I did not know there were so many idiots in the world until I met the internet - Abraham Lincoln once said.

The internet is great because you'll find the answer to every question here. Really - each, just browse the list of queries from which people get to this blog, for example: cyoganie in Slovakia, bridges, an exotic island for cyclists, himalayas, images, no coloring, how people look at cyclists, how to become Janusz, cyclists pee, riders and their pants, beautiful and wet 18 year old ...

The Internet is also a beautiful place to take serious discussions on serious topics regarding serious life choices (eg di2 vs stage) - the problem is that you never know who you are discussing with. It can be a joyful gimbus who knows everything best, and maybe a cyclist with 40 years of experience, both in Masters and Elite.

Here is a short guide to herak know that someone is a fool how to quickly end the discussion with your statement:

Nobody needs shields! (and other inventions)

Disc brakes are not needed on the road, after all, when I tighten my wheel, the wheel stops in place.

Yes, except that apart from the braking force, there is also the quality of modulation (that is, you can slow down instead of stopping the wheel in place). Generally, the wheels deal with this well, but ... Who ever went to the mountains (not in Świętokrzyskie) at the ribostokki and met him downpour there knows that the wheels may not inhibit. The same if someone drives in the winter or hits a piece of mud on the road.

Just because you do not need shields on the road or you do not see their application, it does not mean that they are unnecessary. Riding without having to stress the temperature of the rim and how much block we have has its advantages. But professionals say it's evil!

And in the pro peloton ...

For this technical novelties, no need for disc brakes ... (...)

Twisty crashes will arise through the discs. Guests who put on such brakes will gain a big advantage on wet asphalt. The v-brakes we use now are doing great, but on a wet road the wheel has to make 2-3 turns to dry the rim. Everyone knows it and they stop it sooner. The disks will wait until the last moment, those behind you will not be able to stop and a problem will arise. The other thing is that I would rather not meet in an accident with a piece of metal heated almost to red. I do not like it, I know that there are more such voices, but the opinion of the equipment manufacturers is more important. Until someone gets seriously hurt. Unfortunately.

Bartosz Huzarski, interview for Eurosport

Yes, but: professional cycling is a different sport than amateur cycling. You can easily find out about it by watching any World Tour live. Stand on any corner, roundabout, technical section and see what's going on. Then remember your last race. Alternatively, try to sit on the wheel of a pro during a descent or driveway. Moving our perception of cycling into professional cycling is like saying: my Punto my Focus (he often gives as an example of Punto) will pass this turn at the speed of 200km / h, because I saw Robert Kubica passing such a turn at this speed. And this is also a Focus (although the version of WRC, but that's probably no difference?).

Professionals may not need shields, compact cranks, positive bridges and other solutions that make life easier. It does not mean, however, that we do not need them.

Once the grass was greener

Once nobody was thinking about aero profits, nobody needed to drive 6-kilogram bikes, people rode in soft helmets. 

Yes, only if they could, they would use modern ones. Because they are better, period. Of course you can live by using the relics of the past, but what for? It's like driving a car without support because after all, people used to drive and complain like that.

People always rode with links and did not complain, so Di2 is not needed. Of course, it is not necessary, just like air conditioning in the car - it is not necessary. Man gets used to comfort, and the world goes ahead - why get up from the sofa to the TV when you can use the remote control. We used to use a broomstick for that purpose and in total there was no problem either.

The statement that it is cool to use the old one, because old was enough (btw, once old was new), is a bit like:

I travel and live

This drop can be done on trekking - I once jumped and lived.

The helmet is unnecessary because I used to fall over my head and nothing happened to me.

This is my favorite text, often repeated especially by younger contributors to online discussions. I will leave it here only because I do not have so many letters in the keyboard to explain erroneous conclusions. A single case is not a proof, especially that in the discussion of people who survived something vs those who did not survive, the first will probably be more.

X is the best!

A statement, how useful, but:
- if you work for X, or get something from them for free, give yourself 5 points
- if you praise only X products, give yourself another 5 punts
- if you do it more than 3 times a week, again 5 points
Sum up and if it comes out that you have collected a minimum of 10 points, be aware that no one believes in what you say.

It's like having a grandmother's dinner. As a grandmother, 7 times, proposing an addition of potatoes, you reflexively start to disagree before you finish your sentence. It may turn out that you will also refuse dessert with momentum, and then stupidly retract it. Too often marking your bike / equipment / trainer / sponsor as "the best in the world" causes a defensive reaction in readers.

When recommending things, you also have to be careful about:

Chinese clothes are good because I drive them

I have 10 pairs of counterfeit clothes and I'm good at riding them.

It's a super popular statement. I also rode in Chinese counterfeits. Ba, I still have a few Chinese shirts (although not so ostentatiously counterfeited) and I think that you can easily make longer routes in them. Because in everyone you can - people drive in jeans and live. The argument that I use shorts with a Coolmax liner and it's cool is real .... I'm an invalid. These costumes are cheap, but you just need to buy a minimally more expensive set from Decathlon and suddenly it turns out that the difference is like heaven and the earth. Speaking about things without having a meaningful reference point is misleading. This also translates into other areas:
- What bike can you recommend?
- Giant, because I have one

The argument of an expensive bike

Adding to the discussion the statement that someone was on an expensive bike is somehow strange. Just like parking on an invalidity envelope. Porsche parked there will raise 7x bigger hate than ... let this Focus. If you have not been waved off by a man on the road and he was on a bicycle for PLN 30,000, people will be outraged a lot more than if you do not want a guy on 10x cheaper Merida. After people with expensive things, it's going to get better because they do not like them. So if you have the option, always say that anyone who did something stupid had expensive equipment.

Why drop 50g?

A bridge lighter by several dozen grams can be more expensive by several hundred zlotys. Similarly with every other bicycle part, until we come to the conclusion that each descent from 10 grams is a thousand. And yes, dropping 50 grams seems to make no sense, because it is imperceptible. But usually it does not stop at one element, and when you drop 20g a dozen times, you get 200. Is it worth the price? For you maybe not, for someone probably like that. Nobody will question the statement that on a lighter one rides nicer.

Why drop 200g, if you just have to do two before the start. Why throw 600g, if it's as much as a water bottle?

A statement found disturbingly often. Apart from whoever is going to race with the two in the stomach, it has the same meaning as the statement: why earn more when you can spend less. Everything is nice, only sometimes you can not seem less, just like you can not do two more or give up drinking along the way. The things that one takes on a training / race are usually necessary and are difficult to ignore. Unless they are not - then it does not really make sense.

Who needs an expensive bike?

I answered this question very long ago here: Is it meaning to buy a bike for a million?

In a nutshell: a very expensive bicycle does not drive noticeably faster than an expensive bike or even a rather expensive bicycle. A nice bike, a nice bicycle or a bike we dream about - that's how it goes. Not only is it faster, more convenient and more often. questions for what? they are out of place because they judge through the prism of the questioner's situation. Laughing with someone that has a road bike, and it is slow driving is slow (although in fact, in the case of, for example, Ceramic Speeda and people who drive from the holiday in Gassy 30km / h, they can be fun). Why should we manage the finances of another person?

The bike does not go alone

- Which bike to choose X or Y
- It does not matter, the bike does not go by itself

and any variation of this dialogue regarding any choice. It somehow has to do with the fact that the equipment is unimportant, and the leg counts. This is obviously true. In cycling, the equipment is probably 10-20%, and above a certain price level, even a lot less. Only what, if it still remains with us to make this decision and you need to resist it.

How do you ask husband Wife what to buy for dinner, it does not answer: It's all the same, because you can not cook anyway.

Why gravel, if you can also use the road

Or why for whom MTB, if it can be a gravel. Possibly why fatbike, if MTB is possible and so on.

You can, of course - just for what, if you can be more comfortable.

You have to be hard

Well, you do not necessarily need to. The common truth that everyone must be cycling superheroes is destructive to many. We are talking about the fact that you do not let go even in the worst weather, injuries and that you have to practice even when you do not want to be the first, a successful step towards disguising your hobby. It's clear that there is a need for perseverance, regularity and hard work, but unfortunately you also need genes, luck, opportunities and a few other things, and the best ones can only be few. You have to be tough, but the real tough guy knows that sometimes you have to be too miętkim. As in the entry for sickness and not driving.

I have a Chinese and it looks the same

And I have a Ferrari from Burago and it also looks the same, only it is in 1:24 scale. Just because something looks the same does not mean it is the same. Well, but how - after all:

Everything is from the same factory anyway

Here is a text that is probably worth reading, about it how to recognize a Chinese (implicitly: fake). Things done in China (and the area) are not bad, because if they were - almost everything would be bad. There is a mass of Chinese bicycle equipment, branded with Chinese brands, which is very good. The pretending originals are a problem. Maybe 90% of bikes in the world go from the same factory, or maybe it is 60%, or maybe there are two factories - it does not matter. The fact is that if Chinese (in the sense of: travels) the wheels are falling apart at conglomerates, which I have seen many times, why would I trust the Chinese frame, let alone the steering wheel.

The originals are also spoiled.

Yes, but trust me, less often. Really. Maybe the internet says something else, but the Internet does not trust. The original equipment also breaks and I saw the original frames that cracked for no good reason, but it's good to stand in front of the mirror after this accident and be able to say to myself: I did everything I could to avoid this accident. I am silent about the guarantee here, because what about the fact that we will get a new frame, if we paid as much as 10 Chinese for it anyway.

I have other but it costs more

- Hey, can you advise a saddle to 250 PLN?
- I have Selle Italia SLR and it's cool, but it costs 500.

The least helpful answer in the history of the internet.

Comparison to the worse

 - But it was bad at that party!
 - No, look at VeloToruń, there was a lot worse.

If the parents did not remind you in their youth, that you should not compare to the worse, only to better - I will do it. The fact that something else is much worse is not an argument that something is good. What else, if all the alternatives are worse, then we may start to wonder ...

I'm going to the mountains ... Świętokrzyskie

The Świętokrzyskie Mountains are cool, what you can read about in this entrybut with the mountains they have as much in common as Góra Kalwaria or Tarnowskie Góry. If someone, in the discussion about the meaning of shields in the road, relies on the fact that he has been in the mountains recently and the braking rule stopped perfectly, then he mentions that it was under Kielce, losing some credibility. 

Everything is possible, just want

There is a saying on the internet that if you can not do something, but you really want it, you can. It's similar here.
All fit-profiles and fit-blogs repeating the mantra that everything can be done if they are working for a long time to lie. How wrong is this true every four years, Olympians who spend all their life perfecting this one, only activity, and then lose. Because they were born in a bad place in the world and run slower because the possibilities of development in their country and access to technology were limited or simply because not everyone can be the best. Can be everythinguntil everything we define meaningfully.

Do it better

 - I think that Kwiato went badly in the last race
 - if you're so smart, show me how you drive!

The most common argument for any kind of criticism in relation to anything. Did not you like the race? I wonder if you would have done better!

I can not explain how many levels it is at the same time bad. It's like the accusation that we have a bad access road to work, someone told you: I wonder if you would spill asphalt better?

And finally, the eternally working law, straight from Wikipedia:

Godwin's law (reductio ad Hitlerum, argumentum ad Hitlerum) In 2007, The Economist stated that "in most discussions a good rule is that the first person who challenges the second from the Nazis automatically loses the discussion"