View Single Post
Old 01-25-23, 02:50 PM
  #130  
PeteHski
Senior Member
 
PeteHski's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2021
Posts: 8,425
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4403 Post(s)
Liked 4,853 Times in 3,002 Posts
Originally Posted by livedarklions
I don't know why you need to go out of your way to post your disapproval of my cadence, etc. in just about every thread you can. I thought you were going to put me "back" on your ignore list.

This is a thread in General Cycling, not a racing subforum, and the OP did not mention competition. Why is it I'm supposed to be looking for racing advice before I have anything to say on the subject?

Your MO is to post some sort of "correction" to my postings then to accuse me of being argumentative when I point out your "corrections" are a load of crap based on some silly assumption you made up about what the purpose of cycling is or whatever.

If you don't think I am worthy of discussing this with you, stop responding to my posts, otherwise, you're just being a hypocrite who can't stand not getting the last word.


You do understand that "highly competitive cyclists" have several genetic advantages that I and you don't, so it's pretty unlikely that my calculations of my own optimal practices would be influenced by their very different considerations. They're also 35-40 years younger than I am.
Where have I told you that I disapprove of your low cadence? All I’ve actually said is that I think it has little relevance to the OPs question. I can’t imagine the OP is up for trying your method, but I could be wrong.
PeteHski is offline