Fixed or single speed

Wow, i missed so much by leaving the house for a day!

First off, thanks to Wayne, badtmy and aidan for looking out for my, much sullied, reputation. Thanks to TC for everything else - you are a one, aren't you?

I would like to throw another fizz-suxks point into the mix, about balance rather than traction (which IIRC was the original point of contention) : the gyroscopic effect of the pedalling action will serve to increase the upright stabiliry of the bike / rider. In combination with hippy's point about the position of your centre of gravity being almost completely independent of leg motion ( observe your c o g when walking, jogging etc - in cycling it is better due to no net upward thrust as when you 'bounce' a running step), then peddaling looks like a more stable dynamic cornering proposition than freewheeling.

Of course, there ae caveats: pedal strike if crank length is inapprpopriate; inability to control c o g position at high cadence; bad pedalling style leading to uneven traction... But, in the proposed situation of a non-novice fixed rider in London on an appropriate bike, i think that they should be disregarded.

I suspect that the determining factor here is rider experience, not drive train technology - it would be rash to bet the farm on SS or fixed. Making a blanket statement that SS is better at balancing through corners seems similarly rash and not a little incendiary (witness the firestorm).

As for giving proper citation of my qualifications before using them, if you have a problem with that then it rather undermines your position as a serious debator. You may have noticed a certain self-defamatory interlude in brackets before I mentioned Cambridge; it's not something I would bandy around with scant regard to context, but it seemed appropriate here.

Fuck me, that was a lot to type on a touchscreen handheld :-(