Over on Gwadzilla (http://gwadzilla.blogspot.com), my friend Joel makes an interesting comparison: that, because of his doping, Michael Rasmussen is sort of like Keith Richards, but not (different kind of dope, you see...).  

I wonder what Keef thinks about all this...

At any rate, here's what Comrade Peanut thinks:

But wait, there's more:  Someone else in the pro peloton has something in common with Keith Richards.  Alexandre Vinokourov and Keith Richards have both had blood transfusions (again, a different kind of dope, but still...).

Comrade Peanut will now change the channel.

---posted by josh

Last year, during the nascent stages of our glorious revolution, the Racing Union's Supreme Council for Propagation of Message and Truth sent out a request to our citizenry for a stirring patriotic anthem befitting our quest for all that is right and true on two wheels.  An anonymous sympathizer sent us a particularly gusto-filled little number set to the tune of the traditional Welsh anthem "Men of Harlech."  For further reference, and a moving ode, please peruse the following link: http://www.racingunion.org/PermaLink,guid,638193ef-c7be-43e0-b47c-ccf9f55d0218.aspx

However, today we received another inspiring anthem from our own Comrade Kevin (who's been tearing it up at Greenbelt lately), clearly aimed at our younger compatriots throughout the Union heartland (aka "The Fruit of the Union").  As an expression of our deepest gratitude to a comrade who has clearly been reading his manifesto, an extra ration of potatoes has been reserved for young Kevin at the Plaza de la Revolucion.  Just what the hell am I talking about, you ask?  Well, Kevin wrote a song about it, and even though our humble compatriot may not want it posted (heh-heh...), here it goes:

         You frontin the union? 
         Slow yo roll you ain't got that
         We fed yo communion,
         Don't act like you all phat.

         East side or west side, you know we roll hard,
         Forget all thorps corps, that shit should be barred
         You with us or against, don't fuck wit' tha vanguard.

         Ya'll actin like bitches, sponsor's little whore,
         Watch your step or you'll be right out the front door.

         Rollin on the win, hear the Union Da!
         All you others just droppin a jaw,
         Where they come from, ain't never saw.
         Raise yo glass to the Union, a resounding Huzzah!

Well, there you have it, dear friends.  I hope that this little ditty has brought a tear to your eyes as it has to mine.  To borrow some immortal words from none other than the illustrious Flavor Flav himself, I would like to say: "yeeeeeeahhhhh, boooooyyyyyyeeeee!."  In my own words, I say: Da, Union, Da!

- - - josh

This just in from the state of the art broadcast studios at Racing Union’s Ministry of Culture and Entertainment:

Broadcasting in life-like clarity to the latest and most technologically-advanced high definition televisions throughout the Racing Union (including those made from re-purposed produce containers by loyal workers in our tropical industrial cooperatives), film critic Comrade Peanut brings us news of three cycling movies playing in the occupied Washington, DC area over the next few weeks.  All members of the Racing Union Cinema Appreciation Society (RUCAS, not to be confused with RUCCAS, the Racing Union Commuter Climactic Alert System) are strongly encouraged to attend these films.

It is not too often that cycling movies are exhibited publicly, and it is especially rare that three cycling-related movies are showing within the next few weeks, so Comrade Peanut cannot emphasize enough that it is of the utmost importance that we citizens show our support. 

The first of the three movies is “24 Solo,” which was best described on the D-20 list by Artemis Racing’s Evelyn Egizi: “This movie is absolutely incredible! Even if you don't mountain bike, this movie appeals to anyone who appreciates bike racing or an inspirational story. The documentary follows Chris Eatough, 6-time World Champion of 24-hour solo mountain bike racing in his attempt for a 7th World title. If you heard the news stories after the race last year - the finish was more than dramatic...”  For more information about the film, you can visit its website at: http://24-solo.com

The film was made by Arlington-based documentarian Jason Berry, who also made the award-winning documentary “Off Road to Athens” (about mountain bike racers trying to qualify for the 2004 Olympic Games in Athens).

Although one showing of “24 Solo” has already happened, there is another screening on Friday, April 27^th at 9:30pm at the Arlington Cinema n’ Drafthouse.  The movie is expected to sell out, but you can reserve tickets through: http://www.grippedstore.com/index.php?cPath=2_6

it's a sad day for the return of the union book club.  i had hoped to offer inspiraiton for the masses.  for those who chafe at the yoke of imperialist corporate oppression, a literary balm; for those who thirst for deeper knowledge of the revolution, a heady draught; and for those who yearn to further the union message, a constant companion and source of solace.

regrettably, i have found the opposite.  rather than an uplifting message for young cyclists, i have uncovered a conspiracy.  i can say with absolute conviction that up until yesterday, book burnings had seemed laughably stupid to me.  no longer.  the book being reviewed today is a purported children's book called messenger messenger by robert burleigh with illustrations by barry root.  it is subversive, and a clear violation of racing union thought.

this book appears to defy simple analysis.  it also appears to defy complex analysis.  i attempted to take a cue from roland barthes, and used the tools of structuralist poetics and literary deconstructionism, but found myself no closer to a breakthrough.  it's just not clear what message this treatise seeks to pass along to our youth on bikes.  because i am so unclear on where this book is going, i have attempted a sort of photo essay, in which i document the experience of reading it and the reactions of the union's young pioneers who have perused it as well. 

in the following picture, it's not clear if calvin is cold as in frigid or cold as in "stone cold freak".  i'm not down with the hipsters and their modern urban patois so i think i miss a lot.  even my five year old son thought he was smoking.  and what's with the beirut/haifa street landscape he's riding through.  it's surreal.  he's biking through a war zone with smoke coming out of his mouth.

lest you think the sketchy landscapes will give way to safer suburbs or the relative security of the big city, think again.  apparently a good part of messenger man's job is floating around exceedingly flaky locales and making pick ups and deliveries of non-descript materials.

but messenger man can't do it on angst or urbane cool alone.  no, he needs fuel.  my son took one look at this photograph and asked me if i rode my bike like this, with no hands, eating and drinking, with cars very close by.  i was dumbfounded.  you sort of have to wonder if the guy who drew this picture even knows what riding a bike in traffic is like.  there may be people stupid enough to try to pull this off, but i've never seen them.

if there's any upside, it's that he wears a helmet.  and though this is a positive, like so much else, it just seems to show how out of touch with bike couriers the illustrator is.  we all know that the cool couriers don't wear helmets.  and what's up with the circa-1976,white formula one car in the background?  this is simply a myserty wrapped in a puzzle shrouded by an enigma.

the sole member of the racing union's young pioneers who this was beta tested on seemed to take a shine to it, though he admitted to a considerable amount of confusion regarding the images and text.

attempts to debrief this child were made.  when this didn't go well, attepts to deprogram him from the hipster chic and surrealist guidance that the book contained were redoubled.  appropriate literature was substituted...

but was met with loud denunciations and threats of physical abuse.

so in closing, this book gets no hammers and sickles: the default rating system of the racing union book club.  oh, and formal orders have just been promulgated that...er...um....karl marx has been removed from the racing union young pioneer's official summer reading list and has been replaced with a 24 page glossy stock book called "ultimate nascar", a book about pirates and a book about a robot who is taught to swing on vines by monkeys.  this decision is, apparently, rather set in stone so appropriate orders to local community bookstores should be placed immediately by parents of young pioneers who serve in the vanguard of the revolution.  that is all.

-dear leader

as one who spends a considerable amount of time advancing racing union thought, i'm constantly looking at the overlooked.  people can't seem to see the obvious stuff staring them in the face.  i usually chalk this up to the materialsm and the capitalist and imperialist proclivities that modern americans display so proudly.  but racing union thought seeks to take what people see as problems and produce answers that serve cyclists and citizens.  here's a nice example.

1. mark sommers floats a very cool email indicating that dc velo are seeking to make their bike race carbon neutral. 
2. people new to racing union thought may perceive an obligation, a necessary response, to call out this team for shamelessly plugging their sponsor and seeking new and different ways to make riders interact with corporate entities to help advertise these services.  bill luecke sort of comes through with this email, though he prefers to hit them from a slightly different angle.  however, racing union thought should find no real fault in an organization that attempts to link cycling with social change.  the fact that corporate entites are involved is secondary to the goal that is stated.  this effort is union approved.  and please note: luecke should probably have disclosed his background as a metallurgist and his lucrative corporate ties to big aluminum before attacking a team that rides so much carbon but that's a different post. 
3. on a totally different front, discussion about what promoters do with race entry fees from riders who don't show up can be found here and here and here.

so racing union thought brings us to the only obvious answer to this whole question.  i now unveil my proposal for a new mandatory mabra policy: all promoters must account for race entry fees which were not used and apply that money to buying carbon credits for their event.  further, since the rider who did not show up at the event likely did not drive, and as a result did not consume fossil fuels, the rider should earn 2 bar points for themselves in the category of their choice and one team bar point.  the mabra bod can and should design a form: carbon-abatement bar point requisition.  this form will be a carbonless, five leaf system.  top copy goes to the rider with the other four copies going to the mabra bar coordinator, the event's chief referee, the mabra permit coordinator - record keeper and one copy going to usac in colorado springs.  let's aim to prototype this system by june so we can roll it out for the full 2008 racing season with confidence.  volunteers?

update: go get 'em evelyn!  and as for you mr. unholy roleur, i like the thinking you posted in our comments.  finding a nexus between beer consumption, cyclists, cycling and saving the earth is an achievement.  i have some specific concerns surrounding the fact that many beers i appreciate come on a nitrogen feed so there may be some toxic biochemical issues to work out.  we can't offer you one of them fancy-schmancy bolshevik medals as you have committed a few too many crimes against racing union thought in your illustious past, however, we note your gradual progress towards our world view and welcome you as a brother and fellow traveller.  any union betwixt zymurgy and cycling is union approved.

- posted by scott

the february mailbag is such a weak and tired collection of bitching and moaning that i can't even bring myself to publish it.  really people, if this keeps up i will die of ennui.  i didn't think the principles of the glorious revolution in cycling and the social order were so abstract or difficult to internalize.  i considered trying to change attitides based on our current government's behaviour management program but i dismissed that as unlikely to succeed.  heck, it didn't work for them and they've used it for years.  i do not have years people.  we need to get this party going.  now.  ahora mismo.  immediamente! 

i considered using some alternate materials which might hold your microscopic attention spans a few seconds longer.  however, initial testing produced unexpected, unpleasant and unacceptable reactions.

so we're going to start it out real simple like, using very basic tools that you imperialist mouth breathers probably spend an awful lot of time viewing on a regular basis. 

watch this several times and then we'll see about moving on to some more advanced material.  for those of you who are a bit further along in the curriculum, we can have a spirited discussion of the joys and irony of using capitalist tools of citizen control (tv images, mass produced culture) for our own purposes in the comments. 

- - - posted by scott

word is rippling out that a certain local administrative affiliate of the national sanctioning body of cycling has gone and found itself a webmaster.  if you close your eyes, you can probably picture the scene that precipitated this.  sitting around some gigantic table in deeply cushioned chairs, they enjoy canapes and brandys.  their normal expressions; the wry and cynical smile that only comes from the smug and wealthy, the blankness that comes from detachment, the carelessness and inattentiveness of the unaccountable, it has now somehow twisted itself into discomfort.  well, as much discomfort as can possibly be expressed by these people.  "THERE'S A REVOLUTION AFOOT" they bellow.

while they sat around on huge piles of cash, the cyclists and citizens oppressed by their brutal yoke have tired of their servitude.  they have organized and rallied around the great and glorious cause.  they have been encouraging people to ride and then to race.  this movement, from the ground up, threatens the very basis for organized cycling.  will the gravy train run off the rails?  they hope the answer is no, but brothers and sisters, citizens and cyclists, we know better.

this is a last desperate measure on their part.  they are attemtping to develop a communications operation like ours but it won't work: a day late and a ruble short.  their days of reclining while casually indulging in the finer things and tossing bon mots back and forth are over. 

the revoluton has arrived.

the supreme revolutionary council for propogation of message has prepared some new graphics to help you better understand the important differences between how mabra continues to treat racers like serfs on their land versus how the racing union seeks to liberate bicycle racing and bicycle riders.

racing union!!  boldest and brightest.  beacon to all who labor on two wheels.  the banner which all cyclists and citizens rally.  hope for all those who ride, inspiration for those who seek an end to the dominance of the four wheeled hegemon.  union!!  da!!

mabra.  unaccountable tyranny, organizational despot, bitter oligarch, wringing the last few rubles from our pockets in a joyless and mechanical fashion.  an organization that now pretends at supporting the cyclists and seeks to provide a messenging platform.  clutching to it's own pretensions it's sense of self importance, the myth it has created of it's own relevence, but ultimately doomed to the dustbins of cycling history.

the time is now.  citizens and cyclists, heed the word.  rally to the banner.  union!  da!  union!  da!

note: updated below with informed opinions, as opposed to what i normally publish -sg!

note: updated again with even better material

this is an open thread to discuss the idea that there is some benefit to restricting the gears of junior cyclists.  fixed gear cyclists, put a sock in it for now.  this thread assumes we are talking about riders who choose multiple gears and some mechanism for selecting which gear to ride.  Is there some benefit to restricting what gear the kids can ride?

info from usa cycling: link.

in canada, there is an evolving gear restriction.  link.  juniors under 13 have a maximum possible gear of 42 x 16, juniors under 15 have a maximum possible gear of 45 x 16, and juniors under 17 have a maximum possible gear of 52 x 16.

i am currently trolling for research but it's difficult to find directly applicable stuff.  this article would appear to say that there is little difference.  this article along with this article appear to show that arbitrarily modifying cadence (for instance by riding a fixed gearor using a gear restriction) may lead to suboptimal muscular contraction patterns.  check this as well.  demographically speaking, this is an interesting article, but i don't know if it provides useful proof for gear restrictions.

anyhow, plant your thoughs in the comments.

update (applied experience!): i solicited some feedback from pete lindeman who ran the junior program for ncvc for a few years before becoming their equivalent of maximum leader.  as always, h is insightful and amusing.  he has a lot of experience on all sides of this issue and i think his comments are well worth considering.

new update:  i was sent some more correspondence on this topic.  this is the most coherently argued perspective against this arbitrary rule that i have come across.  i virtually never post anonymous material, but in this case, I will say only that this is from a parent of an active junior racer.  this communique has everything.  be sure to check out the last paragraph.  the ending is brilliant.  simply brilliant.  enjoy...

This Juniors gear ruling is not founded on any empirical research that I can uncover. I've done a lot of research on the origins of the rule and it appears to come out of the UCI, based on nothing more than popular opinion. I believe USA Cycling has adopted the rule only to ensure that US Juniors and Espoirs remain compliant with and competitive in international competition. If that's the case, then why don't they so state. Is there a body of knowledge with the Espoirs National Team supporting the rule? Who knows? Other countries like Australia and Great Britain have even more restrictive Juniors gear rules that change with each racing age year from 12 to 23. Queries to clubs and organizations there have turned up a lot of support for the rule, but no rationale and no origin.

 

Our position of coordinating the 2008 US Air Force 60th anniversary bike race came out of my queries to USA Cycling as to the origins of the Juniors gear restriction rule. No one that I addressed at USA Cycling would discuss the rationale or origins of the rule. In fact, they wanted to get off the topic as quickly as possible.

 

As you know, 15 - 18 year old juniors must be Cat 3 rated or higher to qualify for National Championships. Here are some obvious facts that tend to question the merits of the new ruling that Juniors now must use restricted gearing in Seniors races as well:

 

1. The vast majority of Cat 5, 4, 3 races are flat-ground criteriums decided by a mass sprint in the final 500 meters or less. Loss of control from spinning out (150-200 RPM) in a 40 mph mass finishing sprint presents far more dangers to young riders than potential stress on joints and muscles from larger gears.

 

2. A large body of physiological research indicates that younger atheletes (under 23) are virtually incapable of self-induced stress injuries to muscles or joints, particularly in a sport like cycling, but are more highly susceptable to impact injuries, such as crashing, due to lack of skills and expereince (combine this with #3 above). In fact, adults over 23 are much more susceptible to repetitive stress injuries than juniors from lack of core strength, diminishing muscle mass (30+) and flexibility, and a more sedentary lifestyle.

 

3. USA Cycling cannot rule, measure nor enforce a rule on a minimum pedaling cadence, which is the stated rationale for the rule. Moreover, a bike race is not the place to teach or learn high-cadence pedaling technique. A fixie bike on a track is likely the best place to teach spinning. But in a race, instincts take over, and no amount of screaming from the sidelines will influence a kid trying to win a race, or just hang on to the pack and finish.

 

4. Pedaling stress on joints and muscles is relative to terrain, speed, wind, bike weight and measures, rider weight and measures, rider fitness, rider genetics, and rider pain tolerance, and NOT on the available gear selection. So, a 150lb. Juniors rider ascending a 20% grade at 17mph in a 52 X 17 gear is placing far greater stress on joints and muscles than a 120lb. Junior going 15mph in an illegal 53 X 12 gear on a flat course criterium. Moreover, every competitive Junior trains with one to two days of intervals to increase speed. There are tons of empirical data that support interval training as the only effective way to increase your speed.  So when Juniors spin out doing intervals on flat terrain, they seek nice long really steep hills to get HRs into Zone 5 - rule and rationale defeated.

 

5. Neither NORBA nor USCF Cyclocross rules have Junior gear restrictions, despite encouraging far lower cadences and radical terrain changes with steeper climbing grades.

 

6. There is no empirical data that I can find showing 80 rpms as the universal optimum cadence for men, women and children, in any cycling venue, but its taught and published 10,000 times a year. Where did this optimum come from and when? What types of riding and bikes were around when someone suggested this cadence? What empirical data supports the suggestion?

 

Year after year, I've watched Morgan Gerlak go off the front early in a Junior's race, pedaling at a godawful slow cadence in his largest 52X14 gear, while his mother screamed red-faced at every lap for him to pick up his cadence. He never did. He usually won. He's never had a stress-induced injury from mashing a large gear at a low cadence. He goes right from road racing into cyclocross every year and does suffer injuries there from crashing. Sean Yates (Motorola) was known for his slow cadence, while Lance Armstrong debuted his newly reengineered 120 rpm TT cadence at TdF win #5 I believe. Within the most successful of the pro ranks, there's a huge variance in pedaling cadence, so I conclude that the Juniors gear restriction rule is based solely on popular opinion from some outdated and outmoded cycling official who thought it was a good idea at the time.

 

Popular opinion also taught us that the world is flat and the center of the universe; that spinach is full of iron and good if you're anemic; that bathing causes the black plague; that beer and wine are good for hydration on long, mountainous, hot stages of the TdF; and that the atmosphere is warming and the polar ice caps are melting. Well, sorry Popeye but spinach has no iron. The troposphere has only risen 1 degree Farenheit in the last 100+ years, while the stratosphere and the eastern Pacific ocean have experienced much more significant cooling in the last 20 years. The same supercomputers that are pumping out this doomsday crap about waterfront in DC by 2025 can't even predict the weather three days from now. There's been no significant change in the total ice mass of the poles for decades - it melts a little over here and grows a little over there. 2006 was the calmest hurricane season in decades with the least amount of property damage for a long, long t ime, but that fact isn't newsworthy because it doesn't support Juniors gear restrictions.

 

One thing USA Cycling will accomplish with the new rule is the enduring angst and mistrust of a generation of up and coming Juniors, likely for the rest of their cycling careers. <name withheld> already competes against juniors that are 10, 11 12 months older because he was born in December. What difference would it make to USA Cycling to have your racing age change on your birhtday, rather than the calendar year? That's how it works with drinking age and voting. Now they're going to force Juniors to compete in sprint finishes in Cat 1/2/3/4/5 Seniors races (<name withheld>'s goal is Cat 2 before season end) with a 20% gear-inch handicap (52x14 vs 53x12).  That makes about as much sense as adding weight to a Junior's bike so he'll learn what it's like to race when he gets older and fatter.

kevin and i went to the public comment meeting on the proposed union station bike station.  my impression was that it was a decidedly weird event.  i'll get to my thoughts on that meeting in a minute, but some recent posts and comments set the stage perfectly for how i perceive this situation. 

chris' post from yesterday is a very good one.  it points out the everyday problems that people who wish to get around by bicycles face.  tom posted a very good comment as well.  in response to tom, my general experience is that the actual property owners are not always easy to work with.  my personal opinion is that they perceive they have enough to worry about and don't see cyclists as a large enough constituency to warrant the outlay of money necessary for something like this.  especially now, around the xmas shopping season, when mall rage breaks out because parking is such a premium.  can't you hear it now: "i'm too busy dealing with mall parking rage to help you with this...what did you say it was again....bike parking lot?  yeah, i'll get to it as soon as i survive the parking situation around the holiday season..."

i may be alone here but i see this issue as being very similar to ADA provisions.  the ada mandates that site managers and buildings must make access possible for people with a range of disabilities.  if you talk to the business managers, they will complain about the costs (very real and thousands if not tens of thousands of dollars in planning, permits, construction and equipment) to make the necessary modifications.  but i tend to be less sympathetic to their argument because it often boils down to this: "i don't have many handicapped customers now so why should i be required to spend lots on making my business easier for them to use?"  but this is so clearly a chicken and egg situation that you want to slap your forehead. 

the proximal reason that few commercial real estate owners think they need bicycle accomodations is that so few bicyclists show up or ask for accomodations.  but the ultimate reason that so few cyclists show up is that the roads and parking lots around these commercial areas are so dangerous to ride on and that there are no safe and effective places to put your bike while you're there.  if they built accomodations, would more people come there?  i'm not entirely sure.  but i'm certain that if they don't make it possible that it will never happen.

in very general terms, what's probably missing from this overall discussion is a set of standard tools for someone who wishes to pursue something like this.  maybe we need to develop a tool box so that you could go to any specified area and present them with a very professional package of information.  what might be in the toolbox?  it should probably contain some very brief introductory information about cyclists and what they need (not much!) to effectively use this person's resources/business/services.  you could have descriptions of what other businesses have done (with drawings or pictures and contact information for the site managers) as an example of best practices.  you could have a list of federal, state and local agencies that might offer grants or tax breaks or easements for things like this.  and finally, it would be brilliant to have an architectural firm draw up some generic plans for a simple prototype, cookie-cutter, one-size-fits-all solution so you can show the people there, in real terms, what you are talking about.  this would need to include a projected cost-estimate in current dollars.

such a toolbox would need to be customized for each individual application, in the same way that your resume would need to be tailored to each individual job you sought.  it would not be a lot of work but would stress the needs of that particular situation.  what do you guys think?  good idea?  bad idea? 

to address chris's quesiton, I'd be more inclined to suggest that somewhere in the parking garage, spots be allocated.  the garage already has the property of being covered, there's limited pedestrian traffic and there are "guards" down there.  there is also probably a concrete island somewhere that would be suitable.  i generally prefer bike racks that are public and out there and on display.  it helps to communicate the reality that biking is a very good alternative.  but in the case of the mci center, i'm not so sure.

now, on to the union station bike station meeting.  the meeting was initially described here.  kevin and i got there late owing to a really good deal on pints of guinness nearby.  when we got there, it had a very weird vibe.  there were several people presenting but they appeared to be mostly answering questions.  and the questions being asked appeared to mostly come from people who were interested in managing this facility.  many of the questions dealt with costs, overhead, ownership, subsidies, real estate, and regulations.

i'm not entirely sure what was going on so i am going to offer my best guess at what is going on.  i think that some money to build something has come through.  this money is (federal?) pollution abatement money and someone has decided that a bike parking facility is the best way to spend it.  the money will be spent.  and it's very, very probable that it will be spent on this product. 

again, i may be misreading the situation, but that's what i'm getting from it.  the stated purpose of the meeting was to get input.  but they already have plans, technicals, scale art models, traffic flow ideas and what not.  it looks like most of the decisions are made.  what i find troubling is that i think this particular idea is a solution in search of a problem.  when general interest questions were asked, there were really no answers.  what happens if this thing fills up?  there will be more street parking nearby.  what will happen to the existing bike parking?  unclear, it will probably be lost.  is this supposed to be a service for existing commuters or is it meant to be something to convince non-cycling commuters to give it a try?  no answer.  with the prohibition of bikes on marc and metro during rush hour, is union station the best place for this?  no answer.  will there be showers and changing places in the facility?  no, there will be no running water.  so there will be no toilets?  correct.  what happens when the "attendant" needs to go the bathroom?  does she/he just lock the place up and go into union station.  awkward silence.  no answer.  giggles from bikers.

maybe i'm being way to cynical.  i don't think so as i chatted with several others right after the meeting and they had even more and better questions.  but i don't get the feeling that there's much discussion at this point.  which is a shame.

now to tie the whole post together.  some will be saying that i'm not playing consistently.  in the top of the post, i argue that we need to have bike facilities to make it easier for cyclists to get around and seen and fostering the perception that cyclists share the road and bicycles are a real transportation option.  and then in the bottom of the post, after being offered what i want, i'm turning up my nose at it.  fair enough, in a sense.  i think we need accomodations and they need to be visible.  i think the bike station is waaayyyy too much of a good thing in a single place.  it's probably not useful to think about what that money (>$2M) could have funded but i can't help it.  but i think we can come away from this with something valuable.  in place of this, is there something else that would have been better?  and should it be placed all over the city?  and the suburbs?  and the shopping centers? 

i'll start doing some research towards the toolkit and see where it takes me.  any and all help is appreciated.

- - - posted by scott

updated below.....

compare and contrast the dire news:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/10/AR2006121001113.html

with the valuable services that are being provided:

http://www.wmata.com/bus2bus/smartbenefits/pages/Metro_start.html via this link.

we talk a lot about how the current travel infrastructure is "broken": entirely car based travel -> congestion -> sprawl -> need for more roads -> less green space -> more development -> more congestion -> more sprawl -> more need for more roads -> etc -> etc -> etc...  what we do not talk about as much is the need to have alternative transportation be all the more appealing.  this is somewhat counter-intuitive.  one would naturally assume that as commutes get longer and longer, less and less pleasant, and take up increasing shares of your life, that alternatives would seem more appealing. 

but this is not, in practice, how things work.  people who have hellish commutes will read this metro news about financial shortfalls and smile to themselves.  for them, it only serves to confirm the idea that mass transit and alternative transportation won't work very well for them, since it clearly isn't self sustaining.  i currently reside slighty west of the vienna metro stop.  if i were an average commuter, i would park at the metro, and then ride it into dc.  parking is $3.75 and let's just assume the metro fare is $3.70 each way for the trip which would put you near center city.  that's $11.15 a day or roughly $223 a month (20 workdays a month) or roughly $2,453 (48 work weeks a year).  could you operate a car for that?  in some cases, yes.  looking at insurance and wear and tear and gas, it would be tough for most of us.  you could take the bus to the metro and save a lot.  but hey, that's asking a lot of our commuters.

you're probably thinking that i'm going to tie up this post with a call for alternative transportation to conduct itself in a more becoming manner, to earn the respect of drivers and to work to be an appealing option and for jurisdictions to fund metro to a greater degree.  well, that'd be great but i don't see it happening.  no, i'm going the other way here.  we're going to the mat on this.  the problem is not necessarily metro: in all likelihood, it is no more inept or corrupt or inefficient than any other company or transit group anywhere else in the country.  no the problem here is that people (read: drivers) will read this article and smugly conclude that those great unwashed masses who don't sit for hours on our public thoroughfares are saps, and that they (the drivers) are beating the system and doing the right thing.  but they are drawing the wrong conclusion.  under my normal philosophy of put up or shut up, i proudly unveil my solution.  i will give away $10 in metro fare each month to some random winner. 

my preference is that you give it to a friend or neighbor or relative and ask they to try commuting by metro one day for free.  if you are a cyclist, you may certainly use this to get your bike to a group ride, or for some other purpose (take the kids to the national zoo for instance) but do it on public transit, not in a car.

here's the deal.  all racing union members are automatically entered in each month's drawing, because, well, because they are good peoples.  anyone else in the dc metro area who would like to be considered may send an email to metro_hook_up@racingunion.org with your email address and i will add you to the database.  all drawings will be at random and since i do the drawing, i will not be eligible to win the prize.  all i ask is that you send me a photo (same address) with you and the metro cash or a note by email on what you did with it.  but that's optional.  get those email addresses in.  drawing will take place shortly for december.  if the program goes well, i may expand it.  more on that later.

- - - posted by scott

update: before i dogged taking the bus up above, i didn't realize the true revolutionary powers of bus drivers.  you can witness it here, courtesy of one of the greatest geopolitical thinkers of our time.  this must have casued some sort of cognitive dissonance.  you can cause revolution and upheaval, but only by supporting the rights of striking workers.  can you picture it?  must support toppling of hardline, clerical, anti-american regime....but...cannot support striking unionized workers.....but must support toppling of hardline, clerical, anti-american regime....but...cannot support striking unionized workers.....  and on it goes! 

a commendation for ncvc: the order of the red star from the supreme revolutionary council for change in cycling and the social order.

this commendation is awarded for the very generous opportunity that ncvc is handing to us.  a chance to get out, drink beer, see a movie premiere and mingle with our fellow cyclists and citizens.  the union will be in full effect to show their gratitude for ncvc's kindness.  a hearty huzzah for all the early six day racers and for those who help us to remember those who went before us. 

information on the event can be found here: http://www.ncvc.net/

information on the film can be found here: http://www.sixdaybicyclerace.com/the_film.htm

thank you notes can be sent here: http://www.ncvc.net/contact.php

- - - posted by scott

there are some times when you read something and you just know that people will take it as certain evidence for their worldview.  the eggheads call this "conceptual goggles" but the rest of us call it what it really is, intellectual laziness.  there are probably a ton of interesting and hilarious jokes that could be made about this:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15947626/?GT1=8717

"what, no more hennessy?  no more wide format director's cuts?  this means war!"

rather than try to mine this for comedy gold, I'll share with you my own piece of intellectual laziness.  i see this as sure proof that regis debray was right all along when he said that "the revolution revolutionizes the counter-revolution".  the man is trying something new.  during the cold war, america tried to tackle the revolution head on through armed combat and spy vs. spy silliness.  by the eighties and nineties, we attempted a stealthier approach of economic destabilization and producing armed paramilitary groups that looked like authentic revolutionaries.  and now it's come to this.  why mess around with big budget diplomacy or arms shipments or a school of the americas.  just cut off the congac.  no more luxury cars, no more ipods, no more segways.  how will they possibly endure?  this alone has an uncomfortably elitist undertone: "you  know old boy, they simply can't get by without the finer things."  but at least it shows some adaptability and a remarkable amount of depth in that these sanctions won't affect the average citizen in the slightest.  how about that?  the counter-revolution is slowly being revolutionized. 

- - - posted by scott, link by chris.

sort of close, and then in the end, not really so much.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/?id=2006/woodland_sponsors

amateur athletics does not benefit from the dumptruck loads of cash that are poured into it each year. 

rediscover what amateur cycling is all about.

it starts here.

- - - posted by scott (link from mike)

garner points out that corporations are dropping sponsorship to usa cycling.

One of the tangible benefits of being a USA Cycling member has been United Airline's voucher exempting members from paying extra to fly with their bikes - saving US$80 in baggage charges each way. However, that benefit will not be renewed as United ends its sponsorships of individual sports.

"United decided to discontinue all of their sponsorships of national governing bodies, so it's across the board, not just with USA Cycling," USA Cycling's Andy Lee told Cyclingnews. "They will still be associated [with the] US Olympic Committee - they were a partner with us for sixteen years which was pretty amazing."

 

The loss of the voucher programme will undoubtedly affect those members who normally count on the savings, but Lee says USAC is looking at similar sponsorships for the future; "That is our goal right now. We know there are members who would pay a little more to fly on United in order to save money on their bike. We are starting to research some other companies that can step in and fulfill that role. The United deal and voucher deal was very valuable to our members, but that was only beneficial to members who travelled and lived in markets served by United. Now we can go out and try to find a sponsorships that could benefit a larger number."

 

United Airlines did not return requests for comment.

this post goes out to all the haters.  you simply would not believe the amount of venemous mail we receive here at central receiving under the plaza de la revolucion.  some people try to emulate our smooth rhetorical style.  others try, but inevitably fail, to achieve the incredibly high levels of truthiness we bring to the table.  but most just take an anemic stab at it; calling us names or saying ridiculous things.  it's really pretty pathetic.  if it were amusing, it would bring us joy, but it's generally just grumpy. 

today, i ran into something that is not bicycle related but which did amuse me.  i wish more of our hate mail was like this.  that would please me.

http://www.kentucky.com/mld/kentucky/news/editorial/15986574.htm

I believe that this is what passes for a quality argument amongst the "other" side.  this thing is literally a minefield of fallacies, of every shape and sort.  non sequitur?  check.  straw man?  check.  red herring?  check.  fallacy of many questions?  heck, the whole thing constitutes an emphatic yes. 

in many posts, i try to describe something by presenting a dichotomy between them and us, or how we view the world and how they view the world.  this is what we're up against.  literally.  i was riding my bike to work a few days ago.  i was as far to the right as practicable and not impeding traffic from what i could tell.  a car pulled up slowly, rolled down it's window, and we had the following dialouge.

driver: "it's not safe for you to be on this road."

me: "it's only unsafe if someone makes it unsafe."

driver: "you should really be on the sidewalk"

me: "it's actually against the law for me to ride my bike on the sidewalk"

<pause>

driver: "get your %#$&ing bike off the %#$*^&* road."

me: <silence>

now, dear reader, you may wonder why i bring this up.  i see this as a rare glimse into the real thoughts behind the driver.  they were sort of forcing this nice facade and a veneer of caring.  the whole "it would be safer for you to be off the road" is a ruse.  you are in their way.  and they want you to know it.  they try to tell you politely, but that will only last so long.

to tie the whole post togethger, i am beginning to wonder if we are being too subtle and polite to get our point across.  we have tried to take the high road, but it's like yelling at a wall.  maybe it's time to lift the rhetoric a bit.  in the next post, a description of the surreal encounter i had yesterday of how cyclign fits into the "system".

-sg

i got a number of emails from people suggesting that we'd catch more flies with honey than with vinegar.  i'm not sure what the hell that means.  people saw our recent drive for new members and seemed to want to tell us to tone it down a notch or two.  go along to get along, old chap, eh?  whatever.  read this post very carefully.  the times, well, they are a changin. 

we're standing tall with the will of the people as the wind at our backs.  where would we "move" to?  we're being inundated with *&%$ing ridiculous requests like this one.  mabra is not putting on the races, promoters are putting on the races. mabra is supposed to be an association of it's member clubs and promoters. i fail to see how promoting mabra is supporting these people.  it ought to be going the other way. seriously. How easy is it to find detailed data on the member clubs on the web site? how easy is it to find rides or articles of interest or anything that helps to indicate that there is some sort of community which the association is supporting?  in addition, this whole effort smacks of "branding", and i question the _need_ for mabra to assert it's privledge in this regard.

asking the racing union to advertise this kind of adminstrative oligarchy of plutocratic robber barons defies logic.  it would be like seeing hugo chavez wearing a baseball hat and t-shirt covered in dollar bills and doing advertisements for financial services companies.  communists for cool hard cash.  the reason it's so detached from reality is that it's predicated on the idea that movement towards their chosen position makes sense.  but that's just flat out wrong.  the social currents are with us, not with them. 

brothers and sisters, citizens and cyclists, now is the time to heed the call.  work to break the back of the car-based society.  work to bring the joy of cycling to all individuals and work to experince that joy yourself.  do you sometimes forget why you fell in love with the bicycle to begin with?  the union offers you the chance to rediscover that and more.  union brothers and sisters, onwards and upwards, never failing.  the time is now. 

- - - posted by scott

portal to the revolution: www.racingunion.org

our guiding principles: http://www.racingunion.org/Document.aspx?manifesto