Please note our live blog can sometimes be slow to load, so you may have to refresh your browser.
- News

Live blog: Floyd Landis to open cycling-themed cannabis shops (+ great PSA from USADA), Neil Campbell sets new European cycling speed record + more

Help us to bring you the best cycling content
If you’ve enjoyed this article, then please consider subscribing to road.cc from as little as £1.99. Our mission is to bring you all the news that’s relevant to you as a cyclist, independent reviews, impartial buying advice and more. Your subscription will help us to do more.
18 Comments
Latest Comments
RE Andy Burnam / Heidi Alexander - this is the best thing in many ways - set an example (even if currently it leads to lots of online name-calling). And imagine some of the political alternatives! The folks in the apparently second-placed party seem incredibly unlikely to be doing so. And even the current "new Greens" seem less interested in ... y'know, environmental things. OTOH I wish Heidi could be bolder. And I fear that like anyone ambitious enough to get to the top (exception B Johnson - well, I guess there was the Corbyn bicycle...) Burnam will be trimming his transport policy sails to fit the wind (should that be "bunker-fuel-burning engines"?)
@mattsccm Bull bars aren't banned, they just have to conform to regulations so they are deformable or have plates that allow crumple give on contact, rather than rigid steel bars that can smash into pedestrians and cyclists with no give at all, catch them and drag them under the wheels. If you think that's a problem, do one. Why should who is responsible for a collision remove the responsibility of people driving a tonne of machinery on the road from having safety features to at least mitigate some of the effects of a collision?
I'd be willing to bet that's lazy use of stock photography rather than deliberate misinformation, but the result is still the same.
@smallbeer You obviously don't realise how many bulls there are wandering around Chelsea, in and out of the china shops, that he needs to protect his Range Rover from.
I agree, it's bloody 'elf and safety overreach, can't help some people, I put some meat, sorry, neat decoration on the front of mine and the polis were round poking their noses in like that (mind you, that was a mistake...) (etc)
@mattsccm "Think also 4wd bull bars being banned for no legitimate reason." OK, now I regret engaging with you, you sad little troll.
@Backladder Did they fail to press SHIFT? Did they mean 95%? If so, again, citation needed.
@mattsccm The MIB exists to compensate victims of accidents caused by the drivers/riders of uninsured and untraced *motor vehicles*, not pedestrians or cyclists. So the MIB would have rightly refused any claim by the victim here. If the at-fault pedestrian had no third party liability insurance that would've covered this incident, the victim could have pursued a claim against her estate. The 'optics' (terrible word but it's become common parlance, sadly) of a cyclist pursuing a claim against a dead lady's estate, however, might have made it inadvisable.
Think also 4wd bull bars being banned for no legitimate reason Oh dear ! the unsubtle pro-driver, pro-panzer trolls are not very good at disguising themselves, are they? One can only hope that Clarkson and this disciple never have cause to regret their advocacy for these killing armaments to be added to their already pedestrian-and-cyclist hostile guzzlers. No, that's too subtle for them - what I really hope is that they, or their families, do have cause for such regret.
@ziadvanbeek I would say again that the times are closer than many people think. I was looking at my Strava time on the Huy and that's how I noted what I wrote ... Tadej's time on the Huy for his win in 2023: 3:47 (121st / 36936 Demi's time on the Huy for her win in 2026: 3:48 (141st / 36936) Yes, Paul Seixas has the KOM at 3:04 from his win in 2026.
18 thoughts on “Live blog: Floyd Landis to open cycling-themed cannabis shops (+ great PSA from USADA), Neil Campbell sets new European cycling speed record + more”
When you go out in high wind
When you go out in high wind with the express intention of capturing kotms, you’re measuring the weather and wind, not your performance.
At least 80% of all KOM’s are
At least 80% of all KOM’s are done if favourable weather of course.
If I target a KOM, obviously
If I target a KOM, obviously I’m going to give myself the best chance of success. For a particularaly difficult segment this may include one or more of the following:
Removing unneccessary gear from my bike and person; checking Google street view for exact start and finish markers; making my attempt when there is less trafic about; waiting for favourable wind conditions!
Who goes out to get a KOM with a headwind?!
I wholeheartedly agree with
I wholeheartedly agree with the family of the cyclist killed and I wish them success. The British justice system is a disgrace!
If you’re targeting a KoM on
If you’re targeting a KoM on anything but the most obscure segment, yes you do have to give yourself the best chance of success. Around here there are some very strong riders so to avoid them hoovering up all the KoMs you have to be ruthless and sneaky.
I wish that family success in their legal action.
Is there any point in
Is there any point in pursuing a civil action if a jury has already acquitted someone? Rightly or wrongly, they have been found not guilty and unless there is any new evidence then surely that is the end of it from a legal perspective?
On a lighter note, all sorts goes on with KOMs… drafting, etc. Lets be honest you are unlikely to take a KOM in a headwind. Fair game I say.
PRSboy wrote:
Yes there is, the standard for criminal prosecution is “beyond reasonable doubt”, i.e. there is no other logical explanation can be derived from the facts except that the defendant committed the crime.
However, civil cases only require “balance of probablities”, which basically means there is >50% chance that the defendent is responsible for the death, even though other logical explanations may be possible. This is obviously substantially lower a burden to prove.
In effect, he could be forced to financially compensate them for any negligance in causing the death, even if the bar for a criminal conviction cannot be met.
FlyingPenguin wrote:
Yes there is, the standard for criminal prosecution is “beyond reasonable doubt”, i.e. there is no other logical explanation can be derived from the facts except that the defendant committed the crime.
However, civil cases only require “balance of probablities”, which basically means there is >50% chance that the defendent is responsible for the death, even though other logical explanations may be possible. This is obviously substantially lower a burden to prove.
In effect, he could be forced to financially compensate them for any negligance in causing the death, even if the bar for a criminal conviction cannot be met.— PRSboy
A good explanation of the difference between criminal and civil cases, to which I would add one further distinction; in a civil case, the decision is made by aa judge, not a jury.
Gail Purcell killed Mick
Gail Purcell killed Mick Mason, killer driver Helen Measures killed Denisa Perinova and Vincent Doyle killed Janina Gehlau. The vehicle of which they were operating killed the cyclist. The courts may not have convicted them of causing death by dangerous/careless driving, but the cyclist was killed by the vehicle they were operating. For me if anything you are doing results in someones death then that must be dangerous, but that’s the law.
To add to the comments above
To add to the comments above – in addition to the standard of proof required it is worth bearing in mind that, for a civil case it will be a judge making a decision – as this is in London and one would assume a high value claim then this will likely to be a High Court Judge or one with similar standing and legal experience – therefore the person tasked with determining if the 50+1% standard has been met will not be a bunch of self righteous motorist incapable of thinking beynd “well it was a dumb cyclist and could have happened to anyone so not negligent/dangerous etc” but instead a highly qualified specialist – now admittedly the “dumb cyclist” view may still be ingrained in that individuals psyche but these are individuals who’s job is to separate a personal opinion from a legal fact – and such finding of fact can be appealed to the Court of Appeal (i.e. even more specialist and experienced).
As can be seen from the OJ case in the use, it is very possible to be guilty “on the balance of probabilities” but not “beyond reasonable doubt” its a 50% vs 95% type of equation.
(No subject)
Anyone else getting some weird adverts appearing on this site lately, or is it just me?..
a1white wrote:
Isn’t that Celine Dion?
best ad ever
best ad ever
But how are horses supposed
But how are horses supposed to dial the 0800 number? Their hooves are too big for the teeny buttons
.
I wonder why you keep posting
I wonder why you keep posting those speed records. It has nothing to do with cycling nor sport.
Maybe if more drivers saw
Maybe if more drivers saw civil action it would make them act more responsibly, especially if the chances of the decision going against you are a lot higher. I hope it sets a precedent, there’s little argument against him driving the vehicle, and being involved in the accident, there were certainly more steps he could have taken to prevent the collision, whether he was guilty of the crime, he was certainly guilty of not doing enough to avoid a collision.
I wonder if Floyd’s Fine
I wonder if Floyd’s Fine Cannabis delivers by hand, internationally, in a sealed jiffy bag?
Looks like someone has had a
Looks like someone has had a bad case of the munchies