What Gianni humbly omitted from his last article is that once he finishes ranting about sock color (actually, the lack of need for any color other than than white), he recovers quickly and we wrap up the Keepers executive board meeting with him tearing our legs off on the ride home from the bar with his magnificent stroke. Because after all, he is Rule #72.
But I digress. All the chit-chat Gianni’s article generated, and the timing of it with a new shoe purchase on my end, has me ruminating on Rule #8. Matching saddle, handlebar tape, and tires is, for the Velominatus at least, quite the no-brainer as it were. The only really poignant question I recall ever being raised is whether Vittoria Open Pave’s have an exemption because they are awesome and scream hardman tire (I think they are acceptable).
But what of shoes? They are the one piece of kit that most often throws a rider’s coordination out of sync. Of course this has traditionally been fine as shoes are such a personal matter that expecting one to match one’s shoes with the rest of one’s kit is hopeful at best. That being said, I wonder if shoes are less kit and more equipment. They transfer power directly from rider to bike and thus they are mechanical, they are engineered by smart people using fancy computers, and they render the machine virtually unrideable without them. In fact, I’ve often wondered why retailers list them under “clothing” and why online review forums don’t put them under “drivetrain” instead of “clothing and accessories”.
So if you don’t accept my premise, at least humor me here. If shoes are equipment and not kit, why would anyone buy a pair that didn’t match the rest of their bike? Surely, with the abundance of shoe choices on the market these days I would think one could make every effort to find a pair that fits, has the features and performance characteristics sought, falls within price range, and matches the rest of the bike.
I happened upon this concept casually deliberately this week. You see, I’ve been sporting considerable carbone over Fi’zi:k’s new shoe line ever since they were introduced (you might say I have a thing for shoes). So when a new pair of R3’s fell into my lap for number 1 I was forced to shift the Yellow Princesses over to number 3. The yellow decals and accents on the Serotta look awesome with the YP’s and the new R3’s are oh so sublime with the BMC. Splendid, indeed.
So I’ll put it to you, the Velominati. Does Rule #8 need amending? Are shoes equipment and not clothing? Do we, perhaps, need a new rule pertaining to shoe/bike matching (I think not but a suggestion might be in order). These are the things that keep the Keepers up at night.
I know as well as any of you that I've been checked out lately, kind…
Peter Sagan has undergone quite the transformation over the years; starting as a brash and…
The Women's road race has to be my favorite one-day road race after Paris-Roubaix and…
Holy fuckballs. I've never been this late ever on a VSP. I mean, I've missed…
This week we are currently in is the most boring week of the year. After…
I have memories of my life before Cycling, but as the years wear slowly on…
View Comments
@hardtop
When you step off the bike, the bike is still equipment. When you take the shoes off, they are still equipment. They look like kit, and I suppose there's an argument in the cleats only being equipment, but I maintain, shoes are not kit.
@hardtop
And by ignoring the Powercranks reference, you ignore the fact that your shoes are the "clutch" connecting your guns to the drivetrain. If you never pull up on the pedals, I suppose that shoes wouldn't matter. But then if you don't pull up, you're losing a significant amount of power in your magnificent stroke.
Oh, and this:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14666944?dopt=Abstract (peer reviewed medical journal stuff, not a bunch of wankers at VN spouting off).
@scaler911
And this is the problem.
We're talking about looks here. The definition is only important in so much as it allows us to get the aesthetics right: if equipment, match to bike; if kit, match to kit.
If it's equipment that looks like kit, we're back where we started - it's a grey area that either has not been defined by The Rules, or will never be defined by The Rules.
I take a holistic approach to it. Does the whole look good?
@Blah
Of course they should look good. Equipment that looks like kit perhaps? The question remains, as you've stated, should it match, or does it matter?
@scaler911
As far as I can see, the question is not that they should match (although Yellow Princess owners may think, and at least one has stated, that they ought to clash), but rather what should they match?
Does it matter? Not so much. But when has that stopped us caring about it?
@scaler911
Shoes are both equipment and kit.
Schrodinger's Kit - observationally dependent
My yellow Northwave Evolutions with carbon inserts c2000 run just fine, don't match the bike or kit, but I forking love them and whenever i look down i feel the volupte wash over me.
I remember getting them with the carbon sole (woah, futuristic in 2000!) and feeling at the very top of Mount Awesome. Silly but true. Same feeling every time i put them on. Worth a tailwind everytime. Especially as i remain here plateauing at two months from peaking.
Debate is great but unless you "feel' your shoes, aint mattering a hell of a lot what some person thinks, as you 53t away from them.
Yellow shoes win every time if you are wearing them and Boss Hog kind of proves it doesn't he?
@Chris
I haven't looked it up, but I assume puta is hooker or similar, in spanish - well definitely not my bag if that is the case! I should confirm this was "date of birth prompt by hotel reception computer" - there, that's sorted that one out I hope!
Nice ride you did in Spain - any rides are HC when you have your family with you - having no pressure to keep anyone happy does make an enormous difference to how doable it all is - fair play to you chap - have you had that gouty gun replaced yet?
@ all
thanks for all the support - really kind of you, as always, not to diminish my efforts, in what was in reality for Dave Buches, just another quick spin on the bike!
Team Velominati now on page two of the KOM competition for November, thanks to all who are putting the pain in, not least Mr and Mrs Smith, alias Dangerous Dave and his wife Mel B - honorable mention to Chris B who has done 40,000,000,000kms for his 910 metres in the desert
Rank Athlete # Rides Elevation Gain (meters)
1 Dave Buches -11- 9,322
2 Melissa Buches -7- 6,839
3 Dr C -7- 5,694
4 Mikael Liddy -7- 4,981
5 Adam Goldberg -3- 2,616
6 Nate Spencer-Mork -3- 2,545
7 Mark Babcock -5- 2,133
8 Mynock Hunter -3- 1,548
9 Adam Krumbein -2- 1,522
10 Chris O -7- 910
11 Ben Wilson -9- 849
12 Geoffrey Grosenbach -1- 615
13 Jon Miller -1- 519
14 Alastair Topper -1- 403
15 King Clydesdale -2- 395
16 Jud Gutheil -1- 394
17 Charles Valade -2- 271
18 Don Joling -1- 149
Total -73- rides 41,706 meters
@itburns
A+1. Sweet, sweet comment.