Conference noted::bicycle

    Perhaps it was "the greatest moment in Brit. cycling history" just
    because it was so widely watched?  So many things in cycling get no
    attention at all, it is the press coverage that is the achievement.
    
    ed

    Thanks Graham,
    
    I've been kicking myself all day about not having seen that (I had an
    appointment with a pint) now I'm glad I didn't.  And FWIW I agree with
    your sentiments.
    
    /rod

    Who's Chris Boardman ? QED was about a good old-style mad British
    inventor who knocked up a world-beating bike in his Dad's garage.
    One more journo has demonstrated his/her ability to perpetuate
    myth and cliche.
    
    ---Alan

Am I glad I didn't see it, - I'm just working on taking things less seriously
and not getting worked up.  Quite right Graham, despite all the pictures of fairy
females in full make-up trying to sell bike gear, it is not a nice clean yuppy
sport. It is hard, sweaty, dirty ,totally unglamourous BUT IMMENSELY SATISFYING.

Boardman vs Simpson, or Robinson, or Porter, or Sheil, or Les West?  No
contest.... what about Dave Keeler?  He was best at anything from a track
pursuit to a hillclimb to a 12 hour and even held the End-to-End.  But then,
that was before anyone knew about scientific training so it doesn't count.  ;>)

    re: .3
    
    I'm curious - was this bike a Lotus by virtue of association with the
    bicycle manufacturer of that name, or the exotic auto manufacturer of
    that name, or did the guy who built it just call it that to confuse
    people?  (I had thought that the Lotus car folks might have turned
    their considerable design and fabrication talents to creating a
    superbike, all in the name of patriotism.)
    
    (If it was built by the car people, I'm not surprised it was fast but
    am a little surprised it made it to the finish line - having owned a
    '66 Elan for almost 25 years, I'm entitled to this opinion...)
    
    Andy

    
    
    Mike Burrows had designed a prototype of the bike. He new an engineer
    from Lotus (Lotus is, I think, 3 companies; the car manufacturer, an
    engineering company and someone else. We're talking the engineering
    side) who heard of his prototype. He felt that it was a very Lotus
    idea, the design being something that Lotus could both relat eto and be
    proud of. So Lotus took Burrows idea and used their expertise and
    technology to develop it into the monster we all hate today. :*) Before
    Lotus took over, for example, the bike had never seen the inside of a
    wind tunnel.
    
    Graham.

  I thought the base note was exceptionally well put.

  Thank you Graham.

  John C.

    
    The programme was typical of the QED series - utter, utter, rubbish. I
    never watch it unless I *have* to, but I felt this was one I *had* to
    watch.
    
    To give you a flavour of it, there were several unsupported testimonies
    that Burrows' design was revolutionary, mould-breaking, brilliant etc.
    BUT THEY DIDN'T ONCE EXPLAIN WHY !!!!!!! I still don't know the
    technical reasons why it's supposed to be so good. They also said that
    in the initial wind-tunnel tests, Boardman was more aerodynamic on his
    traditional steel bike, so what would have happened if they'd put the
    extra development into that instead ?
    
    Trevor

    
    	The shape of the bike was changed from tubes to a wing shape so
    that the air slid around the sides more easily. As a result, the bike,
    standing upright on it's own, is more aerodynamic.
    
    	But the least aerodynamic part of a bike isn't the mechanical part,
    but the human part. That's why, when Burrows first came up with the
    idea it was measured at 2 seconds slower than a conventional bike for
    the 4000m. Now this is where, in my mind we hit a gray area. What is a
    conventional bike?
    
    	Burrows original design never had tri-bars? Did their conventional
    bike? Was it a low-profile or was it a butcher's bike with half a pound
    of sausages in the basket? That's the whole problem, their is no base
    from which to measure. There is no standard unit.
    
    	As I said in my base note, I do believe that the bike helped
    Boardman win. There is no bike currently on the market that could let
    him get into that aerodynamic shape. But two points come out of that,
    1. that Boardman is one of those people who is blessed with the ability
    to get a flat back and neat tuck and not everyone who rides that bike
    can expect to copy his position and 2. that if Lotus had spent how ever
    much it was on developing a straight diamond frame, who is to say that
    they wouldn't have come up with the same result, or better?
    
    	The reason that we have got this media hype is because of it's
    looks. You've got to admit that it looks impressive, and most certainly
    not what Joe Public reckons a bike looks like. Unfortunately, no one
    bothered to look at the muscle powering it.
    
    	Picture the seen: Question of Sport (for non-Brits this is a quiz
    show with sporting personalities as contestants) in 3 years time. David
    Coleman asks, "So Bill, can you tell me who won the individual pursuit
    gold in the 92 Olympics?" A puzzled Bill Beaumant replies "Eh, Lotus?"
    Thankfully the record books will show him wrong...
    
    Graham. 

On the past record of cyclists in such contests, I think you got it slightly
wrong, Graham..

Not

>	Picture the seen: Question of Sport (for non-Brits this is a quiz
>    show with sporting personalities as contestants) in 3 years time. David
>    Coleman asks, "So Bill, can you tell me who won the individual pursuit
>    gold in the 92 Olympics?" A puzzled Bill Beaumant replies "Eh, Lotus?"
>   Thankfully the record books will show him wrong...

but....

 	Picture the seen: Question of Sport (for non-Brits this is a quiz
    show with sporting personalities as contestants) in 3 years time. David
    Coleman asks, "So Chris, can you tell me who won the individual pursuit
    gold in the 92 Olympics?" A puzzled Chris Boardman replies "Eh, Bill
    Beaumont?"
    Thankfully the record books will show him wrong...


         ;>)
    
    

    If Lotus won the Olympics, then it lost the professional pursuit
    several weeks later, to another funny bike (steel, with no seat tube).
    Granted, the Lotus ridden to the silver was only a prototype of the one
    Boardman rode, but to my knowledge it employed all the same concepts.
    
    Fact is, Boardman was a very good rider, riding a very good machine in a
    super position, who had a fantastic week.  It's quite a feat to lap last 
    year's world champion in the pursuit, no matter how small the track is. 
    The only way Lotus could've been responsible for that was if they'd
    stuck a several horsepower motor in the bottom bracket. 
    
    And I'll admit, I had to chuckle that the British one-upped everyone
    else (especially us Yanks) in the technical wizzardry department at the
    Olympics!
    
    Justin
    
    

    
    
    Just to let everyone know that a slightly modified version of my base
    note appears is in this weeks Cycling Weekly. See that, you all got the
    exclusive....  :*)
    
    Graham.