The Mailbag – Excuses, excuses and right-of-way

Do you want to contribute to Mailbag, a regular feature of VeloNews.com? Here’s how:

”Accidental” ingestion?

Dear Editor:
So an amateur tests positive for some dope-age and blames it on GNC . That sounds like a pro move to me.

You’d think that anyone who wanted to rely on the “It-was-in-the-stuff-I-took-but-I-didn’t-know it,” excuse would keep a few samples of the stuff just in case there was a positive doping test.

As unlikely as it seems to me that there would be not one, not two, but six banned substances in Mr. Comardo’s “natural testosterone enhancer,” having a few samples would have made it a simple matter to find out.

I suspect the USADA may have been a little more lenient with that kind of evidence. Not to mention that Mr. Comardo would have had a pretty good lawsuit against the supplement manufacturer.
Brian Ragland
Crested Butte, Colorado

Doesn’t buy it

Dear VeloNews,
While I admire this guy taking his suspension like a man, I, for one, don’t buy his innocence.

His story of not knowing what was in what he was taking reminds me too much of Ivan Basso “intending to dope.” Funny how when Basso “intended to dope” he was a serious threat to the greatest cyclists in the world. After he served his ban and is no longer “intending to dope” his results lack the luster of old. Hmmm, that intent must have been a real motivator.

I have friends who are clean Cat. 1′s. Shame on Mitch Comardo. I bet he knew full well what he was getting into.
Adam Rodkey
Bloomington, Imdiana

Why that combination?

Editors,
There was an article about a 22-year-old Houston-based rider (Mitch Comardo) that was suspended for banned substances in his test. Your article said one of the substances was Tamoxifen and its metabolite 4-hydroxytamoxifen.

I thought Tamoxifen was a drug used during breast cancer chemotherapy. What value does it have in athletic performance?
Alice
Miami, Florida

Alice, you are correct. Tamoxifen is, indeed, a breast cancer drug. In that application, it is used for its anti-estrogen qualities, since some types of breast cancer cells require estrogen to grow. In sports, Tamoxifen is also a popular ancillary drug for males who may find that steroid use triggers unwanted side-effects, like gynecomastia (which many of us know simply as “man boobs” … Ick). – Editor

Path wars

Mr. Explainer,
I just read your most recent column (see “Whose bike path is it anyway?“), which includes a question from the reader who wanted to know who would be at fault if he hit a runner on a path when the runner refused to yield.

I’ve got to say that I’m disappointed the question as well as your answer.

Ultimately, it’s simple: the rider. He shouldn’t have been looking down at his powermeter, but rather paying attention. The mere asking of the question exhibits the same attitude towards the runner that many motorists exhibit towards cyclists: that of entitlement (to a chunk of land known as a road) and intolerance (towards somebody who gets in their way).

On the water, the rule is that the more powerful (and maneuverable) always yields to the less powerful. That means that motorboats yield to sailboats yield to rowboats yield to swimmers, etc. Applying and enforcing this same rule to the road would make the roads much safer for everyone.

Please consider amending your reply to be short and simple and appropriately admonishing of the questioner’s likely hypocritical attitude.
Chris Cleeland
St. Louis, Missouri

Okay, short and simple it shall be: Pay attention, don’t go too fast and yield to pedestrians when you’re on a bike path. – Editor

Don’t race on the bike trails

Dear Explainer,
I fully agree with your advice that one should not be doing high speed training on bike paths. Easy recovery rides and one-legged pedaling intervals are the only two “training” sessions that I would consider on multi-use trails. I’ve seen small packs come bombing down the New Santa Fe Trail in Colorado Springs and they are not impressing anyone … at least not in a positive way.

Now I love riding my bike and I try to get in as many good training rides as I can. But I do that on the road. When I do ride on bike paths I always keep a sharp eye on what’s ahead and I always slow way down when passing someone. It may seem OK to a rider to slip on past someone at 15 mph but keep in mind that from a pedestrian’s perspective an unannounced rider passing within an arm’s reach even at 15 mph can be very startling. So easy does it.

Best Regards,
Greg Ames
Colorado Springs, Colorado

Be alert, bike paths need more lerts

Dear Mr. Pelkey aka The Explainer:
I’ve always enjoy your columns. Regarding “Shared-Use Trails,” even if the rules were spelled out somewhere (statute, ordinance, regulation, etc.), many wouldn’t know them, so they wouldn’t follow them.

People don’t follow the rules of the road while driving on the roads or cycling on trails (e.g., earbuds in both ears ? may not be illegal on a trail, but certainly is on a road). I would think they’ll not follow trail rules either.
Jim Manning
Riverside, California

Multi-use means just that

Dear Velo,
Well, as Mr. Pelkey correctly point out, in most cases it isn’t a “bike path.” It is a multi-use path available to anyone and everyone except those in motorized vehicles. Why is this simple fact so difficult for some cyclists to comprehend?

“As I looked up from my power meter after completing my interval session…” – this quote speaks volumes.

Multi-use paths are very common where I live and I am amazed on a regular basis at the lack of common sense displayed by some of my fellow cyclists. In most cases, anything more than an easy spin is simply unsafe and often illegal on a multi-use path.
Charles O. Jones
Orange County California

Take to the roads, my brothers!

Editors,
If Charles Pelkey’s column did anything for me, it was to reinforce my belief that cyclists must fight for their right to ride on the road legally and safely. As CP so aptly elucidates, so-called “bike paths” are multiuser free-fire zones. They are anything but risk-free, putting cyclists at risk of collisions with other uses, bollards and obstructions, and with motor vehicles if these paths have built-in turning and crossing hazards when they reach intersections.

A good multi-use path can certainly work within some limits, but first of all should have an absolute minimum of crossings with motorways, should cross roadways at a significant distance from existing intersections (as the guidelines issued by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials tell us), and must be engineered properly and subject to effective multi-user rules.

Meanwhile, while some lethal crashes have gotten a lot of attention, including one that injured seriously a colleague of mine at work, the dangers of cycling in traffic have been overrated. To some degree, we spin up our own fears in this age of instant continent-wide communication.

Cyclists can significantly reduce their risks by obeying the laws, developing their expertise, and practicing situational awareness while riding. Furthermore, as Mr. Pelkey points out, multi-use paths can only be used safely at low speeds, so I can’t really see how they alone can be used as effective training tools for the competitive cyclists reading this.

As a cyclist in my 31st year of extensive riding (commuter, racer, weekend warrior and putterer) and a proud wearer of one of the original yellow Old Guys Who Get Fat in Winter jerseys, I think cyclists have no real option but to claim their rights to the road. We must organize and combat those real hazards we face such as sub-standard infrastructure, discriminatory laws, inattentive drivers and those police departments and D.A.s offices that do not properly enforce the traffic laws and prosecute those few drivers who are truly dangerous and who endanger a lot of people besides cyclists.

Frankly, by sharing the road with a little good will and competence, we will groom a lot of allies in this quest.
Khal Spencer
Los Alamos, New Mexico

That headline?

Dear Velo,
I saw that headline on your article about electronic shifting on ‘cross bikes (see “I sing the ‘cross bike electric“) and wanted to congratulate you on a bit of “creative theft.” As an old fan of the “Twilight Zone,” I remember “I sing the body electric” as one of my favorite episodes.
John Brewer
Los Angeles, California

Well, thank you. We thought it a bit esoteric, but we’re glad you recognized it. As Pierre-Joseph Proudhon once said, “Property is theft!” and we are happy to steal that line. But as much as we admire Rod Serling, he ripped that one off, too. Ray Bradbury produced a short story collection with the same title. Jazz fusion fans, too, will recognize it as the title of an album by Weather Report. A song by that title also appeared in the original version of the movie “Fame,” as we recall, but they’re all thieves. It was Walt Whitman who used the line in a poem added to a later edition of “Leaves of Grass” in 1868. – Editor

FILED UNDER: Mailbag TAGS: Mailbag