I miss bike races. I miss watching them. I miss following them. I miss enjoying them without needing to be cynical constantly. But mostly I miss the constant feed of interesting things to write about.

As a cycling journalist blogger hack, finding something interesting to write about on a regular basis is the food that feeds the soul. It is super easy to take the advocacy fear mongering path. One can find a steady stream of stupid comments from politicians, tales of death in the city streets, ridiculous public spending on things that are supposed to be “infrastructure.” Some can brave this stream and do the hard work of exposing these important issues. And some can do a damn good job of it. But it it as unfortunately negative view.

Bike industry news is another topic. But even that can be draining. How many times can I enthral you with yet another new product, reinventing yet another old product, by copying what an even older product already did?

But bike racing. The human drama. Battles to the finish line. Heartbreaking crashes. Overcoming incredible odds at the last minute. Ahhhhh….. that’s good stuff.

Except when it isn’t.

Despite all the lip service and ad dollars thrown at it, bike racing still has the dark cloud of doping mucking up all the fun. Stupid people doing stupid things, then trying to cover it up with stupid excuses.

I, for one, miss the times when I was either ignorant of all of the dark side stuff, or was still able to set it aside and enjoy the good. A grumpy old crumudgeon makes for a very poor cycling journalist.

So to that end – time to pay less attention to the Tour Giro Vuelta. There are still interesting, positive, and fun cycling stories about bike racing. Go find your local crit. Connect with a local “just for the hell of it ride” and remind yourself that this whole bikey thing is fun. Sprint to the city limits sign with your local cycling club safe in the knowledge ignorance that the caffeine from the coffee shop where everyone met is the only PED to worry about. Admire new products not for their super-light-weigh uber-aero technology, but their beauty and art. Screw the rules – wear your wool cycling cap whenever you want. Go to a local CX race and be a non-abusive, yet commercially intoxicated, spectator. Don’t let the doping BS ruin it for everyone else.

Just… have fun.

There is an old saying – don’t throw out the baby with the bath water. Unfortunately, that is exactly what some are calling for in response to the abuse of Therapeutic Use Exemptions (TUEs). Namely, a total ban. While that reaction may seem like “common sense” to other racers that feel cheated by the abuse of TUEs in the pro peloton, it actually impacts others in an unintended way. In fact, there is one entire team that relies on valid, legitimate Therapeutic Use Exemptions to even compete. TUEs were made for a reason – and we must not let that reason be forgotten.

There is a need for TUEs and that is for someone to treat an illness or a
sickness. They are not intended and should never be used to improve
performance.

Phil Southerland. CEO and Co-Founder of Team Novo Nordisk

First – a little history

Almost all of the substances routinely (and illegally) used as performance enhancing drugs were designed to treat real medical conditions. As anti[doping controls covered more and more substances over the years, it was inevitable that would overlap with professional athletes using these substances for purely medical reasons – without the desire or intent to gain a competitive advantage.

Because of the desire to open the sport to as many legitimate athletes as possible, as well as help ensure the health of the athletes, a mechanism has been enacted to allow exceptions to standard doping rules for those that demonstrate a medical need and will not receive a performance gain from use.

Athletes may have illnesses or conditions that require them to take particular medications.

If the medication an athlete is required to take to treat an illness or condition happens to fall under the Prohibited List, a Therapeutic Use Exemption (TUE) may give that athlete the authorization to take the needed medicine.

The purpose of the International Standard for Therapeutic Use Exemptions (ISTUE) is to ensure that the process of granting TUEs is harmonized across sports and countries.

World Anti-Doping Agency

There are, unfortunately, possibilities for abuse. And one can definitely understand the anger felt by clean athletes when TUEs are abused in events. A recent publication in the academic news outlet The Conversation even went as far as suggest that TUEs are harmful to athletes by masking symptoms when they should instead be recovering.

If an athlete is ill or in pain, they should rest. Drugs which mask a health problem in order to allow athletes to push themselves for the sake of sport could have an impact in the short and longer term.

Elite sport: time to scrap the therapeutic exemption system of banned medicines

However, this argument falls very much short by refusing to acknowledge that not all TUEs are simply about managing symptoms. The most glaring example of this is the treatment of type 1 diabetes. Diabetics are forced to take insulin – not only to compete, but to stay alive. In is not an optional medication, and it is not something that is used simply to mask symptoms. Instead, in is necessary to use via daily injections in order to replace a vital hormone that is absent in type 1 diabetics. And there just happens to be an entire pro cycling team rostered exclusively by type 1 diabetics.

Team Novo Nordisk

Team Novo Nordisk (formerly Team Type 1) was co-founded by Phil Southerland and Joe Eldridge. The team has become an inspiration for athletes with diabetes world wide. And given that the team is made up entirely of athletes that live with diabetes, each and every one of them has to have a therapeutic use exemption to compete. Ban TUEs, and you ban an entire team.

Team Novo Nordisk is a global all-diabetes sports team of cyclists, triathletes and runners, spearheaded by the world’s first all-diabetes professional cycling team.

Comprised of nearly 100 athletes from over 20 countries, Team Novo Nordisk competes in more than 500 international events each year.

I had a chance to talk with Phil Southerland, as well as Team Novo Nordisk rider Sam Brand, about cycling with diabetes, TUEs, and their reactions to the call for the elimination of legitimate therapeutic use exemptions. Below are their words:

Phil Southerland – CEO and Co-Founder of Team Novo Nordisk

JustAnotherCyclist: Therapeutic Use Exemptions (TUEs) have been in the news quite a bit lately. While researching them for this story, I was somewhat surprised to learn that insulin itself is on the banned substances [list]. Does that mean that every athlete on Team Novo Nordisk has a TUE?

Phil Southerland: Yes, all riders at Team Novo Nordisk race with a TUE. Since the team’s inception in December 2012, we have always been very public and extremely proud that we race with type 1 diabetes. Additionally, we have always been open that we race with TUEs. WADA included the use of TUEs so that an athlete who has a legitimate medical condition can continue to compete. The UCI and the anti-doping organizations recognize that diabetes is a legitimate medical condition and grants all Team Novo Nordisk athletes TUEs to use insulin.

JAC: How many total athletes on Team Novo Nordisk have existing TUEs related to diabetes?

PS: As of January 1, 2018, 28 athletes on Team Novo Nordisk race with TUEs. There are16 riders on the men’s professional team, 11 riders on the development team and one professional female track cyclist, Mandy Marquardt.

JAC: What is the process for an athlete with a legitimate medical need – such as diabetes – to be able to compete while taking insulin?

PS: Our medical staff handles all TUEs, and the process with the UCI includes submitting medical records that show the date of diagnosis, place of diagnosis and the doctor who diagnosed the athlete. All this information is verified to show that our riders are racing with type 1 diabetes and need insulin injections to survive.

JAC: UCI rule 13.3.052 seems to imply that the injection of any substance via syringe in banned. However, the rule does specifically call out diabetes as an example of a permissible situation for athletes to self-inject. Is it a separate TUE for the insulin, and the administration method?

PS: There is an extensive process that we go through with the UCI to prove our riders’ need for insulin. It comes down to life or death for these athletes. The UCI grants all Team Novo Nordisk athletes long-term TUEs for insulin use. As an American-registered team, USADA serves as our anti-doping organization and recognizes and explicitly list on its website that athletes who are insulin-dependent (athletes with type 1 diabetes) are allowed to race under a TUE
while using insulin.

Currently, the only method for type 1 diabetics is subcutaneous injections. Our athletes are not choosing an injection over an alternative.

JAC: Have riders or team staff ever experienced any negative interactions from other riders or officials as a result of the possession and usage of insulin to treat diabetes during a race?

PS: Early on, we had people see the riders injecting at races and report it to officials. The officials are well versed in our situation and all our riders have documentation that they carry that proves their TUEs.

In general, we receive positive feedback from riders, organizers and officials. To be honest, seeing a rider inject typically opens up a conversation. People often use it as an opportunity to ask questions, which we always welcome.

JAC: What was your reaction when Froome’s test results turned out to be a
substance he had a TUE for?

PS: What concerns me about the Froome situation and anyone else using a TUE for marginal gains or to push the limits into the grey area is that it creates a huge negative perception around the sport and can damage the reputation of the athletes who have a vital need for long-term TUEs. There is a need for TUEs and that is for someone to treat an illness or a sickness. They are not intended and should never be used to improve performance.

We are happy to be a part of this conversation and want to set the record straight by showing the valid and positive side of TUE usage. We are proud and thankful that we have the opportunity to race with a TUE. It is a great concept, and one that we believe needs to be ethically respected. Thanks to TUEs, all Team Novo Nordisk athletes can inspire, educate and empower people around the world affected by diabetes.

Sam Brand – Rider, Team Novo Nordisk

JAC: Can you describe the experience the first time you had to acquire a TUE?

Sam Brand: First, let me thank you for taking the time to talk about TUEs and the valid side of the conversation. As a diabetic and even more so, an athlete for Team Novo Nordisk, I am passionate to speak about this topic and to try and further educate and raise awareness about diabetes.

My first experience acquiring a TUE took a long time. I moved up to Team Novo Nordisk’s professional team as a stagiaire mid-season, so I needed to have it in place before then. It required a lot of paperwork, emails and calls with the various organisations (British Cycling and UKAD) in order to process the application and finally have it granted to me. It wasn’t the easiest task and certainly not as straightforward as people may think.

JAC: There are numerous stories of cheating teams and athletes going to great length to hide syringes used for illegal PEDs. As a diabetic myself I know that keeping syringes on hand wherever I go is just part of diabetes management. Do the team athletes have to jump through any hoops in regards to the handling of their insulin pumps, syringes, or insulin as a result of a UCI license?

SB: As a fellow type 1 diabetic, you understand that all diabetics need insulin to survive. Currently, the only way to get insulin as a type 1 diabetic is through injections. We don’t actually have to jump through any hoops because we aren’t hiding anything. For us, the process is applying and being granted a TUE, and then we can use insulin. If we need to inject during a race, that is fine and we do not feel we have anything to hide. 

JAC: Since the findings against Froome, some have started to question the validity of TUEs at all. Do you have any concerns that regulation changes in response may make it more difficult – or even impossible – for diabetic athletes to compete in sanctioned events? Do you feel that riders abusing TUEs for performance gains impact you in other ways besides performance in the peloton?

SB: I definitely have concerns. There are more and more high-profile athletes calling for bans on TUEs. Additionally, people are claiming that if you need one, then you aren’t fit to race or be a professional athlete. To me, all of that is quite offensive.

This current conversation is about athletes using TUEs to enhance performance, and I completely understand this concern. As an athlete with a long-term TUE, I agree wholeheartedly with the need to sort out the current system, but I adamantly don’t agree with an outright ban on all TUEs. It isn’t the answer and takes a very shortsighted viewpoint.

JAC: Have you ever had any conversations with other riders about your use of insulin at an event? If so, what were some reactions?

SB: In my experience, there are many people around the world, not just riders, who are not well educated in diabetes.  This is why the team’s mission is to inspire, educate and empower everyone affected by diabetes. I greatly enjoy that part of my job because it allows me to have conversations with people about diabetes and help educate them on the condition. In general though, fellow cyclists tend to be genuinely interested in knowing more.

JAC: Have you had to change the way you manage your diabetes to comply with the anti-doping rules?

No, not at all. While everyone’s management is different, it’s relatively straightforward how I manage my diabetes.

We hear it all the time. “Those damned self-entitled cyclists!” We hear the word privilege thrown around too. Terms generally used to refer to socio-economic issues. They are often invoked in discussions about running through stop signs and stop lights. I’ve always found it frustrating, as I suspect that many of the people that are saying it are using it as a slur without really understanding what it means.

So what is the term “self-entitled” even supposed to mean, if anything? I think we can all agree to the context there. It implies that some people believe that cyclists believe they have a right to ignore certain traffic laws. Yes – I know that was confusing, some people believe that cyclists believe… I’ve always tried to be very pragmatic about stop sign and stop light running. We all know it is illegal in most places. Many are working to change that, but until then I couldn’t imagine any cyclist honestly believing that running through stop lights was their “right.”

Damn I’m naive… 

For a short time I participated in an online community called ‘NextDoor.’ NextDoor is intended as a way for members of neighborhoods to communicate with each other. They have a few different ways they try and validate that you actually live in a particular neighborhood, and limit your viewing of comments to only those posted by your neighbors. A great idea, that ends up being a horrible idea. But that was where I came across a bonafide self-entitled cyclist.

I can’t recall the exact discussion but it involved cycling in the neighborhood. My neighborhood has a four lane divided road through the center that serves as the primary bike route. It is frequented by neighbors heading to work, as well as commuters heading into our out of the city. It has a nice gentle slope to it for several blocks that allow for a really easy ride in the downhill direction. Couple that with the fact that all of the intersections have lights that are default green for those on the street, triggered only when there is cross traffic, and you can really bomb down the road without much effort.

But there are red lights. And they do get triggered. And that is where Mr. self-entitled cyclist comes in:

The cops gave me a ticket for running a red light on my bike. Don’t they have something better to do? I’m just not going to ride my bike anymore.

Random self-entitled cyclist (paraphrased from memory)

Wait… what the hell? I don’t think anyone is under the illusion that it is legal to run a red light on your bike in most places. Folks that do decide to roll red lights and stop lights at least understand that they are, in fact, breaking the law. No matter how much some may argue for a modification to the law, stop lights are stop lights. So Mr self-entitled cyclist is upset because he got a ticket for doing something illegal. OK. Tickets suck. Vent a bit.

But then he drops the “I’m just not going to ride my bike anymore.” Is he trying to punish all of us by not putting the effort in to ride his bike unless he is allowed to do something illegal? If there is an example of “self-entitled” – this is it.

Unless I get something special, I’m just not going to do it at all. So there…

You know what Mr. self-entitled cyclist: that’s just fine. I’m constantly trying to encourage more and more people to ride bikes, but in your case I’ll make an exception. Cycling gets enough bad press as it is. I don’t think this guy is hurting anyone’s feelings by not throwing a leg over the top tube and making us all look bad out there.

2015 saw us (JustAnotherCyclist and VeloReviews) recovering and retooling after devoting almost all of our resources into a bike shop and bicycle retail in 2014. After some serious soul searching and deciding how to proceed, there is a great plan in place to take us forward into 2016.

A lot of things are on the horizon. Some are just sketches of ideas at this point, and some are just about ready to see prime time. Here’s a sneak peak of only some of the items in store for the new year:

• Continuing our focus on bicycle lighting products with reviews of Monkey Lights, a couple of different economy bike rack mounted tail lights, as well as the 1500 lumen Oculus headlight by Barry Beams.
• Continue to tell the story of Eloise the Motobecane’s transition for urban single speed to full-fledge touring/camping bike. Follow along as we tackle the conversions and upgrades in building the ultimate forrest service gravel road touring bike.
• Full reviews of all of the products that go into the Eloise conversion.
• Thinking seriously about a new podcast to fill the void created after we stopped recording the VeloReviews podcast. Thinking about it seriously enough that a new microphone and some acoustic shielding are already identified and ready to be ordered.
• Some new bike tattoos. Just because.
• A return to the Seattle to Portland Bicycle Classic
• Getting back behind the camera to bring more cycling photography.
• I’ll stop ignoring my mountain bike.
• Getting back to the roots of JustAnotherCyclist and VeloReviews by (re)focusing on building great online content and a vibrant online cycling community.
• And last but not least, I feel like I’ve exercised the ghost of Lance Armstrong that was haunting my thoughts every time I watched racing so … a return to racing coverage.

So get out there and ride! And let’s talk about it next year.

Cheers,
JustAnotherCyclist

Somehow I missed this one when it was posted, and it took one of Biking in LA’s great posts to bring it to my attention. Continuing this month’s trend of bashing media outlets, SFGate has given me more targets with their latest “weekly poll.”

Is it time for bicycle riders to pay to use the roads just as motorists do through vehicle license fees and gasoline taxes?

This assumption that our roads (the ones cyclists actually ride on) are funded entirely by gas and vehicle registration taxes is just plain wrong. In fact, it would be wrong to say that even a majority of the funding is coming from these motor vehicle specific sources.

The truth is, if you compare the amount of road surface I take as a cyclist, add in the amount of damage I do to the infrastructure resulting in the need for maintenance costs, and compare that with a car, you will find that as a cyclist I am not only paying my fair share, I am actually subsidizing the very group that is demanding increased taxes from me.

What Lois Kazakoff should have had in her survey was another line item:

No. Cyclists already pay more than their fair share. Instead, bicycle related products should be exempt from state sales tax to compensate for this disparity

There is a scene in the movie Roadhouse where the main character is telling the bar staff at a rather rough bar to just “be nice.” If you haven’t seen it – it is a classic. Go watch it. If you have, stop rolling your eyes at me…

Anyhow, it struck me today how great the advice from this scene is for all of us bicycle commuters out there. There is far to much confrontational thinking where none is needed. Sometimes it is motorists thinking we are complete asses, and sometimes it is us assuming motorists are complete asses just out to kill us. But I had three separate incidents in the past two days that have turned me back on to the idea of “just being nice.”

Case in point:

I was riding home near AT&T park yesterday. There was a ton of traffic along The Embarcadero and King St – always a sign that there is an SF Giant’s game or other major activity at AT&T park. This inevitably raises the stress level of the commute. Gridlocked intersections where I need to figure out what side of the car to pass on to get through it going straight. Trying to safely navigate around hard-working pedicab drivers that are stuck dragging a family of 5 through a bike lane barely wider than their cabs. And the endless line of game-goers too anxious to jump out of their cars to look in their rear view mirrors to see if someone is in the bike lane. A typical commute…

As I got past the ballpark I turned along the water to the back side of a large parking lot – which takes me off of the much busier 3rd street. Then suddenly – there is a car in front of me. Blasting out from the parking lot in front of me, turning right to follow my direction of travel. Brakes are squeezed. Tires skid. The driver accelerates to take off. Adrenalin is pumping… I’m flat pissed…

I have momentary fantasies of sprinting up along side him, leaning in his passenger side window and instructing him on the damage he could of caused – punctuated by a long line of expletives for emphasis. But he is away in traffic, and I start to calm down. I reply the situation in my head. More rational thoughts form.

First, I remember that I was in fact right next to a semi-truck and trailer that had parked parallel to the bike lane, and the guy in the car was pulling out of the road in front of the semi. There was absolutely no way he could have seen me – his view blocked by the parked truck. So what did he do? The same thing any driver would do (myself included) in that situation – inch forward until he had a clear view. Unfortunately inching forward to see the road also meant that the entire front half of his car was now in the bike lane – where I was traveling at about 20 MPH. While I took him speeding away as an aggressive move initially, I now realized that it was a very normal action – probably out of fear. I can imagine he was thinking something along the lines of “Oh shit… I pulled out in front of this guy. I need to get out of the way” and slammed his foot down on the gas pedal.

Now as fate would have it, about a half mile up the road there was a huge backup of cars waiting on construction. I was going to go right past this guy as he sat in line. As I approached I could already see him watching in his rear-view mirror.

Wouldn’t you know it – as soon as I was close he was leaning across the driver’s seat, hand outstretched in a wave. I slowed a bit as I passed and heard “Sorry – I just didn’t see you around the truck!” I waved back. “No worries! At least I’m beating you past all this traffic!” Mutual laughs and we both went on our ways.

I could have cussed the living hell out of the guy, told him all about how I could have been killed – but what would that have gained? Better safety for other riders?

It is a fact of human psychology that people are much less likely to consider your points – even valid ones – if expressed in a confrontational way. Had I cussed him out all he would have likely remembered is how much of an ass hole I was – and therefore further reinforced the impression that all cyclists are assholes all the time. Instead, maybe next time he is inching out into traffic where he can’t see (which happens a ton in the city) the idea that a cyclist might be there too is something he will consider. And if nothing else… I didn’t give him another reason to hate cyclists.

There have actually been two other incidents of a similar nature for me recently – both of which unfolded in basically the same way. Times where I could have very easily flown off the handle, but instead all parties ended the encounter in a friendly way. And one of them happened to involve a guy that looked a hell of a lot like Santa Clause – so I’m thinking Christmas will be good this year.

As I was preparing to write this post I read another blog that summed it all up pretty nicely. James L. Pocrass, Esq. wrote an article for Biking in LA that I think drives to the heart of this. In it he states:

Remember, no one goes out to kill someone with their car (okay, almost no one), but most drivers are angry because they’re scared. No one taught them how to share the road. No one taught them how to drive sharing the road with a cyclist. You can say that’s not your problem, but the truth is, it’s everybody’s problem.

There are a lot of us that believe cycling is actually a safe, healthy activity that also just happens to be a whole hell of a lot of fun. So save the anger for your political discussions of Facebook. I don’t think that constant helmet wearing or carefully observing each and every traffic law are the ways to improve the general population’s impression of cycling (as Mr Pocrass posits in his article). But just being nice can go a long, long way.

There are so many clichés about it. Buddhism and Hinduism both teach the concepts of the circles we travel through the course of our life. Bands have devoted entire albums to the concept. And for most of my life I thought this was all total crap.

I always looked at life as more of a meandering journey. To me, life was like a stage race. Each day is different. Sure – there are general categories. Some stages are for sprinters, like first love: long hours waiting and preparing in the peloton until a final, quick culmination in sheer joy for a few, bitter defeat for others. Some stages in life are long grueling climbs punctuated with decisive, strategic attacks (*ahem* my professional life). Of course the climb is then followed by blistering fast descents where your tires are barely holding on to the edge of the tarmac – sounds like high school to me.

Recent events in my life have forced me to rethink this outlook however. I’m sure that turning 41 had no small amount of influence on my introspection. As I’ve gotten a wee bit older I’ve come to find more insight from the similarities in life’s situations, not the differences. I’ve come to the conclusion that Life is a crit, not a stage race.

I think that was the interesting part of this train of thought for me. Sure, a crit is just going around and around on the same course. But it is the dynamics of each lap that make it interesting. It is how we adjust and adapt to what we learn on each lap that moves us forward.

If life is a crit it means that I have a chance to adapt and change to the circumstances and people around me. Maybe there is a prime next lap. Last time I went for a prime I attacked just as I heard the drunk guy on the 3rd corner yelling, but that guy in the red kit took me! So maybe this time I hold until I’m through the turn before taking a flyer. And I need to watch out for the guy right behind me. He’s been holding my wheel for 5 laps now and I hear he is a great sprinter. Or maybe I just go for broke and trust that my teammate will take it across the line for our team.

That is how I know life is a crit, not a stage race. Those are the type of dynamics I’ve experienced in my life. I’ve faced challenges both successfully and unsuccessfully. The successful ones always seem to be due to either a bit of luck, or applying what I learned from similar situations I’ve failed at in the past.

Here at VeloReviews we’re in one of those situations now. It wasn’t that long ago that JustAnotherCyclist was some nutty commuter/cycling blogger alone in the world. It then became a part of VeloReviews – a great community of cyclists, blogs, and podcasts. Then VeloReviews decided to “Pull a Voigt” – go completely and fully and don’t stop until we win or nearly die trying. VeloReviews invested everything in a honest-to-goodness, brick and mortar independent local bike shop. And well… I guess you could say we flatted. And bonked. And crashed. And dropped a chain.

But cycling is a team sport. We’re picking up the pieces. While the VeloReviews name is out of the race for now, the team pushes on.

The online portion of VeloReviews is now transitioning to JustAnotherCyclist. We’re going to regroup and refocus our efforts where we started. We sacrificed much of the blogging and content generation while focusing on the bike shop. Time to sharpen the pencils again. Time to connect with the folks online that share the passion for the bike we do. Together, we will continue to revel in the passion.

There is always a risk when you try to turn your passion into a job – because a job can easily become something you HAVE to do and try to avoid. Luckily that passion is still with us. In fact, one of the lessons I learned here is that if you love cycling and being on your bike, don’t open a bike shop. I spent all my time trying to make the shop work and precious little time on the bike.

And next time you are faced with a challenge remember, life is a crit. Maybe you are in a different position in the race this time, but you’ve ridden through all the corners before. Remember what line you used last time and how well it worked. Adjust as necessary. Just keep pedaling.

But don’t be afraid to enter a stage race every once in a while too.

I waited until I got home and had a beer in me before reading it. The headline kinda says it all: Why You Hate Cyclists. I mean – with a title like that how couldn’t I expect something, um… inspiring. I’m an opinionated guy, thus I’m always on the lookout for fellow opinionatedees. And this was going to tell me why I hate cyclists. Clearly I don’t hate cyclists, so right off of the bat I’m assuming the article is targeted towards motorists. Yea. This is gonna be good… But then I read it. And reread it. And it actually wasn’t terrible, nor terrific. In fact, I’m still not sure what I think about it, or its author. According to his bio he’s an attorney and a writer. Oh yea – and according to his own article he’s a cyclist. And kind of a jerk. While the article was definitely quite a bit tongue-in-cheek, he made some reasonably good points about the psychology of people’s reactions. All in all I was a little bit let down – having anticipated finding something to get all outraged about by reading the title. But the intertubez were not to fail me. For anytime an article about cycling is posted there is an almost pre-ordained script that will be played out in the public comments. Let’s review our cast of characters that seem to always show up in these threads:

• Country Truck Driver: This guy (always seems to be a guy) references the numerous times he’s encountered a cyclist on some unnamed country rode, holding up all the traffic. It seems it is always precisely 10 cars that are held up. And this cyclist is generally cited as going 5 MPH up some hill, and forcing (yes – forcing) our poor country truck driver to illegally pass on a dangerous corner.
• Grizzled bicycle advocate: You can recognize comments from the grizzled bicycle advocate. While their arguments are generally low-key, carefully stated and non-inflammatory, they are nonetheless filled with a bewildering array of citations of state and local ordinances (generally by number, with hyperlinked references where available.) These folks generally do not post comments directly about the article, but rather reply to the comments of others, providing their counter-points.
• The Lance-Armstrong-wannabe-wannabe: These folks always make statements about “the Lance Armstrong wannabes,” with references to their “racing suites” or sometimes even “obscene clothing.” Their primary concerns appear to be centered around what the cyclists look like and not so much what the cyclists are doing. It is also unclear if any of them are aware of the fact that no one actually wants to be Lance Armstrong right now.
• Sidewalk bicycle advocate: These folks generally “commuted to work for several month some years ago” but are no longer active cyclists. In their hardened experience, they learned that riding exclusively on the sidewalks was the only safe bet, and therefore all current cyclists – regardless of where they ride – belong on the sidewalks only and not in traffic. To ride a bicycle on the roadways with cars is, in their opinion gained through experience, irresponsible and reckless. The more extreme among these will go so far as to suggest or even state outright that cyclists killed in traffic are getting what they deserve for wandering off of the safety of the sidewalks.
• The tax advisors: Paramount to these commenters is the implication that their enhanced contribution to tax funds (enhanced compared to the cyclists, presumably) gives their opinions elevated value. These folks will talk about how “their tax dollars paid for the bike lanes” therefore cyclists are obligated to use them no matter what. Apparently opening car doors and left hand turns are not even valid excuses to “invade the traffic lane.” They also seem to operate under the beliefe that are roads are built up solely with tax revenue derived directly from the gas pumps. It is unclear if this beliefe implies that a driver of a Prius also has less rights to the road, while a blown 1969 Mustang would presumably have more rights. Also inherent in this position is the idea that somehow us cyclists live charmed, tax-free lives.
• The “I know you are but what am I” cyclist: These folks will counter the complaints that motorists make in general about cyclists (blowing stop signs and lights especially) by pointing out all the laws that motorists break, thereby attempting to negate the motorist’s argument. This emotional argument can be summed up in the single phrase “Oh yea – well I’ve got it waaaaaay worse than you!”
• The “I know you are but what am I” motorist: In contrast, these folks will generally take the stance that they are not required to give cyclists any legal rights on the road until cyclists follow all rules of the road, to the letter, 100% of the time. Catch phrase: “I’ll share the road with them when they stop blowing through intersections endangering themselves and others”
• The victim of the law: This used to be predominately a persona of cyclists, but an interesting trend has developed and motorists are taking this stance. The argument generally goes along the lines that, no matter what accident may happen, the motorist is always (legally) to blame, therefore it is the responsibility of the cyclist to ensure that the motorist is not put in a situation where they inadvertently injure a cyclist and are therefore bankrupted by this legal liability that has been placed upon motorists.

To be honest – it is this last one that has really started to chap my hide. Believe me, as a cyclist, I would like just a bit of legal protection out there on the roads. But the truth is the roads of america are about the only place in the country where you can actually kill someone and not even face a misdemeanor. On the road ways a vehicle accident is considered just that – an accident – until someone can prove negligence or other criminal liability. To put it in very real-world terms, you could run me over on my bike and end my life and probably not get much more than a point on your license, if that. So you see, oh debaters of the internet post, in almost all cases bicycles actually have more restrictions placed upon them than motor vehicles, with absolutely no additional protections. Yup, in many states I’m forced to ride in a skinny patch of pavement painted on the road, but if your SUV drifts into that space I’m required by law to be in it is simply an “accident.” In some jurisdictions I can get a ticket for swerving out of the bike lane as I see someone making a motion that looks like they are about to open their driver’s side door into my path, but if I hadn’t swerved and they do open their door in front of me it is just an “accident.”

I’ve adapted my behaviors on the road to motorists do. Maybe motorists could do the same the few times when one of us on a bike actually does cause you as much trouble as you like to think we do.

In other words, I’ve got it waaaaaay worse than you!

May is bike month. We all know it, and many of us go on about it. We get bike to school day, bike to work day, and in addition a whole bike to work week! Local coffee shops, bike shops and assorted business get the excuse opportunity to set up tables along popular bike routes and paths giving away free swag and looking very bike-friendly. This should be a month for me to rejoice – to share enthusiasm and passions with the greater cycling community. A time for us to pat ourselves on our collective back and take stock in how far advocacy efforts have come. And May is action packed with a lot more than just advocacy and riding to work. On the racing front, we had not only the grand american race Tour of California, but also the Giro d’Italia.  The Tour of Cali was especially engaging for me this year, as I watched one of my personal favorites – and fellow old guy – Chris Horner appear to struggle through the Time Trial with an anchor on his bike. The setback would have crushed the spirits of other folks. But the drama unfolded in the final significant climbs of the race as Horner, Jens Voigt (another personal favorite and fellow old guy) and others took a flyer off the front. Slowly riders from the break away dropped one by one, until Chris Horner had actually made back all the time lost in the TT and then some.  He climbed his way into first place on paper – as Phil Liggett likes to say – and had me on the edge of my seat. Unfortunately the herculean effort was not enough and he was eventually caught. But what a way to highlight what bike month is supposed to be about – enjoying all aspects of bicycles. Rolling the cruiser, commuting to work, or ripping the peloton apart.

Unfortunately, this time around all Bike Month managed to do for me was remind me that the other 11 months are not bike month.  June came this year to punch me in the gut and drive the point home. June has brought us the apparent implosion (again) of what should have been the best team in the peloton – RadioShack Nissan Trek. Andy Schleck has been plagued by … something … all season. There are already rumors of the Schleck boys leaving the squad. When the team announced their Tour de France lineup, Chris Horner was not on the list. This lead to all kinds of speculation and drama as to why that happened. Shortly thereafter, it was announced that the presumed Tour de France GC contender Andy Schleck was not going to make it due to injury. Ahh, but poor Bruyneel wasn’t done with bad news yet. Just when we thought it was over, Bruyneel and Mr Armstrong find themselves in the spotlight for all the wrong reasons. Yup – doping allegations again. What is a cycling enthusiast to do.

But hold on a second…

I once again started my commute on a bicycle this morning in beautiful San Francisco. I passed numerous folks doing the same thing. I continue to ride my bike and enjoy it. And despite the fact that folks are predicting a guilty finding for Armstrong would “destroy cycling” my bike will still pedal and roll regardless of a USADA decision regarding Armstrong.

So that’s what I’ll do. I’ll let June suck for Bruyneel and Armstrong. Come July, I’ll be keeping track of the Tour de France and enjoying it. Bike Month is irrelevant to me, honestly. I don’t have a bike month, or even a bike year. I have a bike life, and plan to until I can’t turn my pedals any more.

Headline:  “Cycling has another week riddled with news of doping and not much else”

Well, at least that is what you’d think if all you read is the mainstream press, or even the mainstream cycling press.  We’ve already had racing action this season.  First in Australia with the Tour Down Under, and the Tour of Qatar just started.  Now honestly though – how many folks do you suspect actually know the standings of the early season races?  I’m betting a fair sight less than the number that know that 1) Lance Armstrong is off the hook, and 2) Contador has been stripped of his 2010 wins – including the Tour de France and Giro d’Italia.

And this season is promising to be a great showdown.  The combination of some of the riders from both Leopard Trek and Radio Shack into one team.  Renshaw free to clash sabers in the sprints without having to focus on delivering Cavendish to the front.  This is real racing drama – happening now.  Armstrong doesn’t race anymore – remember?  And now Contador won’t be racing this year until the Giro either.  So let’s focus our attention on the people out there trying to beat each other on the roads and single tracks – not in the court rooms, press rooms and headlines.

If only we could get as much coverage of our race winners as we do the doping circus…  Just one man’s opinion.