Velouria

I think the Velominati have given up trying to rein in mountain bikers, and have yielded to the corporate machine that dictates we need a new bike/chain ring/wheel/cluster/fork size every year. They regard mountain biking as a quirky side show with no history and tradition, jumping from one fad to the next...

Before asking such questions on The Hub, a quick search of the Velominati will usually provide an answer: http://www.velominati.com/tradition/look-pro-the-flemish-compact/

I didn't see it was you - and when I did, I edited it. Not directed at you at all. Aimed at 24hr events in general in SA. Rain is rain - and will mess up (and ruin) any course. Rietvlei was by no means a tough course, much like Oak Valley and Malmesbury. I'm not trying to sound like an arrogant d!ck, and I can appreciate that there is a balance between difficulty and the fun factor, I just feel that MTBing in general in SA has become too obsessed with manicured trails and fast, flowing single track. We need to toughen up!

I can't comment on the other issues, but a 12km lap should be seen as the minimum length. While I can appreciate that there are people there to have fun and have a blast with mates, dumbing down our courses further isn't good for the future of the sport. And a general rule of thumb - take all your own supplies to a 24hr event - consider any catering a bonus. That way you'll never be disappointed.

Cycling tips has a good write up on the matter of 1m here Firstly, there is no evidence that a law makes any difference in the space given to cyclists, and secondly, how is it enforced. On that topic, how many people in the Western Cape have been fined for passing a cyclist within 1m? Cops eager on a quick Christmas bonus should be cashing in on ignorant motorists, but I doubt a single person has been fined. As one Australian opponent to the law says: Our new fancy law does nothing to limit behaviour of motorists, but restricts that of cyclists.

http://youtu.be/W8sGTh7ZpoY

Of course, but when I'm trying to chill back in the B batch and there are some morons who lose all decency and etiquette and are chasing every second to the detriment of those around them I get a little annoyed. Like the guys who expect the girls to get out the way, but won't return the favour when they're holding up people in the single track. If they were such good racers, they should be in A, otherwise it's just a fun ride. No one cares if you came 56th at Sani. My point is that people seem so focussed on racing from the back that they forget to have fun.

My Team HotChillee Double Century race report

I'm too poor to have a separate set of deep sections. I just know that following them always seems a little harder. Except last year - then us non deep section guys had the last laugh. Swings and roundabouts.

We've had some teammates ride with TT helmets last year. After nearly going mad from hearing your own thoughts for 6 hours they vowed to never do it again. http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-q1jfwa9X9zg/ULSisypDYWI/AAAAAAAAHDo/nGTO7XL283w/s400/DSC03705.JPG

Nope, in 2012 the fast teams all started at the back as well. A few years before that the top 10 started in the middle of the field. Starting the slow teams at the back means they ride in the heat of the day for longer. It's a catch 22 either way.

He did redeem himself once he rediscovered some legs by pushing people up hills towards the end. In retrospect, we should probably be disqualified for that too - helping a team illegally make position 193rd their own. I'm going to preemptively post my medal back to the Cycle Tour Trust - clearly we are a bunch of lying, cheating hoodlums that almost got away with the biggest scam in Western Cape recreational cycling since the Liss incident.

I think the new standard for a sub 3 is making the neutral zone at the Double Century in less than 3hrs. Just you and 11 buddies - no hiding in the peloton. 115.6kms of seeing stars and wishing you were dead - all in the name of bragging rights.

Racetec just being a little slow to update things. From my reply here: As CrashTestDummy has already stated - the result was queried, we went to the commissar's office and had to identify the six (6) riders that they had footage of crossing the line. Nicolas - the 6th rider - only received a chip on the startline, and so he wasn't picked up by the mats. There is a paper trail, and the commissars are more than happy with the result.

Thanks Fandacious. Everyone thinks we bought that result by getting Ben to ride with us - us weekend warriors still had to keep up with him. I've still got a rubbish pair of legs and I went to all sorts of dark places, but I'd do it again in a heartbeat. The HotChillee Racing team are a fantastic bunch of guys - some current stars, some everyday riders, and some future stars - and everyone gave it their all.

As CrashTestDummy has already stated - the result was queried, we went to the commissar's office and had to identify the six (6) riders that they had footage of crossing the line. Nicolas only received a chip on the startline, and so he wasn't picked up by the mats. There is a paper trail, and the commissars are more than happy with the result. HotChillee had 4 other teams riding. I rode past one of our development teams (after succumbing to Ben Swift's power and dropping off the team) and it looked like a warzone - the team had imploded spectacularly - bodies all over the place. That's probably the team you saw. In case you're in doubt - this is what HotChillee Racing looked like: Otherwise - nice sporting behaviour

We rode the race without backup. Slower teams and backup vehicles would not let our vehicle pass. We had to stop at the last water point and fill bottles. If the race had been any closer, this is something that we wouldn't have been too happy with. Thank goodness we didn't puncture or have any mechanicals. I spoke to the commissar later that evening, and they are aware of the problem. Some of the ideas they are toying with is to only receive backup at the Ashton spot, and then maybe before the last 3 rollers - removing backup vehicles from the route almost completely. Another option is to make it like Trans Baviaans - boxes that get taken to checkpoints and no vehicles on the route. As a fast team, it was near impossible to pass the slower teams, especially when they are riding 4 abreast, hugging the centre line. The rules also stated that slower teams should stay as far left as possible, and I'd be surprised if there any single team did that consistently. And don't even get us started on the crazy antics some of the backup drivers get up to. I haven't seen that much aggression directed to cyclists from motorists since the last time I commuted to work. I'd have thought that the people at a bike race would be a bit more considerate towards cyclists.

Congratulations to NuWater CVT - they are in a league of their own. Racing with Ben, Nic, Dan and the rest of the HotChillee team was an amazing, if not pain filled, experience. I'm looking forward to next year already.

This is what I wrote in response to the draft of this bill to Malcolm Watters. The draft was promulgated unchanged. Mr Watters, I've read quite a lot about the draft legislation proposed under the rather oddly named Draft Safety of Cyclists Regulations. As both a motorist and cyclist I don't feel this draft does anything to improve the safety of cyclists on our roads, and if anything creates more of a distinction between cyclists and other road users. An "us versus them" situation. I've been cycling for 18 years here in the Cape, and in that time I've only been involved in one incident that resulted in me being knocked from my bike. This is certainly below the average, both for accidents involving cyclists, and vehicle on vehicle accidents. I've made a point of adopting best practices that will ensure my safety, practices that are shown to keep cyclists alive. As the PPA stated in their letter to you, the 1m rule is not based on best practices at all. A search of the literature will show that 1.5m to 2m is the distance at which cyclists stay alive. Is it inconvenient to motorists? Yes. But if countries like Holland, Germany, France, Ireland and Italy can implement and police it, so can we. The 1m passing distance proposed by the draft falls clearly into the "squeeze" zone where motorists will try to squeeze past a cyclist. The Golden Arrow bus that killed a cyclist on Main Road in Muizenburg last year and the more recent death of a cyclist by (yet another) Golden Arrow bus on Durban road could both have been prevented if a 1.5m gap was required to pass the cyclists. (I find it quite funny that the City of Cape Town advocates a 1.5m gap, http://www.capetown.gov.za/en/Pages/Citycommittedtocyclingsafety.aspx while the Provincial Legislature is targetting 1m.) Under the current national legislation, bicycles are treated like another other road using vehicles, and as such, should be overtaken in the same manner (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicular_cycling). The saying "own your lane" is often used, and this gives cyclists the safety to avoid being caught in the squeeze zone by acting like any other vehicle in the road, and requiring other vehicles that wish to overtake to do so correctly. Which brings me to the next point - keep as far left as possible. What does that mean? As safely possible? As physically possible? Yet again, this exposes cyclists to being caught in the squeeze zone, and given the state of many of our roads, this might even be more than 3 feet from the edge of the road. And what about dual lane roads where a cyclists wishes to turn right? Or congested roads with parked cars on the left? A car door is over a metre wide - and that's how far away from a parked car I will always ride. Lastly, I have an issue with the headphone ban. Again, I can't see any empirical evidence that shows wearing headphones increases the accident rate for cyclists. Cyclists ride facing forward, moving forward, looking forward. This means that in all but a few rare circumstances any danger that a cyclist is likely to be presented and to which he/she will be able to effectively respond, will be in front of him/her. Taking evasive or defensive action to a threat that is positioned behind the rider is practically impossible since the rider is facing forward, moving forward, looking forward. A cyclist needs to actually see the nature and position of the “danger” in order to react appropriately. When was the last time you heard a “danger” and made a conclusive decision on where to go to avoid it? Our eyes are far more effective when it comes to identifying and responding to “danger”. (http://www.bikexprt.com/bicycle/hearing.htm) Why are cyclists singled out for wearing headphones while riding and getting knocked over from behind. A no go zone of 1.5m would be far more effective in keeping cyclists alive. Motorists talk on phones, listen to music, eat, text, apply make up, and control roudy kids etc while driving - if we're going to legislate things that distract road users, let's do it properly. Blaming cyclists is a complete misdirection. They belong in the road as much as cars do, and deserve to be as comfortable and have the same rights as anyone in a car. And I'm not sure when you last stuck your head out of the car at 40km/h and tried to hear anything. I'm rather blessed with big ears, and the wind noise at anything over 20km/h not only make hearing almost impossible, but on longer rides tend to "numb" my other senses. Try a 4hr drive to Knysna with your car window partially open. This draft proposal singles out cyclists, puts the blame on us, and takes away our rights as road users. I'm all for safer roads, but I don't feel the points highlighted above will make our roads safer for cyclists. Rather try and enforce the rules that currently exist, and design and build new roads that are bike friendly (How was Main Road redone with not a single thought given to cyclists??). We've got to create a culture where all road users are afforded the same rights and protections, and that we learn to respect those rights. Targeting an individual group will just increase the animosity between road users, and do nothing to make our roads safer. For some more info on bicycle-car accidents: "The City of Westminster has revealed that more than two thirds of collisions between motor vehicles and cyclists within its boundaries in the past year that resulted in injury to the rider were due to some factor associated with the driver, compared to one in five cases where the cause was attributed to the rider." http://road.cc/content/news/83104-two-thirds-cyclist-injuries-following-collisions-motor-vehicle-due-driver-says Much like London, the accidents in Cape Town are probably due to driver error, yet this draft places no burden or limitation on the actions of the people most likely at fault. Regardless of whether this law is promulgated or not, I will still do what I feel constitutes the best practice in order to stay safe on our roads, even if that means breaking some of the proposed laws. Thanks for reading this

This isn't a law that protects cyclists - it gives a cursory nod to the distance motorists must pass cyclists, and then goes on to limit the rights of cyclists as road users, rather than empowering them. To obey these laws would make a ride on our roads less safe. The whole "own your lane" approach to cycling is now illegal. And what exactly does "as far left as is possible" mean? To me that means riding where I feel safe to avoid obstructions and poor road surfaces, to a motorist than means within 5mm of the edge of the tar. Western Province government doesn't even have a cycling strategy when building new roads - where are the bike lane proposals on the R44 upgrade? I will not be complying with those provisions of this law which I feel do nothing to improve my safety. Safety of Cyclists Regulations pffft Edit: Seems I got quoted out of context by a blogger - yay! http://6000.co.za/cyclists-stay-alive-at-1/

I'm sure they would love to go under 6, but realistically, I think they will be closer to 6:30.

We've got a few spots available in our B team - kit, accommodation, dinner the night before (with Ben Swift and various other celebrities) all sponsored.

Much like my email to them asking who they voted for in the UCI elections, as well as my letter letting them know that I would be riding a World 24hr event in Australia. And I am a fully paid up member.

He did indeed - in 7:17. Got the half way stop and our car had already left - he had to beg other teams for snacks and juice. Mental note - must ride with my phone.

We regularly lose guys before the N2 (the joys of being an internet team - we only ever meet up on race day). To their credit they have all continued and finished. Not so cool when you're starting right at the back and there are no teams to hook onto. I'm hoping Ben offers me a pocket.