Recent comments

  • Reply to: Local Triathlete has serious incident with car north of Boulder   41 min 21 sec ago

    I have filed my records request for the accident report with Boulder County. The clerk told me that I will be put in a queue and that requests are processed in the order received (I don't expect to see it tomorrow). Because I am not a party to the accident, the report will be redacted to some degree and it's possible that it will be heavily redacted. I hope eye witnesses will request to see the report and check it for accuracy. The Boulder County Records Department can be reached at 303-441-3600. The report number is 14-5961. Even though the report is available to the public, they will ask you why you want a copy.

  • Reply to: 2014 - Cowboy Cross   51 min 14 sec ago

    Yeah, they did what I suggested, except for the whole 'more time between races' & 'don't pull lapped riders' thing. Suck that.

  • Reply to: 2014 - Cowboy Cross   1 hour 31 min ago

    I just looked back at the Cowboy Cross flyer. The categories ARE combined and there are no masters categories at all. There are 5 or 6 adult categories. They did exactly what you want and you found something to complain about. Congratulations!

    I'm having fun, so suck it.

  • Reply to: 2014 - Cowboy Cross   1 hour 47 min ago

    Are we back to the racing v participating discussion again? I wish that BRAC would have done the new categories this year. We will have to wait to see if some this proposed changes will make a difference in a year.

    I think that only the top fields should have the 80% rule enforced. Everyone else gets the full time some how.

  • Reply to: 2014 - Cowboy Cross   1 hour 59 min ago

    I wasn't at Cowboy Cross. I would like to have more info. Was the Men's C race really 94 ish riders? Was there any chip timing?

    Just to be an officials advocate, anyone that has not scored a race (like this) by hand should refrain from commenting. Unless they are saying they will pay for chip timing.

    What has been the regular practice of pulling riders or ending the about to be lapped riders ??

  • Reply to: Local Triathlete has serious incident with car north of Boulder   2 hours 14 min ago

    I agree with your assessment of the situation and COMMEND you for speaking up. I support this activism and shall do my own too.

    Being involved with the law, police, and medical stuff you will find that very few reports are 100% accurate or inclusive. Ask any person in a report if it is 100% and they will say no.

    It is unfortunate that WE THE PEOPLE insist that the government works for us and to do that work.

  • Reply to: 2014 - Cowboy Cross   2 hours 27 min ago

    The proposal I made goes a bit further than the proposed category changes for next year. If you can't see a benefit in structuring the race schedule in such a way that racers don't have to worry about getting pulled less than halfway through their race (perhaps the number 1 complaint) then, well... not sure what to say to you...

  • Reply to: 2014 - Cowboy Cross   2 hours 54 min ago

    "random thought", you bring this topic up in every thread. Give it a rest. BRAC is changing the categories next year so what is the point of continuing this conversation? Also, your ideas are stupid. Move on.

  • Reply to: Local Triathlete has serious incident with car north of Boulder   5 hours 18 min ago

    This is a tragic accident and my heart goes out to Kennett, Adelaide, and their families and I hope Kennett will continue to update his blog and keep us informed of Adelaide's progress.

    As a community of cyclists, I think we should ask ourselves if we -- and especially Adelaide -- are receiving fair treatment here. And I ask you to specifically consider two separate issues:

    1. As a holder of public trust and the main source of "official" news for most people in Boulder, The Camera has an editorial responsibility to present the news clearly and impartially. Please read the article in question (the link is in the first comment above) and ask yourself if The Camera met that standard. If you were an editor, would you have approved that story, as is, for publication?

    2. Sargent Madden, as a Public Information Officer vested with authority and public trust, has an especially strong obligation to make clear statements and remain impartial. After reading his statements, do you feel that he has met his professional obligation?

    In my opinion, the cycling community was failed on both counts. In particular, I find the officer's statements to be illogical, ambiguous, contrary to likely facts, and prejudicial against Adelaide. His statements have me concerned about issues of fairness. If the folks conducting the investigation show any bias against cyclists, it may negatively impact Adelaide's ability to realize the full protection of the law.

    By printing the story in the form that they did, The Camera opened the incident to a lot of idle speculation. As expected, the usual assortment of asshats stepped up to the plate to bash cycling and cyclists in general and to suggest the accident was somehow Adelaide's fault; often quoting the obviously flawed story to reinforce their half-baked assertions.

    In my opinion, Sgt. Madden used words that are highly prejudicial and imply the fault of the cyclist: "Perr . . . crashed into the side of Rosh's car"; "That's when they were hit by the bicyclist." How much common sense, simple analytic reasoning, and possibly reported facts were ignored to make statements like that? How can one "yield appropriately" if they then have to yield immediately to traffic they should have already yielded to?

    It might be easiest to demonstrate the stories flaws and bias with some simple parodies. If The Camera and Madden combined forces to report on some historical episodes they would have reported that the Titanic was struck by an ice burg while idling in the ocean, and that President Lincoln disrupted the path of a bullet while watching a play. Word choice does matter. It matters a great deal. And it would have been very easy to write that story in a more impartial manner, or at least one that was logically consistent and true to the facts known at the time.

    I am so disturbed by the officer's characterization that I have written and asked him -- very politely -- to explain his comments to me (no response yet). I have also inquired about getting a copy of the police report and will do so at the earliest opportunity (I will be checking today to see if it has been filed).

    If you share my concerns, you might wish to contact the officer yourself:, or maybe send a message to The Camera challenging their judgement regarding that story.

    I especially hope that the police report will be shared with the eye witnesses that contributed to it, to ensure that it is an accurate representation of what they reported. [I don't know if that is standard procedure, it would be logical, but I know better than to bet on logical.]

    Some of you will think I am over-reacting. But if we just sit back and accept situations like this, we are tacitly allowing the blame-the-cyclist-first mentality to grow unchecked right here in Boulder where it will affect us all.


    For those of you that are unfamiliar with how police attitudes can result in prejudicial applications of the law, you might wish to google "san francisco police department bias cyclists." Not sure if this link will make it past the filters, but here's to trying: