Im 2.88
I should have a medical certificate and permanent excuse not to ride up any gradient
Lee is ~1.97
)My book is getting smaller and smaller ..... whereas Bob's book ... well, let's just say, there are more volumes to comeIt’s not permanent though is it Cuddles? You just gotta get your head out of Bob’s big book of excuses and into Whorty’s big book of diet plans
(If all else fails both books can be used as an excellent sleeping aid
I was reading JoeFriels blog and I found this calc for whether its better to stand or stay seated whilst cycling uphills.
. The lower your body mass the more advantageous it is to stand on a climb. The greater your mass the better off you’ll be staying seated. One quick and simple way to come up with your body mass is to divide your weight in pounds (1kg = 2.2lbs) by your height in inches (1cm = 0.4in). So if you weigh 154 pounds (70kg) and you are 72 inches (180cm) tall your “mass” is 2.13 (154 / 72 = 2.13). I’ve found that for males the best climbers are at less than 2.0. These folks should stand a lot (think of Marco Pantani). Men in the range of 2.0 to 2.3 tend to alternate between standing and sitting a lot (for example, Lance Armstrong). Those men at 2.3 to 2.5 are best advised to sit a lot (like Miguel Indurain). Folks over 2.5 usually avoid hills. Women should use a scale which is about 0.2 lbs/in less (for example, under 1.8 are climbers).
Folks over 2.5 usually avoid hills.
Im 2.88
I should have a medical certificate and permanent excuse not to ride up any gradient
Lee is ~1.97
My book is getting smaller and smaller ..... whereas Bob's book ... well, let's just say, there are more volumes to come
Morning Judge.
@3.77 it's no wonder I'm slow when it goes verticalI was reading JoeFriels blog and I found this calc for whether its better to stand or stay seated whilst cycling uphills.
. The lower your body mass the more advantageous it is to stand on a climb. The greater your mass the better off you’ll be staying seated. One quick and simple way to come up with your body mass is to divide your weight in pounds (1kg = 2.2lbs) by your height in inches (1cm = 0.4in). So if you weigh 154 pounds (70kg) and you are 72 inches (180cm) tall your “mass” is 2.13 (154 / 72 = 2.13). I’ve found that for males the best climbers are at less than 2.0. These folks should stand a lot (think of Marco Pantani). Men in the range of 2.0 to 2.3 tend to alternate between standing and sitting a lot (for example, Lance Armstrong). Those men at 2.3 to 2.5 are best advised to sit a lot (like Miguel Indurain). Folks over 2.5 usually avoid hills. Women should use a scale which is about 0.2 lbs/in less (for example, under 1.8 are climbers).
Folks over 2.5 usually avoid hills.
Im 2.88
I should have a medical certificate and permanent excuse not to ride up any gradient
Lee is ~1.97
That almost makes a week of illness worthwhile!Morning Del
You’re quite right mate. Sniffles, although worth mentioning if you have nothing better to offer. Is a pretty standard 1/10. But if we factor in the fact you’ve lost weight we’re in a bit of a pickle... I do believe you may of just earned the very first negative score!
-3/10
I’m confused whose leg it is. It’s the size of Lee’s legs, but the colour of Adams...
Won't be riding tonight ..... my 'recovery' ride yesterday turned into a 60km race with a podium spot. Legs a smidge battered today. Thankfully I've already posted a time so I don't feel too bad. I'm also planning to paint a spare bedroom later - I'm not used to manual work so this will do for me completely
it was so wasted on here - as soon as i saw it i was searching for the appropriate emoji !Yes, I was tempted to post elsewhere
and pray tell why you used me as an example ? - nearly as tall as Dean and Bob ( who quoffs his hair up ) so nearly the 3rd least tallest !Lee is ~1.97
