“It’s the stupidest thing. It’s the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever heard of.”
This is what Ryder Hesjedal said after officials seized his bike at the finish line of today’s stage of the Giro d’Italia to check for any hidden electric motors. The full story can be found here at Velonews.
There have been rumors of some riders using electrically assisted bikes for a while. I think it started after the 2010 Ronde van Vlaanderen when Fabian Cancellara rode away from Tom Boonen on the Kapelmuur. (round about 2:40 on the video clip)
Electric assisted bikes exist. My wife Grace has one, and it works well. It also weighs 22 kg, of which the battery accounts for about 3 kg and the motor probably about another 3 kg. In other words the motor and the battery weigh about as much as the average pro’s race bike.The maximum power boost is probably about 120 to 150 watts, using it at that level the battery would last about two hours.
I think the important part of the bike to focus on is the bottom bracket area (where the cranks are) If you look closely at the E-Bike you will see a grey rhomboid shape just in front and above the front chainring. This is the motor housing. Do you see anything remotely like this on the Cannondale – no. Electric motors produce power roughly in proportion to their size, so to get a significant power boost you need a reasonably sized motor, something which I don’t think could be hidden in the seat tube. Another thing worth noticing is that grey box on the lower tier of the rack, that is the battery. It is conceivable that you could fashion a battery that would fit into the down tube, but I’m not quite sure how you get it in and out without cutting the frame nor can I see how you would charge the thing without leaving evidence of a charging port. Also note the wires everywhere on the E-bike and not so much on the Cannondale.
On top of that why would a professional cyclist want the penalty of the extra weight of a battery and motor on a mountain stage for a five or ten minute boost?
A similar incident last summer was even more traumatic. I was training in Zuid-Limburg, in the Dutch hills, doing efforts on a climb. Efforts mean riding up a hill as fast as possible. Again. And again and again. When I did the effort for the fifth time, gasping for oxygen and with legs about to explode, I suddenly saw an aged couple two corners above me. They were pedaling up as well.I should have realised immediately that only Super Granny would be capable of riding up a climb like that. For ordinary-aged people it was far too hard. But doing efforts blurs ones vision. I could just notice that this aged couple’s pace was pretty high. Actually, they seemed to be flying up. I was giving it all and I hardly came any closer. WTF?, I thought. WTF, OMG, BBQ?!?! I squeezed out every bit of energy I had left in my body and found myself back in the slipstream of the couple. And there I saw what I should have realised minutes before: electric bikes.
Having tried to follow Grace in full boost mode up a hill, I tend to agree with her.
As (I hope) all of my multitudes of followers in the United Kingdom will know we have a General Election on Thursday (7th May). My further flung readers may not. So in recognition of this fact my irregular Sunday round up of news and opinion will be mainly about the who, what and why of Thursday’s stramash. Working out exactly what this election is about has been difficult.
Huge issues that will confront the next government, whatever form it takes, have been missing from the campaign. Britain’s role in the world has barely been discussed and in so much as it has been debated it has been narrowed to an argument about whether you need four submarines or just the three to maintain a credible nuclear deterrent. The environment has hardly got a word in edgeways. The economy has been talked about a lot, but usually in superficialities. I hear everyone assert that we need a high-skills, high-wage, high-productivity economy; I hear precious little about where all these wonderful jobs are going to come from. How is Britain going to earn a successful living in the future? That most fundamental of questions remains unanswered. We are in a fog of uncertainty about what sort of country we will be living in. We cannot even be sure that this country will exist in five years’ time. Labour is locked in a desperate struggle for survival north of the Tweed against the rampant Scottish nationalists and has not the breath to spare to describe how it would remake the United Kingdom. The so-called Conservative and Unionist party has responded by colluding with the nationalists in stoking the grievances that are pulling the UK apart.
Detached from Scotland, the England over which it aims to preside, never-endingly, will be a poisonous, inward-looking and mean-spirited place. It will be welcome only to the super-rich and their insider networks, denying the mass of English citizens the structures and institutions through which they can live the good lives to which they aspire.
The Britain I love – an outward-looking country that is tolerant, good-humoured, fair-minded and generous, and which, with some reforms, could become one of the most dynamic places to live in Europe – will have been expunged.
On 16 February 1886, Lord Randolph Churchill confided a plan to destroy his Liberal opponents to the Conservative lawyer Gerald FitzGibbon. It was a risk, he implied. But if William Gladstone’s Liberal administration proposed home rule for Ireland, “the Orange card would be the one to play. Please God it may turn out to be the ace of trumps and not the two”.
In the end, it boils down to this: do we want the UK to be a hopeful country or one scared of what lies beyond? I land on this stark question because arguments about everything else have reached stalemate. But a lot of us seem unable to make that one final decision, who to vote for, because we don’t want to be let down one more time. We’ve had enough, they’re all as bad as each other, a plague on all their beautifully maintained houses. It’s a chorus of negativism that’s so easy to join. I urge you not to join it.
Kathryn Tickell is best known for being the finest Northumbrian piper around and arguably the best there ever has been. I first heard her play at the Rothbury folk festival about thirty-five years ago. I heard her before I saw her. It was the open pipes competition, and I had missed the start. As I was making my way into the hall, I could hear this wonderful lyrical pipe music being played. The style wasn’t quite right for any of the pipers I knew. On the stage was a twelve or thirteen year old girl.
“It can’t be her”
was my initial thought, but it was, and if I remember correctly she won the competition.
Having told you what a brilliant piper she is, this “Song I Love” doesn’t feature her pipes.
It is Kathryn’s reconstruction of her mother’s reminiscences of being a girl brought up on a Border farm. Lots of the things she says remind me of my upbringing on a Border farm, about ten or fifteen years later and on the Scottish side of the border.
It features Kathryn’s fiddle (she is almost as good a fiddle player as she is a piper) and her spoken voice.
There isn’t a YouTube video so I have embedded a Spotify track. I’m not quite sure how it works because I haven’t tried it before.You might have to register to listen.
I said in a previous post that in my opinion the road cycling season starts on the first Sunday in February with Le Grand Prix Cycliste la Marseillaise (l’Ouverture), but if you are Belgian the season started today with Omloop Het Neuiwsblad. It is not the longest or the hilliest of the cobbled classics, but as it takes place at the end of February it often has the worst weather. Rain, sleet snow, wind and temperatures hovering either side of freezing are common. It is a race for hard men, and women. The women’s race runs on the same day, on a shorter slightly different course, but the same finish.
Last year’s Het Nueiwsblad was a classic it this respect. The British rider Ian Stannard won it. The phrase “when the going gets tough, the tough get going” describes him well. The pundits reckoned that the conditions today might be a bit too easy for him. There was only light rain forecast and the temperature was a positively balmy 8°C.
The race followed its normal scenario, in that a break of eight riders went clear from the start and built up a maximum lead of about six or so minutes. The racing started for real on the climb of the Taaienberg where Tom Boonen made is now traditional lung opening attack, just to see how the legs are. A few kilometers later Boonen and his Etixx-QuickStep team mates attacked again and this time split the field, only former winners Sep Vanmarke and Ian Stannard could follow. Vanmarke had a puncture at an unfortunate time and although he tried he couldn’t get back on.
The situation was three Etixx-QuickStep riders against Ian Stannard. It should have been no contest. what followed was depending on your point of view, either a textbook example of how to win against the odds or a textbook example of how to lose a race that you should have won. The video below is of the final ten or so kilometers, the commentary is in Dutch.
Ian Stannard plays his cards absolutely right, down to conning Niki Tepstra into leading out the sprint.
Etixx-QuickStep can redeem themselves tomorrow in the Kuurne-Brussels-Kuurne race where Mark Cavendish should be one of the favourites
After winning this race last year, a crash at Gent-Wevelgem, where he fractured a vertebra wrecked the rest of his season. If he can avoid that sort of bad luck this year we could see the first British winner of De Ronde van Vlaanderen since Tommy Simpson.
Anna Van Der Breggen won the women’s race, which unfortunately I can’t find a video for, Eleonora Van Dijk was second and Lizzie Armitstead third.
I found this pre-election flyer from my local (Lib-Dem) MP Tom Brake stuffed through my letter box today. In it he asks me one question.
“Would you be happy with a Tory MP?”
The answer is obviously no.
However I decided to check Mr Brake’s voting record on They Work For You, and as far as I can see we might as well have had a Tory MP for the past five years.
I’m sorry Tom but I’m through with holding my nose and voting Liberal Democrat to keep the Tories out. My vote is going to the only party that has even quarter of an idea about how to get the United Kingdom back on the right tracks and that is the Labour Party. Though as Billy Bragg said recently on Facebook;
It’s a mark of how constipated our political discourse has become when the ideas put forward by the bishops of the Church of England are more attractive than current Labour Party policy
srack= pairs of shoes that a shoe rack is designed to hold;
sf= the pairs of shoes owned by the female (hopefully sf < 100);
sm= the pairs of shoes owned by the male (must be > 0);
y = the number of years that the shoe rack has been installed;
tm = the tidiness factor of the male;
tf = the tidiness factor of the female;
sactual = pairs of shoes in the hallway on or near the shoe rack
sactual = srack + (sf y / tf) + (sm y / tm)
Off we toddled to IKEA to get a new shoe rack, and a new table to put in the porch so we could put a plant on it. The table goes in the porch and has the plant on it, not the shoe rack. At this point I suppose I should mention that we had gone to IKEA the weekend before to get a shoe rack and a table for the porch and came back with a bathrobe, two sets of battery operated fairy lights and a bread basket. Hopefully we wouldn’t get quite so distracted this week.
We did manage to buy a shoe rack called “Tjusig” and a table called “Grennen”. We actually bought two shoe racks in the hope of at least temporarily overcoming the “Law of Shoe Racks”. By the way does anyone know how IKEA thinks up their product names? Are they just random letters thrown together to sound vaguely Scandinavian or do they actually mean something?
I took some photos of the assembly process. Unfortunately I can’t bring you hilarious tales of ineptitude. I am actually fairly good at assembling flat packs and the like. I am an engineer so, I can interpret drawings and normally see how something fits together.
Read the instructions and make all the components aka “bits” are present and correct.
First step; assemble the legs using the correct cross-bars; the threaded ones.
Using the trusty IKEA Allen Key fix the cross-bars.
Fit the locating dowels to one set of legs and assemble the cross braces
Insert the wood screws and tighten using a cross-headed screwdriver (or trusty multi-tool device)
Fit the second set of legs – remembering to fit the location dowels first.
And that’s it. If you want to stack them two high (like me) there are a couple of fish plates to fix the racks together so you can’t knock the top one off.
Using a proper screwdriver instead of a Trusty Multi-Tool would have made the job slightly easier, but it was raining and I couldn’t be bothered to go out to the shed to get my tool-box.
As you can see the “Law of Shoe Racks”is already coming into play.