THIS WEEK IN PRO CYCLING »

Get the VeloNews Email Newsletter FREE

  Learn More | Archive
Home » Top Stories » Mailbag »

The Mailbag - The good paper, the bad doctor and more

Published: Nov. 6, 2009
Road warrior or jerk? We vote for the latter.
Road warrior or jerk? We vote for the latter.

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

  • Keep it short. And remember that we reserve the right to edit for grammar, length and clarity.
  • Include your full name, hometown and state or nation.
  • Send it to webletters@insideinc.com.

Humor is in the eye of … someone, we’re sure

Dear Velo,
After reading “this week’s “Explainer,” I thought I would send you this photo I took while out on my regular ride last weekend.

I know this is meant as a joke, but driver attitudes to cyclists seem universally bad.

Thanks for your coverage of the road rage trial in California. Hopefully it signals a progression in the ability of everyone to share the road.

Regards,
Brent Wall
Brisbane, Australia

Yeah, I was wondering that, too

Dear Velo,
My thanks to Robert Thomas for asking the questions that had crossed my mind regarding the doctor's trial procedure (see “The Explainer - Doctor behaving badly”) and to you for your informative response.

Moe Powers

One thing you forgot to mention

A note to the Explainer:
Good explanation of the subject. I’ll suggest that you left out one really important other thing for cyclists to do. That is to report these things to the authorities. If Watson hadn’t reported his incident, the fact that Dr. Thompson had misbehaved previously wouldn’t have been available to the prosecutor.

Jeff Cozad
Bettendorf, Iowa

Lessons learned or not?

Dear Editor,
The case of the doctor and your article “Doctor behaving badly” has sparked club web postings to new heights, mainly the "Lessons Learned" paragraphs.

Apparently, some riders feel the fact that the Dr. got spanked for his bad deed (and will continue so until the civil case is completed) is the reason cars will control their behavior around bikes, and not because following the same rules of the road will give us a better public perception. So the battle still rages, as in this case, the rider feels that he still gets to ignore basic rules (stop signs, etc) and not have that impact the perception.

What does one say to another cyclist? The adage about truth being easy to kill and lies being immortal applies here. The problem seems to be "behavior" on both sides of the issue and with behavior comes emotion.

The doctor’s act was not rational. The cyclist in my club believing he is somehow entitled break the law is not rational either. There will come a time when these two juggernauts will meet on the road. The result will
probably be yelling, and one finger salutes best case, worst case, another raging driver in a car. I do believe we represent all of us out on the road. Most people reading your article will tend to agree. But there will be the few who, after the echoes of the case heard round' the world die down, will be business as usual.

What do we do about that?

Tom Romano

Law of Lugnuts

Dear Velo,
One Saturday morning, a crusty St. Johns County, Florida, sheriff deputy gave our small paceline a lecture about obstructing traffic.

While I didn’t feel that we were obstructing traffic at the time (on a virtually deserted 2-lane road, with a shoulder, riding a smooth paceline where everyone took 15-second pulls and rotated off to the left), something he said was memorable: He articulated the “Law of Lugnuts,” which holds that “whoever has the most lugnuts wins.”

That law clearly holds true for any encounter between a bicycle and a motorized vehicle.

Cheers
Tom Aton
Florida

A note from USA TODAY’s cycling guy

Dear Velo,
Like many cyclists around the nation, I wasn't totally pleased with my USA TODAY colleague Chris Woodyard's Drive On blog postings about the propriety of cyclists and automobiles sharing the same lanes. After reading the blog, I posted a response from my point of view: Cyclists and drivers are both put in precarious positions on the road because of a mangled mish-mash of local, state and federal laws that determine how roads should be shared and that both parties should unite for better multi-modal roads, streets and highways. I also suggested some research into why drivers are so angry about cyclists.

Woodyard's view is his opinion and his alone. USA TODAY is not some cabal that gathers every morning to decide which group to insult that day. In a free society, we should celebrate the rights we have to post our thoughts, no matter how ill-informed others may judge those thoughts. USA TODAY also provided every reader the right to respond to Woodyard's postings and many did. Again, a good thing.

What chaps my saddle is that many readers of both USA TODAY and VeloNews associated his remarks with USA TODAY's coverage of cycling. As the cycling reporter, I have no influence whatsoever in determining what Woodyard writes and I certainly don't want him determining what I write about. You may be surprised that he is also a cyclist. And some VeloNews writers occasionally contribute to USA TODAY's cycling coverage.

USA TODAY made a commitment to cover cycling as a "real" sport long ago and has kept to that pledge. In 2007, I was inducted into the Mountain Bike Hall of Fame not because I am a swift racer or equipment innovator (because I am clearly not swift), but because this newspaper was willing to cover the sport before others even knew it existed. When the Lance Armstrong era began, we had reporters at every one of his winning Tours. You might even want to check out my "In the Slipstream" blog at usatoday.com. It is on the CYCLING page.

USA TODAY is not anti-cyclist, but some of our writers may express those sentiments. That's their right, just as it is your right to complain about it. Just don't mistake the opinion of one blogger as the opinion of the newspaper as a whole. And you might want to pick up that colorful paper left by your hotel room door; you might be missing some good cycling coverage.

Sal Ruibal
Washington, D.C.

Sal, we have to agree. Clearly, no major publication can – or should – be represented by a single individual. We may not like Woodyard’s troglodyte-like approach to traffic, but we sure to know, respect and enjoy your work. Even a small publication like our own includes a broad cross-section of opinions and personalities. We have a good number decent, hard-working and polite staffers, for example, but we also have O’Grady. Editor

Ride like everyone is nuts

Dear Editor:
I've been closely following your coverage of the road rage trial and I will be yet another person to say kudos. It was well written, prompt, and probably as unbiased as possible coming from a cycling publication. I've also been reading a lot of the responses from readers and I've noticed a lot of "keep your cool," "be the bigger person," "politely advise a motorist on their unsafe driving habits rather than cursing them out" themes. These are all well and good, but it can only go so far.

I've been particularly interested as I currently live in Beijing and commute by bike 30 minutes each way every day. To say that traffic laws are loose here would be a severe understatement. Without exaggeration, I probably nearly get hit here on a daily basis. I don't like to sacrifice speed, but I keep in mind something my mother told me when she was ready to let me leave the confines of "the block" and venture out into the neighborhood on my little red Schwinn.

"It doesn't matter if you had the right of way if you're dead."

I've adopted the philosophy here to ride as though everyone around me is going to do the stupidest thing I can imagine. It doesn't always happen, but it does more often than one would expect, and when it does I'm ready for it. I still think it's important to own and also share the road, but it's most important to look out for No. 1.

I'm not trying to say any cyclist is in the wrong when they get hit and they have the right of way. I'm familiar with unavoidable accidents, but I'm merely trying to point out that many motorists don't believe that cyclists have the right of way ever. So even if you do, it's still a good idea to somewhere in the back of your brain, anticipate an incident before it happens so that it doesn't.

Cheers,
Ben Wareham
Beijing, China

Happy for Jens

Dear Editor,
Thank you for the update piece on Jens Voigt. Just recently, I found myself wondering how this truly gifted athlete and remarkable man was faring and your article is most timely.

Thanks for somehow knowing what we cycling enthusiasts are thinking.

Joanna Gray Randle
New York

Can you Explain this?

Editors,
Can someone explain to me how a tiny, boutique frame-maker like BMC can afford a 30-strong ProTour-level team?

Peter Krogh
Nevada City, California

That’s an easy one. BMC – which will be riding not as a ProTour team, but as a UCI Professional Continental squad – is owned by Swiss businessman Andy Rihs. As you might recall, BMC is not Rihs’ first foray into the top tier of professional cycling. He sponsored a ProTour team earlier in the decade, then financed by his other – and much larger – company, Phonak Hearing Systems. - Editor