Live blog: Tour de France Stage 8: De Gendt wins Stage 8 with phenomenal breakaway performance + Alaphilippe attacks + Geraint Thomas crashes (snaps bike in half)

Just dropping by to apologise for the errors in the first version of this article. It shouldn't have been published when it was, and it's now been edited. We'll be better from now on, apologies again.

The sun article using outdated stories just shows how desperate and, more worryingly, determined the gutter press are to perpetuate the bad feeling against cyclists. If it were new and newsworthy, sure that's their job to report on. But in digging up old stuff just to rage bait shows quite clearly this is an orchestrated and deliberate act on their part to find anything to fill the pages of their shitty rag to keep it simmering in the minds of the gammons who buy into their nonsense.

@OnYerBike Attack types for certification: https://seatylock.com/blogs/blog/bike-lock-security-ratings Bike Radar testing: https://www.bikeradar.com/advice/buyers-guides/best-bike-lock Bike stripped but good lock not touched: https://www.reddit.com/r/ukbike/comments/1vzt0k8/lock_up_your_front_wheels_people_dont_be_like_me/

@Xenophon2 No-one has ever claimed any bike lock is "invincible". Angle grinder resistance is one of the most important selling points, because angle grinders are often the tool of choice for the serious thief. That said, these locks tend to stand up well to other forms of attack. Seatylock has a good article outlining the types of attack various certification schemes require locks to pass, several of which include cold and hammering attacks. Bike Radar did some pretty extensive destructive testing too. Despite spending an arguably unreasonable amount of time on the internet looking at bike-adjacent content, I am yet to come across a single case of one of these new generation angle grinder resistant locks being defeated in the "wild". There are other cases of thieves damaging bikes or stripping parts off bikes locked in that way, but if anything that simply highlights that the thief couldn't get through the lock with the tools at their disposal. It's pretty cold comfort if you come back to a locked frame stripped of all its parts, but as I said, you can't fault the lock - the lock did it's job. So whilst no-one is claiming these locks are invincible, all the evidence suggests they are pretty darn tough, and can't be easily defeated. If it was as simple as using some refrigerant spray and a hammer, I'm sure we would have heard about it. Clearly, even if the lock were undefeatable, it's still possible for a would-be thief to damage or destroy the bike, either in spite, or in attempting to defeat the lock. Components can also be stolen. It seems pretty unreasonable to fault the lock in those scenarios - the lock is doing it's job; you just have to accept that there are some risks a good lock can't do anything about. A good lock doesn't mean there's a magic forcefield around your bike protecting it from any and all damage/theft. Good locking technique can also help in some circumstances - I always recommend as a minimum putting the lock around the rear wheel, frame and bike rack. This means the thief can't simple cut the frame, or the rack, and then ride off with the bike to deal with the lock later (and yes, thieves have been known to ride off on bikes despite having cut through the top tube). It also means you bike is less likely to be accidentally knocked over, which can cause damage to the bike, as well as an obstruction to other road users. The bottom line is that it's about reducing risk, not eliminating risk entirely. You want to make your bike less attractive than the next one. If you've got a good lock, most thieves will simple move onto the next bike - if they can cut through the lock and ride off with a complete, working bike, that is generally the preferred option. (Links to follow in separate comment)

@Smoggysteve Fair enough so! For me, with only two of us who can ride roughly the same size bikes (she rides 54 cm, me 56/58) a dedicated cheap secondhand bike would do the job but obviously if you want something that can be adjusted for kids and adults that's where this comes into its own.

@Rendel Harris For me its partly adjustability, partly having something I can encourage the kids to use. My biggest issue is I might be ok putting my bike on my trainer , but because its disc brake and everyone else in my households bikes are all rim braked the adapters are different and then its storage etc . 1 bike everyone can use is much more attractive and for the fraction of the cost of buying something like a wattbike.

@Smoggysteve Yes I get that, I was just wondering what the advantage is of a purpose-built frame like this or the Zwift bike compared to just having the same trainer with a dedicated standard bike? I can see that if several family members of significantly different size are going to use the trainer then the adjustability is definitely a selling point but I can't see much advantage for a sole user, apart from maybe that is aesthetically more pleasing.

And something of Led Zeppelin in "a whole lot of true, original, and relatable soul"?

@mdavidford Thanks, I'll try an remember to take a tape measure next time I'm walking that way.

I'm not getting the disapproval here? Some of this is right up there with the best of Mark V. Shaney's work on Usenet. It hovers, Dylanesque, between the trite and the incomprehensible: