irony

a. Incongruity between what might be expected and what actually occurs.
b. An occurrence, result, or circumstance notable for such incongruity.

You probably shouldn't be skipping or skidding in a velodrome unless you're doing infield donuts.

But what if someone stops quickly in front of you?

Then you get permission to beat the **** out of them for having a brake on their bike at the velodrome.

I don't have a brake on my track bike for that reason — too lazy to take off then put on again. so I ride brakeless on my way to the track, but most other times I'm on my commuter which is front-braked.

sweet banana jesus, who cares? at first these arguments were interesting, and now they're just dividing lines. if you don't like the fact that people do things differently than you, then go live in a cave.

I'd like to live in a cave, do you know where I might find a nice one? Maybe with a mountain view and some sweet single track for my mountain bike?

Sorry, but I have to disagree with the idea that a helmet is a better safety object than a front brake. Helmets only help if you actually get into an accident (and even then they are no guarantee) while a front brake helps you stop faster than you can by skidding therefore giving you more room to avoid unfortunate contact with whatever obstacle is trying to ruin your day.

That said, go ahead and ride with or without a brake, with or without gears, naked or clothed, in full hipster garb, or whatever, just try not to harm other people. What you do with your own damned self is your own damned bidness.

It means they take advantage of the fixed gear by usually stopping with their legs, and use the brake when the legs aren't enough.

In the car I use my brakes pretty sparingly -- With proper throttle control (manual transmission of course) and proper pacing for the traffic conditions I can usually cruise along behind someone who's brake lights are blinking on and off without using my own at all. Sort of like the freewheeler's pedalpedalpedal! coast, compared to our pedal, pedal, pedal, pedal... It's about control. *shrug*

I'd just like to echo the thoughts of the OP. This isn't about riding with or without brakes, its about feeling the need to justify having one, as if its some kind of mortal sin. I think if somebody is feels the need to justify having a brake they should really think about why they are riding fixed in the first place...

well said WB

Eh? I didn't get that. Ok, whatever. I just assumed when people like myself say they've got a brake and try not to use it, it's just so they can give other forum users all possible information about their particular fixed gear issue.

So many assumptions.

Jeez, it's like justifying a justification...

EDIT: And by the way, I didn't mean to imply that I would be skidding around a velodrome. However, it is important to know how to properly regulate one's speed without a brake. This becomes easier with practice. How does one practice? That's right, by staying off the friggin' brake.

That ain't allowed, I expect they're all on the street. You have to pop it off to set it on a track.

I would say that regulating speed (adjusting just enough to keep from rubbing wheels on the track) versus braking (stopping the bike completely) is different. The idea of anyone on the track having a brake on their bike freaks me out; but not having a brake when I'm riding on the street freaks me out, too. In an emergency on the street, I want to be able to stop on a dime. On the track, I definitely don't want my feet to stop moving. To me, they are very different styles of riding.

In this regard I went on a 55mi ride with multi-geared roadies and found it a pure pleasure to regulate my speed and following distance with legs alone. It really helped smooth out the line. But I did appreciate having a front brake one time when a leader yelled out 'stopping' at the last minute for a light turning red. ;)

Al