird and reaches an intensity that you don't see face. In person when things get het up most people back down because, gee, it is a shame for things to get violent over clips vs flats. Or dare i say it, discs vs rim brakes. Those sort of arguments are ridiculous anyway. If you say ''tubs vs clinchers' you are going to get a storm in a teacup.

Everybody has their own vision of cycling. For every Ritchey Rich there is somebody who prefers the soul of a classic bike. The current wave of mass market cross bikes are astounding. But it wasn't always like that. Cyclocross was a off season distraction. Top riders may have had custom frames but more often than not tourers were stripped down or older racing frames with adequate tyre clearance were refurbished.

I'm no grouch, but i am also no weenie (All but one of my bikes are steel!). I feel that sooner or later a technology goes mass market and that is the time to buy. I had an argument the other day about the damage that Merckx could have done if we sent him a stock standard Specialized Tarmac back through time. Unfortunately (maybe fortunately in Cyclingtoms view) carbon prices will rise over the next couple of years due to worldwide shortage. Just when it was almost in my reach....

Yep, you are a grouch. If you are worried about your public image, qualify your argument with an admission of your grouch nature. Or not. I feel that people will figure it out soon enough.

A little competition on and off the trail is the only way to push things forward.

xccx

It's not necessarily (just) you.

I get the sense that this particular forum is populated largely by non-racers. There's alot of commuters and newbies here, which is cool, but their mentality is totally different from a (seasoned) cx racer's. You seem to race, or at least to have raced at some point, which lends a certain angle to your posts. I think that's fine, and most of the time I agree with you, but not always...but who really cares? One can get lots of good advice from an online forum, but there is no substitute for real life experience.

We can all go back and forth forever about disc -vs- canti or steel -vs- alum or tubs -vs- clinchers...but in the end, the best is whatever works for you. Personally I think disc brakes on a cross bike are completely idiotic, unnecessary, and well, ugly, but I dont use my bikes for commuting (I race 'em). For some people, discs on a cx bike are probably great.

I dont think there's anything wrong with spirited debate. Let it fly! I appreciate colorful posts and fierce arguments. I think the reason you might seem "negative" is because you are in the minority in this forum (assuming that you race). You probably already know about it, but just in case you don't, there's another online forum thats much more race oriented. I'd say about 90-95% of the members are racing, and you can regularly read race reports, equipment reviews, comparisons, training tips, etc.

Check it out:
https://forums.roadbikereview.com/forumdisplay.php?f=47

You'll be happy there...disc brakes are blasphemy and there's lots of other retrogrouch-esque and its-the-engine-not-the-bike-type sentiment.

v1nce

Yeh + 1 to most of what was said above, though i gotta say that these days i take the term 'retrogrouch' as a compliment even though it could be constituted as a slur. I mean if i were to dub all OCP members consistently as 'Elitist Moody Slavish Non-thinking Consumers' (not as catchy as Retrorouch i admit) i think it wouldn't be on. There need not be anything 'grouchy' or 'obsessive' about liking the old/tested nor the new light stuff, i think it unfortunate that it is often implied. But oh well.

roadbuzz

Infidel!

SpongeDad

When did OCP cross over to CX? Anyway, OCP never said it would make you faster.

A lot of what 'tom has to say is absolutely correct. If I had to choose, I'd rather be in amazing shape than have an amazing bike. Dissing people is wrong in all it's forms - whether it's because you think their bike is too nice (which was not 'tom's argument) or because you think their bike is not nice enough.

spunkyruss

This is my first post in the CX forum, but I do alot of lurking here. I don't race, but I hope to next season. I haven't made any posts here because I don't have enough knowledge or experience to add anything to these threads. I'm simply here to learn. Hell, I don't even know enough yet to ask any specific questions that I couldn't answer by searching here or the rest of the internet.

I don't think that you are a negative person. I do think that your posts are often a departure from much of the common mythology in many cycling circles. There is a very good reason for your departure from common mythology -your wisdom comes from actual experience and observation. Far too much of common mythology seems to come from little more than reading advertising or polishing the latest-greatest-lightest-shiniest-gonna-make-your-buddies-drool-the-most parts. Buying fancy new parts provides instant gratification and it's almost painless; becoming a stronger, better-skilled rider takes time and it is anything but painless.

Some people may feel that you are consistently negative because you consistently say things that go against common mythology, and that's not what they want to hear.

I say that you and your posts are valuable assests to this forum becuase you consistently say things that go against common mythology. You are a voice of reason.

This thread reminds me very much of some of the "discussions" that I have had with my teenage daughter.

sameness

I don't get the "negative" vibe per se.

I certainly get a little pedantic whiff here and there (with subtle notes of condescension, and perhaps a touch of the world-weary dogmatic on the upper palette).

But hey. It's the sum total of typed characters via the internet. Tone is only ever implied, and never an absolute.

You could be twisting a dastardly black moustache. You could just as easily be L-ing your beer-fueled AO.

We'll never really know. We'll only ever project based on the evidence at hand.

YMMV, JMHO, $.02, etc.

- - -

Full disclosure:

HAVE

- Used both cantis and V-brakes
- Done a front wheelie

HAVE NEVER

- Used a disc brake
- Held a mechanical engineering license
- Met Keith Bontrager

sat_cycle

IMO super bling stuff doesn't make much of a difference in a cross race, so I agree with the original poster there.

but, it does seem to help sometimes if you have the money and support to have a clean bike in the pits . . . some of the races I did this year, guys I would be riding with would get a bike change and then take off and I'd still be slugging around 15 extra lbs of mud.

xccx

yep, and if you shop smart you can have 2 bikes for less than the price of one pimpin' ride. cyclocross is no fun if you are walking to your car with a flat or a bent der. after one lap. imho, THAT makes you look like a fred...especially if your one bike is an X-knight with Zipps and Dugasts.

cyclintom

Hey the nasty part is that the mud is hanging on the brakes and cables and putting the damned brakes on. Or jamming in the fork and the chain stays and the front derailleur (why do you think that they used to use only one front ring? - MORE clearance!). The weight hardly compares with those problems.

The mud fills the spaces between the knobs and then you can't get any traction. At least cyclocross bikes don't get a buildup like you do on an MTB where you have 2.2" tires with 45 lbs of mud on the bike.

xccx

hey, dont be afraid to ask questions, especially about racing and gear....we are here to help!

spunkyruss

Thanks for the offer! I'm sure that I'll have plenty of questions in the future.

cyclintom

And don't hesitate to compliment us. We like that part especially well.....

spunkyruss

..... the mud that you're wearing really compliments the color of your eyes

SpongeDad

tommy boy, don't you know that vanity is just a hop skip and jump away from OCP?

jpearl

Arguing in a cyclocross thread? That sucks since cyclocross is one of those rare sports with no predators or competators, unlike say, skiers versus boarders or roadies versus mountain bikers. Then again, this thread is indeed populated by true 'crossers (and poser 'crossers like myself witha real 'cross bike who follow the likes of Sven Nys more than Lance Armstrong) and people who buy the nu-skool "cross" bikes out there with quadruple chainrings and full braze-ons for commuting, touring, and picnics. Elitism is an obvious side product when people in this thread who ride bikes without waterbottle braze-ons and single chainings for 45 minutes of all-put muddy intensity lock horns with some guy whose 'cross bike is used only for commuting and touring.

Not to say that there is anything wrong with owning any form of 'cross bike or riding it in any fashion (I might just even race my Cannondale Cyclocross one day, the same one with rack mounts and waterbottle braze ons as raced by Italian national 'cross champion Enrico Franzio), but we should all realize that cyclocross was originally concieved as an off-season training method by roadies, and survives primarily through competition. Non-racers should give a sense of respect to racers, and racers should always be open and tolerant to non-racers, and while 'cross will grow and redefine itself at times, it's important to remember where it came from and why it is.

Pontification is now complate, I'm gonna pick out a nice route for Friday's ride around Washington DC that will take in as much dirt and technical riding as possible.

roadrasher

WORD!

'Rasher

Empella_Rider

I have noticed a small but growing roadiness to our Cross series and hope its not indicative of the whole Cross scene.The Roadie whine is beginning to pervade the scene due to Cross becoming the sport du- jour. With it comes mainstream and with mainstream comes the pervasive discontent of having everything and having it for nothing. Its a clash of ideals. the relentless pressure that Mr mainstream feels to conform versus his subconcious desire to resist capitolistic assimilation. The mental carnage of this battle he hopes to escape or at least subdue is wrought out in the frozen fields of city parks everywhere on any given Sunday.Just as a good tradesman has the very best of tools to do his job so too does Mr. mainstream in his quest to resist assimilation he chooses the best tool(s) for the job and if its a Colnago then so be it. The inevitable clash of minds between those who are free and those who long to be free of the socioeconomic tentacles of capitolism run amok will be fodder for this thread for many years to come. Racer #125 of NC Cyclocross Series 2005

SpokesInMyPoop

to cyclintom: big props to schwinn worlds!!!

I like them :B

graff71884

This thread is dumb and completely worthless! Happy Holidays everyone!