Brittle Days

Staccato signals of constant information

Four noble truths

leave a comment »

1. Life is suffering.
2. Suffering is caused by desire.
3. To eliminate suffering, eliminate desire.
4. To eliminate desire, follow the path.

I keep forgetting these things and so must write them down to help me remember.

Advertisements

Written by tomsulston

06/09/2011 at 20:44

Posted in Uncategorized

Tagged with

I just want to live life and survive it

leave a comment »

I can’t get enough of this song at the moment.

Written by tomsulston

02/08/2011 at 22:56

Posted in Uncategorized

On the 2012 Olympics.

leave a comment »

The kerfuffle over ticket allocation and shortage has given rise to a question: why are there so few Olympic track cycling events? Track cycling requires a dedicated venue, much like the aquatic events. So let’s compare the two.

Cycling

5 track events (Sprint, Keirin, Team Sprint, Team Pursuit, Omnium) for both men and woman; 10 gold medals to be won.

Construction of the velodrome: £93M. (£63M over-budget but delivered) [Mail]

Cost of hosting each track cycling gold medal: £9.3M

Aquatics

33 swimming events; 2 synchronised swimming; 8 diving. 43 gold medals to be won.

One Olympic aquatics centre costs £262M (£190M over-budget and incomplete) [Telegraph]

Cost of hosting each gold medal: £6M

So even though the aquatics centre is 3 times over-budget, each cycling event costs a third more to host. Not only that, but the track cycling is running only for 7 days, whereas there are events in the aquatics centre for 15.

So there’s plenty of capacity for more cycling events that would not only increase the fixed asset turnover ratio of the velodrome, but also allow thousands more cycling fans to see the events live.

That all said, I’m fortunate. In the insane Olympic ticket lottery, I got all the tickets I asked for.

None.

I was giving some serious thought toward pitching for some of the track cycling events, but came to the conclusion that I’d rather spend my time and money on actually riding my bike than to:

  • give any money or attention at all to the IoC, LOCOG, Seb Coe or any of the various corrupt, venal, evil entities that are involved in the modern Olympic games and the corruption of the sporting ideals espoused;
  • sit in a velodrome full of “Come on Tim!”s who are only there because there’s a sniff of a British gold medal and who wouldn’t know the business end of a track bike if it did a fixie-skid all over them;
  • leave my bike in the oh-so-secure Victoria Park, rather than ride it to the Olympic village, where it would represent a “security issue”.

Written by tomsulston

06/06/2011 at 14:52

Posted in cycling

Obree for UCI President

leave a comment »

 

Ain’t that the truth. [Via Bianchista]

Written by tomsulston

06/06/2011 at 14:04

Posted in cycling

Fitting a Brompton chain guard

with 5 comments

I have a Brompton. It is lovely and useful, but the plastic chain guard is a weak spot. It gets squashed in the fold and can be crushed in transportation. Mine was smashed to pieces following a disagreement with a tram track in San Francisco. So I ordered a replacement.

Here is the useful secret that helps make fitting it easier: snap off the 5 large nubbins on the right-hand side (ie the outside) of the guard. Then put it on the chainring, aligning the little tabs with the holes in the chainring.. Then push the snapped-off plastic bits back in. I found it easier to push them in the wrong way round.

Written by tomsulston

27/05/2011 at 18:28

Posted in cycling

You load 16 tons and what do you get?

leave a comment »

One of the nice things about cycling is that it’s a non-Sisyphean task. Once you’ve pushed your body (and mine is somewhat like a boulder) to the top of a hill, the only thing that awaits you is the joy of flying down the descent.

As opposed to work, where great achievements are rewarded with a larger load. There’s probably some management law about increasing the size of an employee’s boulder until they are unable to make progress up the slippery slope of career development. Sort of like a deterministic Peter principle.

Written by tomsulston

25/05/2011 at 15:53

Posted in cycling

Tagged with

On the UCI & race radios

leave a comment »

So the bunfight continues between Pat McQuaid and various ProTeam directors about the use of radios in UCI races. There are two things that strike me as being interesting here:

1: The reason the UCI give for a radio ban is to induce more exciting racing. I would like to know what other options for achieving the same result the UCI considered and then rejected. Here are some alternatives:

  • Reduce the number of cyclists in each team from 9 to 6. Force the sprinters’ teams to combine to catch escapees.
  • Increase the number of teams in each race. More potential winners means less certainty over who will be first over the line.
  • (Re-)introduce time bonuses to encourage combative riding for the top positions

2: Pat McQuaid is pugnaciously defending the UCI’s position as the leader of cycling worldwide. He has fallen into the trap of confusing management of a thing with ownership of a thing.

The UCI exists because there is consensus amongst competitive and professional cyclists that a body is required to fairly administer the sport. Like any bureaucracy, though, it is self-interested and wants to remain alive.

But the strategy of claiming that cycling ‘belongs’ to the UCI and it can change the rules how and when it likes is high-risk. Either the teams and cyclists will agree to these terms, or they will simply leave. Some of them will leave to other sports, and some will leave to form breakaway leagues – as happened in the UK in the early 1940s with the creation of the British League of Racing Cyclists from the National Cyclists’ Union.

The UCI’s position is particularly weak as it has no ownership of the sport’s great races. The Tour de France, Giro d’Italia, Vuelta a Espagna, the Classics. None of those. The only race that the UCI owns is the World Championships. Hence the need for the new UCI-owned Tour of Beijing to go straight onto the ProTour.

The teams don’t want to race in Beijing; the sponsors don’t have interests in China. The only reason for the Tour of Beijing is to increase the UCI’s revenue and reach.

And this is why the UCI’s position is extremely weak. It would be trivial for the teams to hold racers back from competing in the worlds, boycott or soft-pedal Beijing and then in the resultant finger-pointing and recriminations start up a new league with the blessing of ASO and RCS.

And that is why Pat McQuaid’s bullish attitude is a bluff. The real power in cycling is with ASO, RCS, and the team sponsors. They have all the money and the power follows. McQuaid’s bluster  is a smokescreen to hide a bureaucracy that is mired in ineffectiveness and self-aggrandisement and that really has very little to offer the sport.

Written by tomsulston

04/05/2011 at 15:50

Posted in cycling