Fixed gear bicycles, AKA fixies fixies fixies are Satanic tools, and fixie riders are spawn of Satan.

As I keep a clove of garlic in my saddle bag and holy water in my Polar bottle, they're OK with me.

why can't they stop like a road bike? a fixed gear bike can have brakes...

that said, plenty of FG come out on our group rides, and are often up front pushing the pace.

I don't understand what is more dangerous about a fixed gear bike vs a geared bike.

i think you missed this:

to my understanding, most of this thread has been directed at that point rather than the drivetrain aspect.

I have never heard this or anything like it in a lifetime of hearing apocryphal cycling stories. I can't imagine when this would have taken place as Campagnolo standard reach brakes were much worse than all the centerpull brakes in use in the 1960's, 70's and 80's. Campagnolo's fix was the creation of the short reach sidepull that was as good as a standard reach centerpull but required a frame design that only could accept smaller tires and no clearance for fenders. Which is fine on racing bikes for which these anemic brakes were intended.

Today the centerpull brake has been morphed slightly into the dual pivot design allows the easier routing of brake cable and housing of the sidepull and everyone is happy with great braking performance.

I vaguely recall having heard something similar, possibly with respect to a particular model of Mafac brakes, but haven't been able to find it.

(and you don't want to grab the other rider-- just press forward from behind on their hip/lower back. )

My reading of the UCI rules is that racers are not allowed to touch another rider. For example, pushing a team mate up a hill, pulling a jersey and etc. The UCI goes into detail on each offense and penalty. Clearly, racers touch each other as part of incidental contact and to momentarily redirect another racer. I find it hard to believe that one racer using another through physical contact for some type of gain in a race would be allowed. Of course, it has to be enforced and that may be another matter.

This year in a road race, i was beating a friend from another team up a hill to the finish and one of his teammates pushed him for assistance. He ended up beating me. They both should have been relegated by the officials. I told him he was a wussy.

It was definitely Mafacs. I just read this story this week and now can't remember where. maybe somewhere in the bowels of sheldon brown's site?

you need to spend more time watching cycling on TV...

There's quite a bit of helpful contact that doesn't get penalized. Things like a rider who is about to blow up in a fast paceline (usually headed up a mountain) will reach back and offer a handsling to the rider behind to help bridge the gap he's about to create. Or when a rider has to pee and the peloton isn't taking a break, a teammate will push the rider along while he does his business. And riders at the back of the pack on a mountain stage will often get quite a bit of assistance from the spectators...

I do watch a lot of pro racing and observed same. You need to spend some time reading rules.

In each case you mention, the UCI has an infraction and associated penalty and one rider pushing another does not have a peeing safe harbor clause. The one assistance rule frequently enforced is using the team cars either to get back on the peloton or assistance from a mechanic beyond what is "required". All is totally at the discretion of the officials which I assume is anything they deem material to the outcome of a race. As I recall, Levi got a 20 second penalty for using a team car in some way.

This year at the TdF Renshaw was thrown out for impeding Farrar by running him into the rail by not holding a line in a final sprint and head butting. They deemed running Farrar into the rail dangerous.

Like most rules and those responsible for enforcement, there are rules and then there is the practical application. My point is that if one rider gets material benefit from another due to contact that could affect the outcome of a race, it is clearly an infraction and probably would be called.

All fixed gear bikes have just as much breaking potential in the rear as a geared bike. They just use their legs, rather than calipers. You can lock up the rear just as easily with either. Front breaks are what you should be worried about as they make up 70% of any bicycle's breaking potential. As long as the rider is competent and has a front break, s/he can ride with me - regardless of drive-train.

hyperbole?

I probably know the rules better than you do...

but I also am well aware that there are many situations (and I gave examples) where they are visibly ignored and no penalties are issued. The issue of using other riders for their brakes was apparently well known and probably accepted behavior, particularly for safety in groups on fast descents (I've been on both ends of riders using each other as brakes). As is supporting riders for bathroom breaks. It's quite different from what Renshaw did to Farrar, or from using team cars to get back after being dropped (riders still use team cars-- watch carefully how bottle handoffs are done).

haven't we all seen the video of the two riders descending in the tour de france where the second guy slipstreams to the first one, and then lightly pushes the first rider ahead? on the contrary, wasn't cervelo relegated for a push in the qatar ttt a few years ago? i think context is significant.

yes-- that was the point.

i quoted you to indicate supplementation, not disagreement.