the blog manifesto.

the purpose of sme is simply this: to overthrow the capitalist hegemony that has a stranglehold on our beautiful, multiethnic society. contributors are asked to take part in this, our overriding mission, so the people of the green earth can breathe together in the clean air of progressive politics and non-judgmentalism. each blog post must bask in the sunlight of earnest expression, never falling into the trap of satire or parody. our aim is clarity and verisimilitude; our mission is truth and the propagation of it. the blog is the perfect place to post your old family videos, homophobic video blogs, another blog's material, awkward, poorly-drawn sketches, halo reach updates, or unexplained/irrelevant wikipedia articles--sme is home to the entire eclectic conflation that is the internet. if there is one thing entirely intolerable to the editors of sme, it is sarcasm. there is simply no room in this blog for sarcastic, humorous, and reference driven posts. if you are among those responsible for such garbage, please leave.


barnaby jones

Wednesday, February 17, 2010

How to Judge the Worth of a Cyclist

(for my speech class)
Ever see someone ride on a bike and think to yourself, " I really wish I had some criteria on which to Judge this man's worth, as well as his legitimacy in relationship to other cyclists."
Well I certainly have, So after doing oodles of research, studying the sciences, and much number counting. I have irrefutable, hard facts about legitimacy in cycling.
To Judge effectively you must take into consideration looks, money invested in cycling (e.g. bib shorts, Jersey, bike), age, and skill.
Below I have placed all my data into very scientific scatter plots

The first two I looked at, money and looks, go hand in hand. However there is a interesting split in the $6,000 dollar range. As I observed people with more expensive bikes, the majority became increasingly lame, while the minority became more tight.

The second two, Skill and age, form a nice pattern as well.

The Categories

Childhood riders

The section highlighted above is where the childhood riders fall into. Their bikes are very cheep, but they look good on them. Cuteness multiplier.
As we can see in the age vs skill graph, young people suck. And there is a high concentration of bikers between the ages of 6 and 16. When those bikers turn 16 they start driving cars. They no longer have a need for their bikes. That is except for the.......

The stoners that didn't get their license
you can see the stoner bikers are rather high in the tightness category. However not much of their money funds their biking habit.

as they age and spend more time on their bikes, they progress slowly in skill. And learn to do odd things with their bikes. It doesn't help their road biking skills but it does make them look really tight.

Completely Average Bikers

This category has reached the point of balance between skill and looks. They don't spend to much money on their gear, and they don't suck.

Local Racers

The Increase in skill leads to a decrease in body fat. Therefore they look more tight. However it is a minimal increase in tightness.

the ratio of spending money to looking tight is starting to become unbalanced.

People who suck but don't care/fitness bikers

(yes that is Russell Crowe. He is a exception to the category, and belongs higher in tightness)

the Split Occurs

Old people with to much money that think they are way cooler than they really are.


the tightness is off the scale right now. Super skilled, Super expensive everything, and right at the perfect age range.


There are a few I didn't mention, child prodigies and really fast/strong/tight old men. They are illusive, but do exist. They are not well documented because of the small a percentage they take up in the world of cycling.

The world of cycling is mostly full of people like this.

not many like this


  1. This is simply amazing. I can't even imagine how you came up with this, but it's great!

  2. this is so long like