In a message dated 6/4/2004 11:45:33 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Bikerdaver writes:
<< Who is one to say one bike vs another bike is not worthy? From your posting, I presume it is not you. But then why do you repeat it? Again, I am 100% sure you have good intentions, but you further propagate or enhance a bogus manner of judging bikes. From what I have seen on this list, absolutely NO one has ever come forward and claimed that they know 100% for certain that of every Pog they see, they are 100% capable of telling whether it was made by "the master himself", one of his many assistants, Rossin, Basso, DeRosa, etc., etc. Sure there are differences between each of these bikes, each paint color, each lug used, etc. There are 365 days in a year, but which day is "unworthy", which is not "real"? Even if it was not made by "the master himself", go tell all the pro racers that their Basso, Rossin, or DeRosa is not worthy or "real" as they are first across the finish line. Not worthy, not real, yeah right! Maybe this list is full of shamed Pro racers who have ridden "non-worthy" Pogs to loss after repeated loss in the TdF, Coors Classic, Vuelta, etc. Let them come forward and testify to their bike's "unworthiness". Do put words in their mouth, let them tell us first hand. I can tell you what is "unworthy", Bogus opinions based on pure speculation, and the poor souls that buy into that flatulence!!
Dave--we are all "unworthy" in the eyes of Quasimoto--Anderson Cut Bank MT>>
Whew, Dave you are pushing your limits again. Calm down, calm down...
I now will ever so patiently address your message above:
"Bogus opinions based on pure speculation"?
There is little to no speculation going on here. I can absolutely tell you that the bike frame in question is not a product of Pogliaghi's workshop. No question, no speculation. Of course, toward the end, the maestro made little of the frames himself but he certainly provided oversight and guidance. But he was not in the building for this one.
I can also tell you that persons who are interested in craft, heritage, authenticity of old bikes (that being the majority of us on this list) do not give a tinkers damn about spin-off or re-constituted brands or labels. They make work just fine but are not original. Originality does matter.
And in a broader view, judging bicycles is what we do here, individually and occasionally in concert. Valuing a bike more because the name-on-it is the guy-who-made-it is not silly. In fact, it counts a lot. That doesn't mean that other bikes are unworthy, just not preferred by some folks. Being discriminating, selective, having preferences is part of life though, and something is always eliminated when a choice is made.
Pros, successful or not, actually care little about a bike. Asking a pro to place a value for me would be silly, he would use a completely different criteria. To him, a bike is a tool, a means of conveyance that serves a single end purpose, that, of course, is to do as well as possible in a race. The craft, form, association of persona, style, nostalgia, art(?), nuances of the assembly have little interest to the Pro racer. We in the CR group are different. Even though you protest it, you are different or you would not be reading this list.
We all judge and value bikes differently. We all are allowed that! We are allowed to think our love and attraction to a particular style or era or maker is OK.
Finally, on the CR list at least, we also have the right to express our preferences without anyone declaring that our opinions are bogus and that we are poor souls for buying into the flatulence! If you Dave, for instance, declare that you just LOVE old Romani bicycles (You had one when you were a kid, you met the family in a visit to Italy, your uncle raced one) and now want to buy and collect and discuss them, it is simply not polite or appropriate for me to tell you that I think they are a piece of crap! Are you getting my message?
Most sincerely, Dale
Dale Brown
Greensboro, North Carolina