text:
Advertise on BikePortland

Mayor Adams issues statement on fatal bicycle collision – Updated

Posted by on May 17th, 2012 at 6:21 pm

Street Smart campaign launch event-7-6
(Photo © J. Maus/BikePortland)

Portland Mayor Sam Adams just issued a statement about last night’s fatal collision on SW 3rd and Madison.

Adams’ office has posted the statement on his blog, under the headline: Statement from Mayor Sam Adams on Bicycle Accident at SW 3rd and Madison. Here it is:

Last night, a terrible tragedy occurred downtown: a bicyclist was struck by a motor vehicle and killed. My condolences go out to this young woman’s family and friends; I am deeply sorry for the anguish they are going through. This incident hit me particularly hard given my commitment as mayor to making our city’s streets safer for all users. While we’ve made great strides, losing even one life is too many. This incident is still under investigation and the Portland Police Bureau will work with the District Attorney’s Office to determine appropriate action.

The use of the “bicycle accident” in the headline is very unfortunate — especially coming from a Mayor that has such a deep knowledge of and sensitivity around bicycle issues. It’s common knowledge in transportation circles to avoid using that word and instead use the word “crash” or, the one I prefer, “collision”. “Accident” tends to make these tragedies seem completely unavoidable, when we all know there are things we can do to prevent them.

I appreciate Mayor Adams acknowledging this tragedy, but I hope he, or someone in his office, will edit that headline as soon as possible.

UPDATE, 7:57 pm : The headline has been edited to “bicycle crash.”

UPDATE, 9:22 pm: I have confirmed that Mayor Adams will attend the community gathering at SW 3rd and Madison planned for Kathryn Rickson on Friday at 5:30.

Email This Post Email This Post

NOTE: At BikePortland, we love your comments. We love them so much that we devote many hours every week to read them and make sure they are productive, inclusive, and supportive (heck, sometimes we even fix your typos!). That doesn't mean you can't disagree with someone. It means you must do it with tact and respect. This is our business and we do not tolerate mean commenters who add nothing of value to the discussion.

Unfortunately, we are not robots and we don't always catch everything. You can help by notifying us if you see inappropriate comments. Thanks! — Jonathan and Michael

  • Hart Noecker May 17, 2012 at 6:40 pm

    We need a car-free down town Portland, if that isn’t our ultimate goal, I don’t know what the heck we’re doing out there.

    Recommended Thumb up 19

    • Cary Williams May 17, 2012 at 7:02 pm

      I commute on a bike..cars belong in this city just as much as bikes do. We have no monopoly to the roads. I treat every car and truck with respect. I will not win if they hit me. I have no details as to what happen and sad at the passing of this young lady…Be careful out there.

      Recommended Thumb up 35

    • naomi May 17, 2012 at 7:07 pm

      personally i think it’s unfair to tell drivers they can’t go downtown.

      Recommended Thumb up 22

      • NF May 17, 2012 at 7:39 pm

        How do they do it in Europe? Plenty of carfree districts, and I assume that some people drive to them.

        Recommended Thumb up 11

        • Andrew N May 17, 2012 at 9:57 pm

          Most European cities have residential densities that Portland can only dream of. You don’t have to drive to a car-free district if you live in one.

          Recommended Thumb up 7

        • Tom M May 17, 2012 at 11:42 pm

          Many of those areas are simply too narrow for cars. They are usually just alleyways or other small areas.

          It was also the intention of the Queen (?) of the Netherlands that when looking to what infrastructure to build in the 50’s soon after WWII she looked at the road networks, the infrastructure involved, and the unforgiving nature of automobile networks and decided to build only as many as truly necessary. In other words she looked at the total costs monetarily and to human population. This coming from a country that has a 100 year plan in place to deal with rising sea levels due to ongoing climate change.

          Recommended Thumb up 3

          • Dan May 18, 2012 at 10:20 am

            Sorry, they had the same auto-centric tendencies that we as Americans did, they just looked around when they were clearing the inner-cities for “urban renewal” and realized that if they gutted their cities for better traffic access, they wouldn’t have any place to drive their car TO. In addition, they were abhorrent at the mounting death-toll from cars and trucks, especially in children (leading cause of child mortality in America is traffic accidents right now), and DEMANDED that the planning and policies change. That’s all it will take here, is the people demanding change, being the change, and being willing to support the changes necessary to bring about that change. While I don’t necessarily believe that motorized traffic should be banned from downtown, I do believe that we need to limit the number and times that semis have to pass through those streets. I feel that drivers anguish over the collision, and I’m certain that many other drivers are terrified at having to make those corners EVERY DAY.

            Recommended Thumb up 4

      • Paul May 18, 2012 at 9:28 am

        Of course it’s unfair, they’ll just need to leave their cars outside of downtown. You can’t bring your car inside a shopping mall :)

        Recommended Thumb up 5

        • wsbob May 18, 2012 at 10:28 am

          But you can bring your car to a shopping mall, and park it there for free. Can you do this in Downtown Portland?

          Recommended Thumb up 0

    • q`Tzal May 17, 2012 at 10:20 pm

      I love the idea of a carfree city so much I bought my own copy of CarFree Cities.
      And the problem even the author of that book would tell you is the current freight transport infrastructure is entirely automotive based. To remove large trucks from the roads you have to come up some reliable transport system that will consistently move in and out the 10’s of 1,000’s of TONS of freight that come in to an area the size of the (former) fareless square every single day.
      Some of you are ambitious but I think imagining that cargo bicycles are capable of handling 100% of that freight load shows that you’ve drunk too much of the KoolAid.
      Don’t get me wrong; I think these large trucks don’t belong downtown either I just don’t see how some of the basic economic functions of a city will be able to take place without either large trucks or a large infrastructure investment in to a sort of “freight mass transit”. I’m personally enamored with email for things.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

      • 9watts May 18, 2012 at 8:19 am

        “Some of you are ambitious but I think imagining that cargo bicycles are capable of handling 100% of that freight load shows that you’ve drunk too much of the KoolAid.”

        I hear you, and it is of course ridiculous to think we could achieve this transformation overnight, but I don’t see any reason not to START moving in this direction today. We’re going to have to figure it out/change how much freight we think we need to move anyway, and soon.
        Today’s expectations for freight volume may or may not survive the end of cheap oil, so if we’d like to continue with the freight, moving it without 18-wheelers would be a good place to start.

        Recommended Thumb up 3

        • Alan 1.0 May 18, 2012 at 10:46 am

          I wonder about the risk analysis of many smaller vans making many trips compared to a single big rig, whether the sum of smaller risks outweighs the larger single one. I expect big rig drivers are more skilled and safety-conscious than van drivers.

          Recommended Thumb up 1

      • oskarbaanks May 18, 2012 at 9:09 am

        I am not sure of it entirely, but with the deregulation and the undermining of the trucking industry, only UPS and Fed-X are left with inner-city terminals. As a child I recall every major trucking company having city fleets that ran out of busy terminals, mostly with trailers no longer than like 28ft. There is more than likely a few reasons for this situation.

        Recommended Thumb up 0

    • Ryan Good May 18, 2012 at 12:41 pm

      Recommended Thumb up 0

  • dave G May 17, 2012 at 6:45 pm

    For those of us who have lost a family member to a motorist while cycling, we all know too well the pain that goes with these tragedies. And this individual died on the day that nationally honors those who have lost their life while riding a bicycle. http://www.rideofsilence.org

    Recommended Thumb up 6

  • K'Tesh May 17, 2012 at 6:54 pm

    Went by that space this morning after finding that Kathryn had passed away. Very Sad.

    I Pray for the day that we get safe roads for all.

    Recommended Thumb up 10

  • Andyc May 17, 2012 at 7:20 pm

    Yes, I want safe roads. Please come on, please! You want me to bike, city of Portland? Prove it. I’m too distraught to finish this comment without delving in to cliches and rants which would better server the boregonianlive crazies. Again, condolences to all involved.

    Recommended Thumb up 3

    • naomi May 17, 2012 at 8:00 pm

      the roads for cyclists here are incredibly safe. not perfect, but still incredibly safe. think of how few cyclist deaths in portland there are each year compared to auto accidents, lost hikers, etc, etc. what happened yesterday is incredibly sad but it is also incredibly rare and i dont think sensationalizing it or suggesting that one is too distraught to ride is logical. you still have a far greater chance of dying in an automobile, on a fishing boat off the OR/WA coast, etc, etc. i still feel very safe and i’m still aware that 99.99% of the drivers in portland are absolutely amazing and many times the cycling community in portland demonizes them as much as certain drivers like to demonize the entire cycling community.

      Recommended Thumb up 28

  • browse May 17, 2012 at 7:33 pm

    I’m still pondering the usage of the word “accident”. For me, it’s highlighting the difference between a willful action versus an unintentional outcome. If I ride my bike into a utility pole, it may have been avoidable if I had been paying better attention, but I’d still call it an accident.

    Recommended Thumb up 13

  • Amanda May 17, 2012 at 8:24 pm

    Well it WAS A accident because the driver was and still is very very upset and being i am his neice i do know FIRST HAND this young lady life was take and its horrible and my family is very saddened! people piss me off saying how are they saying accident umm well because he did not do this on purpose and its very sad for us on the other side this as well!!

    Recommended Thumb up 13

    • Jonathan Maus (Publisher/Editor) May 17, 2012 at 8:45 pm

      Hi Amanda and browse,

      I hear what you are saying about this term and the intentions of the guy driving the truck. I agree with you that he did not intentionally hurt Ms. Rickson. That being said, there are other issues, beyond his own, personal actions, that are important here. Specifically, I’m thinking of the design of the bikeway — if we had a different type of bikeway in this location would this have happened? Also, there are issues of the truck’s equipment — should we mandate better mirrors or perhaps side underrun guards? Or, should we consider not allowing 43-foot truck trailers in the urban core?

      The definition of the term “accident” is, “anything that happens by chance without an apparent cause.”

      What I am getting at is, I realize that the driver of the truck did not intend to hurt anyone. However, the result of what happened was preventable and therefore did not happen by some random chance.

      I hope this helps you understand why referring to traffic collisions as “accidents” is not accurate or appreciated by traffic safety advocates. Thanks.

      Recommended Thumb up 31

      • naess May 20, 2012 at 4:27 pm

        jonathan: i like how you like to get uptight over the use of the word “accident”, yet still like to throw around the term “sting” when it suits you.

        Recommended Thumb up 0

    • Schrauf May 17, 2012 at 9:20 pm

      To add to what Jonathan said, “accident” implies there was no negligence. There very likely was negligence in this case. That will be decided later if there are enough facts uncovered. Or, it might never be known.

      Negligence does not equal intent, but negligence should not go unpunished. People often say “accident” when negligence is present because they do not want to admit what really happened.

      Recommended Thumb up 8

  • RH May 17, 2012 at 8:50 pm

    I really hope this event spurs action….it could have been any cyclist…Bike lane, green box, still light outside, etc… It shows we NEED more separated bike infrastructure. I will be at the memorial tomorrow to pay respect….knowing it could have been me. RIP

    Recommended Thumb up 3

  • Joe Adamski May 17, 2012 at 9:04 pm

    being dispatched with a 40+ foot trailer and a twin screw tractor, designed for long haul over highways into a dense urban setting is akin to giving a kid a powersaw and not expecting a bad result. With the massive size of the rig coupled with a very active streetscape, this is predictable result. What load was so important as to send such a large truck down there? Or was he trying to ‘cut through’ to the freeway?

    Recommended Thumb up 9

  • styrex May 17, 2012 at 9:26 pm

    I think it would just be best if everyone was quiet for the next day. Slinging about prejuduces and speculation is kind of pointless. I feel pain for both families. Enough.

    Recommended Thumb up 41

    • oskarbaanks May 17, 2012 at 11:49 pm

      A-‘effin -men.

      Recommended Thumb up 3

  • Andrew N May 17, 2012 at 10:29 pm

    Regarding allocation of space on our streets and sidewalks, it is worth taking a look at Enrique Penalosa’s talk here in Portland earlier this week:

    What kind of city *do* we want to live in, anyways?

    Recommended Thumb up 5

  • Nola Wilken May 18, 2012 at 6:19 am

    What a terrible tragedy. But, if you look at several of these recent fatalities you’ll see that the cyclist was doing nothing wrong and was either stopped in a bike lane or box and/or proceeding through. Bike lanes and bike boxes may be part of the problem. They are not safe places to be. I would rather be a rude, aggressive and obnoxious cyclist than a dead one. Take the road whenever you are in a dangerous intersection. Ride wherever you need to ride to stay alive. More bike infrastructure and dedicated lanes will never be enough to protect cyclists from distracted drivers. Truck and bus drivers have major difficulties navigating in downtown areas so extreme caution is needed.

    Recommended Thumb up 5

    • peejay May 18, 2012 at 7:56 am

      I, and many other people here, think you are wrong that more infrastructure will never be enough. That’s been proven in many parts of the world, but with better infrastructure than we presently have — true separated facilities with different surface materials and/or grade levels. We will never get more people to ride their bikes if “extreme caution” is the requirement, and “rude, agressive and obnixious” is the only attitude to take.

      Cycling in this city should not be an extreme sport. It should be a routine behavior that you can do without any more care than you would take if you were walking. If the only way to safely bike in Portland is to take the preparations that skydivers take, we’ll be stuck with a tiny mode share forever.

      Recommended Thumb up 11

      • Nola Wilken May 18, 2012 at 9:32 am

        LIve in a fantasy world all you want, but the reality is that bike lanes and bike boxes benefit drivers far more than cyclists, and they create an illusion of safety that is absolutely false. New riders especially may be lulled into thinking that riding in a bike lane will protect you. Bike lanes were invented so that cars can speed past us as quickly as possible, and take no responsibility for their driving. Many studies have shown that drivers routinely drive closer to bikes in bike lanes, than to bikes on roads and streets where there are no bike lanes.

        We have a fast cycling commute in Portland, with many hazards to navigate. It is extremely intimidating to new riders, and by no means do I feel that riders must become extreme sports enthusiasts to take on bike commuting. But they must be aware of the hazards, many of which, I believe, are created by the so-called bike infrastructure we have here consisting of ridiculous bike lanes that go nowhere and end abruptly. What would help are solutions that don’t require multi millions of dollars building “infrastructure”. Where will that money come from and how many decades will you wait while riders get killed?

        Recommended Thumb up 7

        • peejay May 18, 2012 at 1:25 pm

          “…ridiculous bike lanes that go nowhere and end abruptly…” is a strawman argument. Nobody wants bad infrastructure. But what you are proposing is that we go back to the wide open world of vehicular cycling, which, as the overwhelming evidence demonstrates, puts us into sub 1% mode share. You may choose to ride that way –and I often do, by choice, as a fit and fairly fearless rider– but the vast majority of people will not consider cycling if that is how they must ride. Vehicular cycling is a smashing success for those people who are willing to do it, but an absolute failure for the remaining 99% of the population.

          Bad bike infrastructure and incomplete infrastructure is dangerous, but probably not nearly as much so as you suggest. For one thing, even bad bike lanes get more people on their bikes, and more bikes equal safer riding conditions. And incomplete networks are eventually completed (watch Jonathan’s animation from an earlier story), and inadequate facilities are eventually fixed as a result of pressure.

          Bikes are not cars. Not even close. Bike users should have as much access to the roads as car users, but just mixing them all together and hoping it works is criminally naive in the face of the overwhelming evidence that it isn’t working.

          Recommended Thumb up 4

        • matt picio May 19, 2012 at 1:29 pm

          Bike boxes are not the problem. Bike boxes work fine, and they *do* benefit cyclists. Bike boxes are only used when traffic is stopped at the light – and they put cyclists in front of all other traffic, where they are easily seen. There’s nothing inherently dangerous about them.

          Bike lanes, on the other hand, *are* dangerous in many respects. They place cyclists where they can’t be easily seen, they create a space where we are required to ride by state law, provide an illusion of safety, and in many intersections in Portland, they place cyclists to the right of right-turning traffic. That said, the illusion of safety gets more people on the road, which causes *actual* safety.

          This was a horrible event, and even one death is a terrible, tragic thing. But let’s put it into context – bicycling is still safer than driving in Portland, and the number of deaths on Portland roads in a given year is still lower than motor vehicle deaths. A lot of that is due to lower speeds – fatal injuries in cars tend to happen at freeway speeds, not so much the lower-speed crashes in town that take the lives of cyclists. Cycling already is pretty safe, but we’d like it even safer. The easiest way to make it safer is to have more cyclists out on the road, and bike lanes are part of that. So are sharrows, and cycle tracks, and all the rest of the tools in the toolbox.

          Recommended Thumb up 0

          • spare_wheel May 20, 2012 at 9:33 am

            “Bike boxes are only used when traffic is stopped at the light – and they put cyclists in front of all other traffic,”

            A cyclist can approach a bike box immediately before the light turns green. In this situation the bike box creates a false sense of security for the cyclist. I often avoid this risk by filtering into the box from the left (legality be damned).

            Recommended Thumb up 0

        • spare_wheel May 20, 2012 at 9:23 am

          Sharrows and shared lane signs save lives. 500 yard cycletracks, not so much.

          Recommended Thumb up 0

    • JAT in Seattle May 18, 2012 at 8:43 am

      I, and many other people here, agree with you that infrastructure can’t solve every potential conflict. Indeed is it possible to build infrastructure that allows every road user, be they large (but economically necessary) trucks or small (but environmentally responsible) bicycles to operate without regard to the presence and operating characteristics of any other user? I posit that it is not.

      Bike lanes and bike boxes encourage cyclists to pass more slowly moving traffic on the right, and that’s clearly not always safe. I don’t think taking the lane through an intersection where other vehicles may be turning is the paranoid equivalent of clipping on a chest mounted emergency chute, I think it’s the mentally engaged equivalent of looking both ways before stepping into a crosswalk.

      Recommended Thumb up 1

  • Barney May 18, 2012 at 8:37 am

    Taking the lane would almost certainly have prevented this collision from happening. It would have put the cyclist either in front of or behind the truck and not in the blind spot. As a motorcyclist I am hyper-aware of staying out of the blind spots of other motorists. I use those habits when riding my bicycle as well. I’m not blaming either party here, the cyclist was just using the provided infrastructure, as was the truck driver. We should all try to stay more aware of the hazards that exists on the roads of this city.

    Recommended Thumb up 10

    • Chris Tuttle May 18, 2012 at 9:21 am

      These right-hook “events” are always tricky. For me, instead of thinking about blame/fault, I always find myself thinking about the basic concept of bike lanes. For many drivers, it’s strange and counterintuitive to have a small bicycle lane to the right of the right-most car lane. For the first fifteen years of my driving career, I lived in places where I could safely turn right without ever having to consider the possibility of a vehicle to my right. I have no data to back this up, but I’m guessing that the large majority of US motorists live and drive in places without bike lanes. And then whey they come to visit us here in Portland….

      Recommended Thumb up 2

    • oskarbaanks May 18, 2012 at 9:49 am

      Barney is correct in his statement on taking the lane. I am a former competitive cyclist and motorcycle racer, as well. I am also the child of a retired Teamster truck driver with a nearly impeccable driving record. My father has never been at odds about sharing the road, he has so much compassion for victims of horrible collisions such as this. He has seen so many horrors that you cannot imagine. We have both agreed for over thirty years, that infrastructure, proper policing of streets, in hand with a greater emphasis on education in regards to safety by all users of the road is needed to curtail the ridiculous amounts of fatalities that happen. This is a horrible occurrence. I am sick to my stomach over this. What a beautiful person for our community to lose. I send my heartfelt love out to everyone involved.

      Recommended Thumb up 3

  • Mark May 18, 2012 at 8:56 am

    The thing that disappoints me the most is that we are required by law (ORS 814.420) to use bike lanes, even if we know they can be unsafe.

    Recommended Thumb up 9

    • A.K. May 18, 2012 at 9:10 am

      Has anyone been ticketed for for violating ORS 814.420?

      I frequently ride outside of designated bike facilities to improve my safety when I feel its necessary, and have not once had any any problem with police.

      That being said, condolences to both the family of the young women and to the truck drivers. What an awful day.

      Recommended Thumb up 1

    • Scott May 18, 2012 at 9:18 am

      That is a ticket I have received multiple times, and I beat it in court every single time.

      Recommended Thumb up 5

      • BURR May 18, 2012 at 1:25 pm

        you should not have to go to court to defend your decision to ride outside the bike lane because it is unsafe.

        Recommended Thumb up 2

    • captain haddock May 18, 2012 at 9:18 am

      I keep seeing people say the above, and I don’t understand why this impression exists. Yes the language does say that you need to use the lane/path, but it does not say you can only use the lane/path. for example see section #

      (3) A person is not in violation of the offense under this section if the person is able to safely move out of the bicycle lane or path for the purpose of:

      (e) Continuing straight at an intersection where the bicycle lane or path is to the right of a lane from which a motor vehicle must turn right.

      Recommended Thumb up 4

      • wsbob May 18, 2012 at 10:39 am

        Excellent point. Know the law and use it to your advantage. Upon reading 814.420 and its provisions carefully, it becomes clear that a big part of the reason the law exists is to officially legitimize reasons people traveling by bike would need to occupy the main travel lane.

        Recommended Thumb up 3

        • Alan 1.0 May 18, 2012 at 11:12 am

          I prefer to be granted widespread freedoms with narrowly enumerated exceptions, rather than vice-versa. I hope I’m not alone in that.

          Recommended Thumb up 3

        • are May 18, 2012 at 5:58 pm

          that is the reason the exceptions exist, bob, but you would not need the exceptions if the mandatory sidepath was not the general rule

          Recommended Thumb up 2

      • Alan 1.0 May 18, 2012 at 10:49 am

        SW Third and Madison doesn’t have a “vehicle must turn right” lane, so the criteria in exception 3(e) don’t seem to apply.

        Recommended Thumb up 5

        • wsbob May 19, 2012 at 1:03 am

          “SW Third and Madison doesn’t have a “vehicle must turn right” lane, so the criteria in exception 3(e) don’t seem to apply.” Alan 1.0

          I would say it certainly does apply, and does provide for people traveling on bikes to leave the bike lane and take a main travel lane of the street.

          814.420 3(e) says: “…Continuing straight at an intersection where the bicycle lane or path is to the right of a lane from which a motor vehicle must turn right. …”.

          Madison has two same direction main travel lanes. Motor vehicles intending to turn right at third must turn right from the right main travel lane, across the path of the bike lane which motor vehicles are prohibited by law from traveling in. The right main travel lane is, as the law says, “…a lane from which a motor vehicle must turn right.”.

          3(e) does not specify the provision applies only to “vehicle must turn right lane(s) “, in which road users are obliged to turn right rather than having the option of also continuing straight through the intersection.

          Read the law carefully and think about the various circumstances it provides for. I suppose the language of the law has the potential to throw people into confusion. Keep it simple: if conditions are making the bike lane hazardous to ride in: Don’t ride in the bike lane.

          Recommended Thumb up 0

          • matt picio May 19, 2012 at 1:44 pm

            3(e) most certainly does stipulate that. In any case, it really doesn’t matter how you or I interpret that provision, it matters how the Multnomah County Traffic Court judges interpret it, and how the Portland Police Bureau enforces (or doesn’t enforce) it.

            I think the important point is that safety trumps the law – you can be completely right and completely dead. Worry about your own safety first, even if it means violating ORS 814.420.

            Which doesn’t mean we shouldn’t work to repeal 814.420.

            Recommended Thumb up 1

    • wsbob May 18, 2012 at 10:47 am

      “The thing that disappoints me the most is that we are required by law (ORS 814.420) to use bike lanes, even if we know they can be unsafe.” Mark

      Not true. Read the full text of the law and you’ll see it includes provisions for a vast number of reasons people traveling by bike would have to legitimately leave the bike lane for the main travel lane.

      Recommended Thumb up 1

      • Alan 1.0 May 18, 2012 at 10:57 am

        So, what’s the big attraction to ORS 814.420? Is there really a problem that it addresses? Does it really make our society a better place? Or might things actually work just as well or better without it on the books?

        Recommended Thumb up 0

        • Jonathan Maus (Publisher/Editor) May 18, 2012 at 11:00 am

          From what I recall, it was put in place when bike lanes where first being installed. It was a compromise with auto-centric legislators… “OK, we’ll give you these bike lane things; but only if you stay in them and get out of our way.”

          Recommended Thumb up 3

        • wsbob May 18, 2012 at 5:44 pm

          maus, in a sarcastic manner, probably sums up some of the reason 814.420 exists. I think generally describing, as ‘car-centric’, people that either worked to write and pass the law, or for whom the law was written, is shallow, not very serious thinking and doesn’t consider practical reasons, which I’ve mentioned in previous comments, that the law likely exists.

          A rough figure of about ninety percent seems to correspond with various stats and studies that come along from time to time, estimating the number of people traveling the road either by driving or riding in a motor vehicle. Many of them likely have very little, or no idea about what reasons someone riding a bike would not be riding in the bike lane, or to the far right side of the road, when to reasons apparent to someone inside a car, both such places to ride on the road exist.

          So then, the law, is likely written in part for people traveling in motor vehicles, as much as it is for people traveling on bikes.

          I’ve posted comments before asking anybody that has a memory of how the law came about, to post some info on that, but this seems to be one of those things people don’t have much recollection of.

          As for this particular collision that occurred at SW 3rd and Madison, there has been nothing reported that would indicate that obligations of people that bike, written into 814.420, had anything to do at all with this collision.

          Recommended Thumb up 0

          • are May 18, 2012 at 6:01 pm

            the basic mandatory sidepath statute, without the exceptions, has been on the books for about forty years, which may explain why no one remembers much about the supposed reasons for it. in its original form, it was copied from similar traffic statutes from other states.

            Recommended Thumb up 1

      • El Biciclero May 18, 2012 at 2:49 pm

        But it is true. As Scott attests, tickets are issued for this “offense”, even though they are later dismissed in court, which as also noted above, should not be necessary. If a citation is dismissed by a judge, I have to assume the judge agrees that there was a legitimate reason for the citation recipient to operate outside a bike lane, yet the citation was still issued. That tells me that the exceptions, as generous as one might think they are, are open to a wide range of interpretation that results in cyclists getting tickets for legal things. All that does is clog up traffic court with bogus cases. The only stipulation we need to make regarding bike lanes is that drivers of motor vehicles may not drive in them. Get rid of 814.420 and watch much of the opposition to crappy infrastructure evaporate with the knowledge that we won’t be imprisoned by it.

        Recommended Thumb up 3

        • wsbob May 18, 2012 at 7:20 pm

          In his comment to this particular thread, Scott is the first person claiming to have received citations for violations detailed in 814.420, despite questions about this Oregon law having been raised in other bikeportland stories over the last couple weeks. The impression left is that very, very few people receive citations for violations of this law.

          Also, he didn’t include in his comment, any details about the circumstances under which those citations were issued, or why the judge found justification to dismiss them. Having some of that information would help everyone understand why the citations were issued, and why they were dismissed.

          People that ride bikes on the road are not imprisoned by 814.420. Repeatedly and incorrectly stating this law does imprison people doesn’t make the falsehood true except for people that are too scared or lazy to read, think about, and learn for themselves what the law says. This link leads to one of numerous websites that has the scoop on 814.420:

          Recommended Thumb up 0

          • matt picio May 19, 2012 at 1:53 pm

            Some people *are* imprisoned by 814.420, because despite the impression of many, there are a lot of law-abiding cyclists – and many of them will obey that law because they obey the laws regarding cyclists in general. Some aren’t aware of the exceptions. There’s very little training out there for cyclists, and few take advantage of what does exist.

            Recommended Thumb up 1

          • El Biciclero May 19, 2012 at 3:18 pm

            The story linked to does not provide any insight into ORS 814.420 or a cyclist’s responsibility to use or not use a bike lane. When speaking of being “imprisoned” I intentionally used the term “bike infrastructure” rather than “bike lane”, because bike lanes are actually the least confining type of “amenity” (heh) we commonly see.

            However, I see a rising tide of support for “separated” infrastructure that makes use of grade separation or other physical barriers that would truly confine a cyclist to a narrow gauntlet, often filled with obstacles–especially if it is designated as a MUP, as 98% of “bike paths” in the region are–outside the normal field of vision of drivers. To me, this kind of infrastructure is an impediment to cycling for transportation, and doesn’t really offer any real safety benefit. Yet if substandard, off-street MUPs are built in lieu of bike lanes, more and more we will see cyclists expected (and legally bound) to use such off-street facilities regardless of how usable they actually are. Because I would be legally bound to use any crummy cycle-gauntlet transportation geniuses can throw down, I will continue to be against them. Design them in such a way as to actually be useful AND safe (extremely hard/expensive to do, and therefore never done), and you won’t have to force me to use them.

            Also, if the exceptions to 814.420 essentially make it optional, as you seem to continually suggest, why have it? Reminds me of a short conversation I had with an old girlfriend:

            her: “I hate mushrooms.”
            me: “Why? They don’t really taste like anything.”
            her: “Then why have them?”

            Recommended Thumb up 1

            • wsbob May 19, 2012 at 8:06 pm

              “…Also, if the exceptions to 814.420 essentially make it optional, as you seem to continually suggest, why have it? …” El Biciclero

              In earlier comments, in fact…in one just above a bit, I’ve offered possible reasons why the law exists, and reasons for the law to exist. 814.420 covers a wide range of legitimate reasons that people traveling by bike would need to travel outside of bike lanes or paths where provided.

              The cited reasons become well known to people having acquired experience traveling by bike on the road, but people lacking such experience might very well not have any idea about circumstances in which it’s legal to use the part of the road safest and most suitable for travel by bike. Among others, the law spells this out fairly clearly for them.

              Though, as Matt Picio notes above, many people that travel by bike wouldn’t probably have read 814.420 to know what the exceptions are. I think that’s an education and an information problem. By some means, people intending to travel by bike in traffic need to be brought to a better familiarity with laws relating to travel by bike.

              People traveling by bike, having some obligation to use bike lanes and paths when possible is somewhat of a concession in exchange for use of roads that often have posted speed limits far above the speed people on bikes can travel. I suppose this is one of the touchier issues associated with different modes of traffic commonly using the same roads.

              Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Peter W May 18, 2012 at 9:06 am

    Are trucks that large allowed to (or even able to) drive in dense urban areas in Europe?

    Anyone know what kind of freight that particular truck was carrying? (Just curious.)

    Recommended Thumb up 1

    • A.K. May 18, 2012 at 9:16 am

      Often the streets are much to small for large trucks in Europe (and Japan, and elsewhere). Smaller “sprinter” vans are typically used for “last mile” deliveries.

      Recommended Thumb up 2

    • jeff May 18, 2012 at 9:19 am

      what is “Europe” to you? Its not the homogeneous place it appears you think it is. I saw trucks all over Amsterdam and Barcelona last year, as well as every major city in Switzerland.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

      • Chris I May 18, 2012 at 9:32 am

        “In Amsterdam, large trucks over 7.5 tons are not allowed to pass specific arterial roads unless they conform to three conditions: vehicle length of less than 9 meters, load factor greater than 80% and engine conformity to Euro II standard (MOC, 2000)”

        source: http://www.easts.info/on-line/journal_06/2947.pdf

        Sounds like a great policy to me.

        Recommended Thumb up 1

    • Paul May 18, 2012 at 9:32 am

      Depends on the area. The large cities I’ve lived in Europe could not accommodate large trucks in the center and are not allowed. They pull into distribution centers on the edge of town and smaller trucks and vans deliver from there. Amsterdam is testing out cargo trams in the city center, similar to the trams that deliver parts to the VW factory in Dresden.

      Recommended Thumb up 1

      • Peter May 18, 2012 at 10:25 pm

        Utrecht also has a system of managing deliveries outside the urban core. Large loads are subdivided in centers outside of the core. Then the loads are packaged according to the part of town and delivered by van. I believe they also are exploring or have implemented a tram delivery service. They also do some deliveries and city center waste removal by canal boat.

        I also think, although I’m not positive that heavy trucks are not allowed during regular business hours. Although it isn’t in Europe, I know that was the case in Dhaka B’desh when I was there.

        Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Joe May 18, 2012 at 9:08 am

    loss for words at this point. so sad for all!

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Dan May 18, 2012 at 9:29 am

    Instead of car-free downtown, what about a network of streets in downtown that would be car-free (like, every 5 blocks or so)? That would improve things.

    Recommended Thumb up 4

  • Larry Mastin May 18, 2012 at 9:37 am

    This tragic accident highlights a critical problem with 18-wheelers and right-hand turns. My closest call in the past 10 years was in a similar situation: riding in a bike lane on Padden Expwy (Vancouver) eastbound through a green light at 136th Ave. I thought it was safe because no cars were in the right-turn lane. But an 18-wheeler swinging wide in the left lane turned right into my path. I stopped just barely in front of the right-turning truck, but would have been driven under the chest-high flatbed and crushed anyway as the rear wheels cutting the corner would have rolled over me. Fortunately the driver was looking in his right-side view mirror while turning and stopped before this happened. In this case, “taking the lane”, as Barney suggested, may not have solved the problem since the truck was in the left lane, though it may have made me more visible.
    The two problems: (1) large trucks swing wide to make turns, catching cyclists unaware if they are only checking for right-turning cars; and (2) the rear wheels of large trucks can cut corners and push cyclists under their flatbeds.
    Can a solution to this problem be engineered? It’s a challenge. A possible solution may be to require downward-pointing IR sensors ahead of the right rear wheels of flatbed trucks that sense objects being trapped when making right-hand turns. Others may have better ideas.

    Recommended Thumb up 1

    • Opus the Poet May 19, 2012 at 4:14 pm

      Actually there is a simple method to prevent pedestrians, cyclists and small cars (happens frequently in Europe) from getting crushed by the rear wheels of trailers and large box vans. It’s mandatory in most EU coountries and consists of a tube frame covered in light sheet metal. This has the double effect of streamlining those big wheels and pays for itself in about 5 years through fuel savings. From there on out you get the added safety at no cost because of the fuel savings.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Lindsay May 18, 2012 at 9:41 am

    I’m still pondering the usage of the word “accident”. For me, it’s highlighting the difference between a willful action versus an unintentional outcome. If I ride my bike into a utility pole, it may have been avoidable if I had been paying better attention, but I’d still call it an accident.
    Recommended 11

    That is how I read it too- for me an accident implies lack of intent. I think 100% of accidents are avoidable, but we are after all human not robotic. Knowing we are human means we shouldn’t villianize parties involved in accidents, but rather try to eliminate them by the clever use of infrastructure and re-routing, signs, car-free areas and even bike free zones! As a car-free mum on a bike I have mentally declared some areas bike-free for me, I can re-route rather than risk it.

    Recommended Thumb up 1

  • Roger Averbeck May 18, 2012 at 9:53 am

    On Thursday May 17 between 4 – 4:30 pm, an informal count of vehicles turning right from Madison on to SW 3rd was 11, as compared to dozens if not 100’s continuing straight / east toward the Hawthorne Bridge. Eliminate right turns at this intersection?

    Recommended Thumb up 4

  • GlowBoy May 18, 2012 at 10:19 am

    If they’re trying to turn right on 3rd, it’s because they need to go south. After 3rd Avenue, 1st Avenue is the only other opportunity to do that. Banning right turns onto 3rd will just push the problem further down to 1st/Madison, which thanks to the bus stop is an even bigger mess than 3rd/Madison.

    What I’d like to see is some enforcement at that corner, ticketing drivers who stop in the bike box, turn right on red or fail to yield to bikes in the lane (and for every right-hook collision there are 100 close calls). Normally I wouldn’t think it likely that they’d actually do that, but this week’s death may get them to focus on this problem spot.

    Recommended Thumb up 4

  • R3d May 18, 2012 at 10:36 am

    Too scary to bike downtown. Never gonna do it, not even once. SE 34th street is terrifying enough.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • David Feldman May 18, 2012 at 10:59 am

    Will someone please explain the logic–or absence therof–in wearing earth=toned helmets and quiet-colored street clothes while cycling in the city? Drivers are stupid, drivers are blind–if you value your life, wear neon!

    Recommended Thumb up 4

    • 9watts May 18, 2012 at 11:04 am

      Although the Bike Gallery agrees with you, not everyone thinks it is the responsibility of the person on a bike or walking to be lit up like a reflector, especially during the daytime. The risk as you can probably appreciate is that this soon turns into a ‘she wasn’t wearing neon colors, I couldn’t see her.’

      Recommended Thumb up 6

    • Schrauf May 18, 2012 at 12:06 pm

      And getting from point A to point B should not require special gear, generally, not if we want bike transportation to be mainstream.

      Further, the safer we all are, when more bikes are on the road, because drivers are more aware to watch for them. Some people have not tried biking simply because they do not want to buy special gear, or they don’t want to look like a clown wearing neon, and they see many people doing both these things, and think it is practically required, unfortunately.

      Recommended Thumb up 5

      • spare_wheel May 20, 2012 at 9:46 am

        if only more people rode *slowly* in high heels, woolen knickers, and tweed beanies cycling mode share would surely rocket up into the steam punk stratosphere!!!!!11!!!

        Recommended Thumb up 2

    • A.K. May 18, 2012 at 12:11 pm

      Have there been any studies done on bright colors really helping, or is it perception? I have kits that are mostly black with orange/white accents, as well as several jerseys that are brighter colors such as red, light blue, and white. I have not noticed a difference between being spotted by drivers while wearing a dark kit vs. bright kit.

      Also, my helmet is white which may help, and my arms/legs are VERY white. :)

      Recommended Thumb up 1

    • Machu Picchu May 18, 2012 at 12:53 pm

      It’s the same logic as an F150 painted charcoal grey: You’re supposed to make sure you don’t hit it when you’re driving. There are lots of moving hazards out there in camo, and not just the humans that don’t light up for the convenience of the operators of hurling machinery.

      Recommended Thumb up 2

    • Scott May 18, 2012 at 12:57 pm

      The lady killed on Interstate by a cement truck a few years back was wearing all blaze neon green. Wear what you want. Don’t become complacent. Don’t feel a false sense of security.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

      • matt picio May 19, 2012 at 2:02 pm

        You might be mixing up two different incidents. The woman struck on Interstate (Siobhan Doyle) survived, the man struck on Interstate (Brett Jarolimek) two weeks prior was the one killed by a collision (right hook) by a truck.

        Recommended Thumb up 0

    • dan May 18, 2012 at 1:46 pm

      Yep, it’s an odds game, and I think bright clothes and wearing a helmet improve your odds of not getting hit, or sustaining brain injury if you are hit. I would certainly prefer a downtown where infrastructure is such that it’s not possible for cars to hit bikes, but given that pedestrians _on the sidewalk_ were hit by a cab this year (or maybe last year?), I think that attaining that point of perfection is almost impossible.

      Recommended Thumb up 1

      • KYouell May 20, 2012 at 1:28 pm

        I was thinking of that incident (with the taxi and the pedestrians) as we rode down to the vigil Friday night. It all an illusion of safety. We wear our helmets every time, but does that just signal to drivers that I’m protected and it’s ok to drive unsafely around me? I wonder. If I had my kids in a car and buckled into car seats without helmets would they be safer if another driver plowed into us? We’d be going faster down highways sometimes (which we never are in our bike) so would the overall odds of injury be higher? I think so. We are always at the mercy of the others on the road to be careful and safe around us so that we can stay safe. While I use our lights day and night, wear a helmet, stop at stop signs & lights, signal, etc. I’m still trusting the operators of other vehicles to respect those lights & signals.

        All I really can do is the same thing I would do driving a car: be aware & don’t use excessive speed. My driving instructor way-back-when told us it’s better to get somewhere late than not get there at all. I still operate my bike using that philosophy.

        Recommended Thumb up 0

    • Nathan May 18, 2012 at 1:59 pm

      Wearing a neon helmet hasn’t stopped me from being clipped by a mirror, nearly right-hooked dozens of times, or forced up a curb. Sorry. Fashion logic need not apply where people are only looking for car-sized obstacles.

      I had a coworker nearly rear-end me in the parking lot, then laughingly joke about how he didn’t see me despite the helmet. Needless to say, I didn’t laugh along.

      Recommended Thumb up 2

      • dan May 18, 2012 at 2:49 pm

        Heh, then why bother with a neon helmet? Or, think of how much worse it would have been without a neon helmet! Like I said, it’s an odds game, and I’m open to whatever might improve the odds for me. Maybe you just need more neon ;-)

        Being clipped by a mirror is bad luck/poor driving by the motorist for sure, along with getting forced up on a curb, but almost getting right-hooked only happens when you allow yourself to be in a vulnerable position. I’m not absolving the motorist of responsibility for watching the bike lane, but it is possible to ride a bike in such a fashion that you’re never (or rarely) in a position to get right hooked.

        Recommended Thumb up 0

        • Nathan May 18, 2012 at 3:46 pm

          Neon helmet is already paid for, so -shrugs-. It still satisfies my “don’t scuff head on pavement” concern.

          As for riding, I agree with you. I always get on the brakes when a car rides “too slowly” next me near an intersection and pull behind them (bike lane agnostic). I also take the lane instead of cruising past a line of cars on the right. There are lots of tricks, but still some stuff happens. Ever-vigilance is sadly necessary.

          Recommended Thumb up 2

          • dan May 18, 2012 at 4:29 pm

            “I always get on the brakes when a car rides “too slowly” next me near an intersection and pull behind them (bike lane agnostic).”

            Yes! I get very uncomfortable when a car is driving “too slowly” ahead of or next to me near an intersection or parking lot. I call it my Spidey sense — you can almost always tell when someone’s about to be an idiot, regardless of whether they have their turn signal on (they rarely do).

            Recommended Thumb up 0

            • matt picio May 19, 2012 at 2:05 pm

              Seriously. I always become hyper-aware whenever anyone behaves unpredictably. And when a driver in a car does not follow the law, I will frequently stop and refuse to move until they figure out what they intend to do and clear the intersection/roadway. Even if they yell at me.

              Once I can’t predict what you are going to do, you are unsafe. I need my life more than I need your approval or understanding.

              “Are you worried about your own skin?”
              “Yes. It covers my body.”
              – Sean Bean and Dustin Hoffman, “Ronin”

              Recommended Thumb up 2

  • Machu Picchu May 18, 2012 at 12:38 pm

    My own research into the definition of “accident”, shows as many examples of lack of intention as it does lack of cause, in an: Either/Or sense. I’m all for precise communication, but we have to work within the limitations and ambiguity of the language.

    Recommended Thumb up 2

  • BicycleDave May 18, 2012 at 11:31 pm

    After starting a new job in the Pearl I made my way home a few times down Madison through this very intersection until about the 4th time when I narrowly avoided a right-hook collision of my own with an SUV. Since then I take Stark to 3rd and 3rd to Madison to get to the Hawthorne bridge. I doubt I’ll ever cross 3rd via Madison again.
    My condolences.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

    • oskarbaanks May 19, 2012 at 8:57 am

      Leaving the silent gathering for Kathryn last night, while in the bike lane my friend and I proceeded on the green light, only to have a BMW owner ( who HAD to of seen the hundreds of people all holding the signs and standing in memoriam along the sidewalk) cut us off in the MIDDLE of 3rd and Madison, no blinker, no nuthin’… I had to laugh to myself at the irony of this (perceived) disrespectful move.

      stay safe out there everyone.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

- Daily bike news since 2005 -
BikePortland.org is a production of
PedalTown Media Inc.
321 SW 4th Ave, Ste. 401
Portland, OR 97204

Powered by WordPress. Theme by Clemens Orth.
Subscribe to RSS feed

Original images and content owned by Pedaltown Media, Inc. - Not to be used without permission.


Content-Type: application/http; msgtype=response

WARC-Type: response

text:
pinit fg en rect gray 20   2012 GT Sanction 1.0 Mountain Bike

2012 gt sanction 1 0 mountain bike   2012 GT Sanction 1.0 Mountain Bike

One of the top mountain bikes released for 2012 is the new Sanction 1.0 from GT Bicycles. Packed with trail-friendly features, this mountain bike is equipped with a 2×10 Shimano drivetrain, Funn handlebars, and DT Swiss wheels.

Built from an all-new 6061 monocoque frame, the Sanction 1.0 comes with 6.0 inches of rear wheel travel as well as a new forged I-link. Its Fox 160mm Float fork up front offers excellent travel and reliable stiffness to tackle even the most challenging parts of the trail.

Climbing and descending are both hassle-free with the 2012 GT Sanction 1.0 Mountain Bike, thanks to its 150mm of I-Drive/Fox travel in the rear, which is perfectly matched with DH and pedal-friendly geometry.

warcinfo:
robots: classic
hostname: ip-10-236-191-2.ec2.internal
software: Nutch 1.6 (CC)/CC WarcExport 1.0
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2015-32
operator: CommonCrawl Admin
description: Wide crawl of the web for August 2015
publisher: CommonCrawl
format: WARC File Format 1.0
conformsTo: http://bibnum.bnf.fr/WARC/WARC_ISO_28500_version1_latestdraft.pdf


WARC-Truncated: length

text:
Wednesday, March 28, 2012

Earl Scruggs, R. I. P.

Earl Scruggs, bluegrass legend, dies – Country Music Hall of Famer Earl Scruggs, a singular talent of collective import, died Wednesday morning at a Nashville hospital. He was 88.

But Scruggs' legacy is in no way limited to or defined by bluegrass, a genre that he and partner Lester Flatt dominated as Flatt and Scruggs in the 1950s and '60s: His adaptability and open-minded approach to musicality and to collaboration made him a bridge between genres and generations.

Hat tip to Seepy Benton.

Todd Mason said...

Damn. Well, at least there's the band Uncle Earl, among so many others, to keep up his legacy and work out further innovation.

Not looking forward to losing, say, Doc Watson nor Pete Seeger, and I suspect they're not looking forward to us losing them, either.

Bud said...

A Master musician if there ever was one!

Anonymous said...

What a sad day. Todd said it all.

Unknown said...

Earl Scruggs And Lester Flatt - Cripple Creek


text:
Stemming the Frozen Controversy

All of this PC quibbling about the design of Frozen’s Anna and Elsa is absurd before the movie’s release on Nov. 27. But I’ll chime in: They are not Rapunzel clones and are not preoccupied with being pretty.

Certainly Anna and Elsa are pretty and were technically more difficult to animate as siblings, which Disney animation head Lino DiSalvo explained last week, and has been taken out of context as a condescending statement about gender inequality:

“And historically speaking, animating female characters are really, really difficult, ’cause they have to go through these range of emotions, but… you have to keep them pretty and… you can get them off a model very quickly.  So, having a film with two hero female characters was really tough, and having them both in the scene and look very different if they’re echoing the same expression; that Elsa looking angry looks different from Anna being angry.”

And here’s the response from Disney: ”Animation is an intricate and complex art form. These comments were recklessly taken out of context. As part of a roundtable discussion, the animator was describing some technical aspects of CG animation and not making a general comment on animating females versus males or other characters.”

But Frozen is actually a more progressive feminist approach to the princess fairy tale about the conflict between two sisters built around love vs. fear. It’s a lot fresher than pursuing traditional romantic love  (co-directed, incidentally, by the studio’s first female, Jennifer Lee, while Anna was supervised by Rebecca Wilson Bresee).

And the performances are much more nuanced and emotionally complex than ever before in the Disney canon. There’s a “cohesiveness and continuity,” thanks to the new “truth in acting” approach instituted by DiSalvo, and, of course, the animation itself, which is superior to Tangled’s. He brought in acting coach Warner Loughlin very early on to help them discover the emotional truth of every character, conducting detailed exercises in technique, singing, and especially breathing, given the frozen environment.

As for the design, the Glen Keane influence is definitely present, as is the emphasis of hand-drawn warmth and expressiveness that he brought to CG. His look has obviously become iconic at Disney and is being taken to the next level.

But look at the different personalities exhibited in the two model sheets and Anna’s funny face in the above still. It’s all about exploring a more realistic range of expressions.

But the real issue should be: Does Frozen advance the role of female characters in animation through craft and storytelling? Let’s continue that conversation after the movie opens.

Posted on by Bill Desowitz in 3-D, Animation, Tech, Trailers, VFX, Virtual Production

Add a Comment


text:
View Full Version : Nothing Like a great Rack!!

04-30-2002, 08:12 PM
Its clear this community, well...loathes anything sardo, which I wholly agreee with. However, I am tired of the plastic rack where I play a lot of the time, and my wood rack for my table is mediocre at best. Where can I go for the best rack?

What about the Porper rack, the guy can make the best cases, but can he sell a rack?

Big Al

04-30-2002, 09:02 PM
Get the Hercules rack from Triangle Billiards in Calif.

05-01-2002, 05:50 AM
Good morning:

A good rack is important however, the condition of the table and the "spot" itself will dictate the quality of the rack. Yesterday, while practicing, I experienced a table that was so beat up in the rack area that a tight rack was almost impossible unless I racked with the 1 ball in front of the foot spot.

Dr. D.


text:
Monday, December 21, 2009

When the Going Gets Rough (leg)

Monday, December 21, 2009

On our late November birding trip to The Wilds, the birding started out very slowly. Normally as we drive the roads around the property we spook up flocks of horned larks, Savannah sparrows, American tree sparrows, and dark-eyed juncos. Not on this reasonably mild winter day. It was Deadsville, dude.

So we did what any bunch of bored birders would do, we started scanning to see if we could spot anything interesting. I've already recounted our observations of the local white-tailed deer, plus the captive endangered species at The Wilds. A few red-tailed hawks, a flashy male American kestrel, and a distant male northern harrier were nice, but I was hoping for something a bit rougher. And there it was: a rough-legged hawk.

It was a distant bird, but even before I got the scope on it, I had a hunch it was a rough-legged because of where it was perched. It was in the top of a small tree along a fence line. It would be unusual to find a redtail perching in such a small tree. But for the comparatively tiny-footed rough-legged hawk, the thin branches of the small pine were perfect. Rough-leggeds have small feet for grabbing smaller prey such as rodents.

On the Arctic tundra where these birds breed, lemmings are a main prey item. Here at The Wilds, it's probably meadow voles. The red-taileds with their larger feet are seeking rabbits in the meadows and squirrels along the woodland edges. And when they perch, they are perching on larger, sturdier branches.

Around the back side of The Wilds we pulled up to an overlook and quickly spotted another roughleg hovering over a hillside. We jumped out of the van and took up positions in a grassy ditch to take some photographs. The hawk obliged us by flying over. I'm still not great at getting good shots of flying birds, but this bird was large enough that I couldn't strike out completely.
Here are a few of the images from that fly over.

The bold black-and-white wing pattern of a rough-legged hawk in flight.

Long, wide wings with black carpal patches. A black belly band.

The white tail with a broad black band shows well in this photo.

It was very cool to see this second rough-leg. And this sighting seemed to open up the birding action a bit. Soon we were scoping rafts of buffleheads and mallards, gadwall and scaup. We never did see a single lark, though, which seemed weird. Maybe the more recent snows have brought them down from up north.

Soon enough it was time to suit up and bug out. We let the sun say its fare-thee-well and then we did likewise.

On December 21, 2009 at 3:18 PM Mary said...

Oh, I think your shots of flying birds are good. Much better than mine that look like a gray smudge on sky blue.

On December 22, 2009 at 9:37 AM DaveABirding said...

Great tip on the different perch liklihood between Red-tails and Roughies, I'll keep that one in mind.

On December 22, 2009 at 6:25 PM Corey Husic said...

Wish the Rough-legs would show in PA this year... Great post.


text:
The Virgins and the Bridegroom

By Ray Hollenbach   •   March 6, 2009   •   Topics:

Christians of every generation have been interested in the return of Jesus Christ to the earth. And no surprise: the second coming of Christ has been the hope of the church in every age.

Jesus Himself instructed us to “keep awake” and be aware of the signs of the times:

At that time the kingdom of heaven will be like ten virgins who took their lamps and went out to meet the bridegroom. Five of them were foolish and five were wise. The foolish ones took their lamps but did not take any oil with them. The wise, however, took oil in jars along with their lamps. The bridegroom was a long time in coming, and they all became drowsy and fell asleep.

At midnight the cry rang out: “Here’s the bridegroom! Come out to meet him!”

Then all the virgins woke up and trimmed their lamps. The foolish ones said to the wise, “Give us some of your oil; our lamps are going out.”

‘No,’ they replied, ‘there may not be enough for both us and you. Instead, go to those who sell oil and buy some for yourselves.’

But while they were on their way to buy the oil, the bridegroom arrived. The virgins who were ready went in with him to the wedding banquet. And the door was shut.

Later the others also came. ‘Sir! Sir!’ they said. ‘Open the door for us!’

But he replied, ‘I tell you the truth, I don’t know you.’

Therefore keep watch, because you do not know the day or the hour. – Matthew 25: 1-13

In this parable Jesus gives his disciples the assurance of his return and provides instructions for how they should order their lives in light of the promise of his coming. His message was not only for them; it is for us as well. What can we learn from the Lord’s story?

From the very opening words of the parable we can discover something about the community of faith: we wait together for his return. His coming will certainly involve personal accountability as Jesus returns to judge each person, but until he arrives we are called to remain in community.

It is a fact demonstrated in every century and every culture: Christians flourish in community and wither when they attempt the Christian life on their own. We have a duty to await the bridegroom together.

The young women in this story also carry lanterns. It is a beautiful image of those pure in their faith, filled with expectancy, acting in obedience to the Lord’s command to be the light of the world. Jesus said, “While I am in the world, I am the light of the world” (John 9:5). But he also said to his followers, “You are the light of the world” (Matt. 5:14).

In his absence he wants us to carry God’s light. In a world darkened by sin we are the evidence that a new day is coming. For some people trapped in the darkness of depression or disobedience, we may be the only light they see. And the light we carry is not our own, it comes from the Spirit he has given us.

Jesus spoke of the oil that enabled the lamps to burn. Throughout the Scripture oil is one of the symbols of the Holy Spirit. Jesus promised that He would not leave us alone. While He is away he provides his Holy Spirit to comfort and empower his disciples.

In this parable it is the oil that gives the lanterns their light, and the virgins must trim the lamps. This speaks of our devotion and fervor. We have a responsibility to trim our lamps. No one can do it for us. We alone must be sure that we steward the precious resource of his presence in the Person of the Holy Spirit. The Apostle Paul reminded us that we are the Temple of the Holy Spirit, and instructed those who waited for the Lord’s return, “do not to put out the Spirit’s fire.”

This passage also reminds us that things may take a little longer than we might expect. The bridegroom was a long time coming. He was delayed so long that both the wise and the foolish both fell asleep, but we are still commanded to be ready for his return at any moment.

Ultimately, only the Father knows the day and the hour of the Son’s return. While we recognize along with the Psalmist that our times are in his hands, we also need to recognize that the End Times are most definitely in his hands.

Much has been made of the end of Jesus’ parable. When word finally comes that his return is at hand, the foolish virgins must leave to find more oil, and they eventually find themselves on the outside looking in.

This verse can be the source of argument and division or we can take from it one sure lesson: instead of fearing the words, “I don’t know you,” we can prepare now for the assurance that the door to the feast will be open to us.

Have we made Jesus both Savior and Lord of our lives? Do we guard the gift of the Spirit given to us? Do we look eagerly to the day of his coming?

The end of this parable is the beginning of the wedding feast. And Christ Himself has made a way for all to come and dine. The second coming is really the beginning: the beginning of the marriage supper of the Lamb. Will you be ready?

Ray Hollenbach, a native of Chicago, has been the pastor of Vineyard Campbellsville (KY) for eleven years. His desire is to see the Kingdom of God advance in Campbellsville and beyond, as well as to see the next generation of leaders raised up and released into ministry.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published but you will receive our next BGEA ministry update. You can opt out of future emails at any time.


text:
Alpert Medical School

site search
  schedule | services | published articles | directions | contact us | home

Orthopaedic Research at Rhode Island Hospital

The Orthopaedic Research Labs at Rhode Island Hospital exist to expand the basic science of orthopaedics, improve understanding of orthopaedic diseases, and evaluate new methods of treatment for orthopaedic injuries and illnesses.

Research projects are generated from the interests of the research staff, orthopaedic physicians, and residents. Research topics range from collagen breakdown products to joint kinematics to new biomimetic surfaces for implants. Combined, the Orthopaedic Research Labs at Rhode Island Hospital possess a substantial amount in total grants and contracts.

afiliated hospitals | brown alpert medical school | brown university | related sites | contact us | home


text:
[Bioperl-l] getting database info from the blast report

Brian Osborne brian_osborne at cognia.com
Thu Feb 10 09:22:57 EST 2005

It's not clear what database information you're looking for. And when you
say "separate page", do you mean Web page? For a reasonably complete list of
the methods available to you, including ones that return database details,
please see the SearchIO HOWTO (http://bioperl.org/HOWTOs).

Brian O.

-----Original Message-----
From: bioperl-l-bounces at portal.open-bio.org
[mailto:bioperl-l-bounces at portal.open-bio.org]On Behalf Of Jun Zhao
Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2005 5:39 AM
To: bioperl-l at bioperl.org
Subject: [Bioperl-l] getting database info from the blast report

Does anybody know, in the blastn report, how to get the information
about the database which each hit result is queried from? I am parsing
the NCBIBlastn report.

For who are familiar with that blast report, the detailed information
about the DBSource is stored in a separate page from the blast report.
Is there any tool from BioPerl could access that information?

Thank you very much for any help!

Best regards,

Bioperl-l mailing list
Bioperl-l at portal.open-bio.org

More information about the Bioperl-l mailing list


text:
[Bioperl-l] Sequence Character Visualization

shafeeq rim hsa_rim at yahoo.co.in
Tue Feb 17 04:30:43 EST 2009

Hi guys,

I want to just visualize a sequence in horizontal manner reading from a genome fasta file / genbank file as per the given genomic location..

Suppose I want to visualize a sequence string from 1000 - 1100 nucleotides in horizontal string like manner in terms of an image.
Is there any such tool or library that can do it for me... I am not looking for alignments but just linear visualization.

      Add more friends to your messenger and enjoy! Go to http://messenger.yahoo.com/invite/

More information about the Bioperl-l mailing list


text:
Birds of Britain
  The Monthly Web Magazine for Birdwatchers
Home Guide to British Birds Birdwatching feature articles Birding news and events Bird Reserves Birdwatching Clubs Mystery Bird Quiz Accommodation for birdwatchers Birdwatching FAQ's Bird Shop
Where to stay when birding
When visiting reserves, or just away birding, please see our accommodation section featuring accommodation near bird sites around the country, and a number abroad - click link above.

Cley reserve, Norfolk

Bird and Nature Reserves

County by County Guide to Britains Bird Reserves

Choose a county from this drop-down list and click go!


text:
birmingham, al free classifieds > Birmingham adult entertainment > Birmingham escorts

Posted: Monday, November 11, 2013 12:34 PM

Hot & ready to play available for outcall only 24/7 call for appt 334_333_6588 I promise u will come back so come play with me

Poster's age: 29

• Location: Dothan

• Post ID: 9042241 birmingham is an interactive computer service that enables access by multiple users and should not be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider. © 2015


text:
Lebron James & Maverick Carter Play “Race” Card In Response To Critics of The Decision | Robert Littal Presents BlackSportsOnline

Lebron James & Maverick Carter Play “Race” Card In Response To Critics of The Decision

by Robert Littal | Posted on Wednesday, September 29th, 2010
Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookEmail this to someoneShare on RedditShare on Google+

You might find this hard to believe, but I am black.

This may shock Lebron and Maverick Carter, but I have been critical of Lebron not for going to Heat, but for some of the decisions leading up to his choice.

Amazingly I am not a critic of Lebron because he is black, but because sometimes he acts like the biggest baby on the planet from time to time.

Futhermore the majority of Lebron’s harshest critics are black, so unless I missed something and they have joined the tea party that is a just a pathetic attempt for sympathy.

There is not a more catered athlete on the planet by the media than Lebron James (Brett Favre begs to differ).  Even though he has zero rings, he has grown men calling him “King”. He had so much pull with the Cavs he was the De Facto coach and his posse were one of the most influential gang in Cleveland.

It is so easy for African-Americans when they are criticize to throw out the race card, but it is a slap in the face of real people who have to deal with true racism on a daily basis.  The media didn’t get on Lebron James because he is black, it is because he is “moist”.

It is because he walks around talking about having a “list” like a 12 year old who is going to tell the teacher who made fun of his Mach 5 Speed Racer receding hairline.

To go on CNN and with a straight face and throw out the race card to deflect attention from his bad decisions, just reinforces why Lebron was always destine to be a #2, but real Kings take responsibility for their own actions, not pass blame by going Jesse Jackson when it is convenient.

About the Author

Founder & Editor and Chief of BlackSportsOnline The Ohio State University Alum & Dollarnaire for Life

Powered by

BSO Privacy Policy


text:
Video: Floyd Mayweather Half Billion Dollar Man | Robert Littal Presents BlackSportsOnline

Floyd Mayweather Says He’s The “Half Billion Dollar Man” (Video)

by Robert Littal | Posted on Saturday, August 31st, 2013
Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookEmail this to someoneShare on RedditShare on Google+

Floyd Mayweather Billion

Floyd drops a video to get you hyped for his fight with Canelo Alvarez.

About the Author

Founder & Editor and Chief of BlackSportsOnline The Ohio State University Alum & Dollarnaire for Life

Powered by

BSO Privacy Policy


text:
WWE: The End of Tonight's RAW Felt Like WCW Monday Nitro, and I Liked It

Use your ← → (arrow) keys to browse more stories
WWE: The End of Tonight's RAW Felt Like WCW Monday Nitro, and I Liked It

When I witness a locker room clearing brawl featuring all that is good and evil in the WWE universe, my mind slowly drifts towards memories of the infamous Monday Night Wars.

Being more specific, I am reminded of the countless episodes of WCW Monday Nitro which ended with the nWo squaring off with the likes of Sting, Lex Luger, and Ric Flair

These happen to be some of my fondest memories as a wrestling fan. I can still vividly remember darting my eyes back and forth between my clock radio and the television, realizing that Tony Shiavone would be telling us good night any second, and once again WCW Monday Nitro would leave me, the fan, completely thrilled and wanting more.

It has been a long time since an episode of Monday Night Raw left me with that old familiar feeling.  It seems that the era of People Power is here to stay, and is actually becoming more intriguing each week. I am sucker for these type of angles, I always have been. Whether it be the nWo, the Ministry of Darkness, or more recently Nexus, these invasion type story lines have always peeked my interest.

Now I am not saying that John Laurinaitis and his merry band of heels are ready to take the wrestling world by storm. I am not even sure that they can stretch this thing through Summerslam. But what I do know is that when RAW ended tonight, I was genuinely curious about what happens next.

I had the opportunity to attend Over The Limit in Raleigh, NC and had a truly unbelievable time.  The crowd was on fire, and for the most part the show absolutely delivered...except for Cena and you know who.  Now there is no need to recap the mess that this so called "main event" turned out to be,  but what I will say is that coming off such a sham of a bout at Over The Limit, the Cena vs. People Power story took a turn in the right direction.

The only thing that puzzles me is the inevitable end game.  If there is one thing I truly believe about the WWE, unlike what WCW was notorious for, they have at least a somewhat concrete idea of where this is all going.  There has to be a plan going into the summer months, especially with RAW going to three hours in July.

My guess is that eventually Laurinaitis will get what is truly coming to him, and most likely at the hands of John Cena.  I have a feeling that WWE wants the Cena vs. Johnny feud to rival the old Vince vs. Austin days.  Well I think it is safe to say that it isn't happening.

But that doesn't mean it can't be a meaningful and entertaining couple of months, and if we keep getting those episodes of RAW that leave us chomping at the bit for more, the WWE will be in great shape moving into Summerslam.

Load More Stories

Follow B/R on Facebook

Out of Bounds

Subscribe Now

We will never share your email address

Thanks for signing up.


text:
"Freddie" Flintoff's New Dawn

Use your ← → (arrow) keys to browse more stories

Cricket is a sport with perhaps more nuances than any other. It is a game which can last between five days and a couple of hours, often without producing a result, and its unique subtleties and traditions set it apart from any other mainstream sport.

It is also completely fixated by statistics. Nobody can be considered to be making an accurate or intelligent judgement on a team, player ground or indeed any microscopic element of the game without first consulting the record books.

The success of a player in particular can be determined as much by his stats as what people remember of his actual performances and, for the generations who follow, player’s averages define their status in the game.

Mention the name Andrew Flintoff to any contemporary cricket fan and the response will almost certainly be one of gushing admiration.

"Fred," is one of the modern greats. He is a bowler capable of fast, hostile and inspirational spells against the very best batsmen combined with brutal displays of hitting with the bat as well as metronomical slip catching and is talismanic presence for every team he represents.

There might be some trepidation surrounding his captaincy but Flintoff’s errors in judgement only seem to make him more accessible. He is a people’s champion.

But a quick glance at cricinfo reveals some surprising statistical evidence against "Fred."

The commonly cited yardstick for an all-rounder is a batting average higher than a bowling one. Flintoff currently meets those credentials; but only just.

His batting average of 32.23 (prior to the first Test vs West Indies) is only .11 of a run higher than his bowling average; somewhat surprising considering his immense ability and reputation.

Of course, cricketers know that stats do not tell the full story and characters as headstrong as Flintoff know that his status within the game is assured, no matter what happens for the rest of his career.

His averages make no mention of "that over," at Edgbaston in 2005, his spell at Jacques Kallis at the same venue last summer, his batting on the fourth morning against South Africa at the Oval in 2004 or his inspired performance in leading England to a remarkable test victory in India in Mumbai, 2006.

They also make no mention of the sacrifices he made to recover from three serious ankle operations or of his often colourful off the field antics.

But they do matter, and though Flintoff may not concede as much, or even believe in their importance whilst he is still playing, he may reflect in the future on a career somewhat unfulfilled should they begin to represent merely a "good," Test cricketer, rather than the "great," he undoubtedly is.

At 31, Flintoff is entering the twilight of his career. However, England fans, pundits and opposition players alike know that he is still the side’s most dangerous bowler, particularly now that his fitness seems less of an issue.

He is one of the game’s biggest superstars and one stat which might be of much greater interest to Flintoff in the short-term is the price he might fetch at the IPL player auction today.

But his priority remains playing for England and in particular, regaining the Ashes he so painfully surrendered as Captain in Australia in 2006.

Potentially, 2009 could be the beginning of another period when Flintoff produces his best form. Should his ankle problems finally be behind him, a consistent run in the side will assist both facets of his game as well as giving England the balance and depth he can provide.

Flintoff’s batting is based on feel and natural ability rather than a sound technique and past evidence suggests that the longer a run in the side he gets, the more consistent his scores will be.

He is also a much more confident player of seam bowling than spin, particularly early in his innings, and with England’s next 16 test matches being played against the West Indies, a Warne free Australia and away in South Africa, he has a great opportunity to once again cement his place at No. 6 in the batting order.

Should he do so, the game of cricket will once again have been greatly blessed.

Load More Stories

Out of Bounds

Subscribe Now

We will never share your email address

Thanks for signing up.


text:
Keep an Eye On Richard Petty Motorsports, A.J. Allmendinger In 2009

Use your ← → (arrow) keys to browse more stories
Keep an Eye On Richard Petty Motorsports, A.J. Allmendinger In 2009

He may stand only 5'6" in his driver's suit, but the newest edition to my comeback stable-of-the-year pick, A.J. Allmendinger is hard to miss.

He's currently the part time driver for the Valvoline #44 Dodge for and if you are looking for him, chances are you won't find him by looking behind you in your rear view mirror since he's likely the guy that if he hasn't lapped you, he's going to give it his all in order to do so while maintaining impressive control over his car.

Cast off rather unceremoniously last silly season by Team Red Bull in favor of their next pet project, that being Rookie of the Year candidate, and my personal pick Scott Speed, "the Dinger" as he is affectionately known on online boards, gracefully landed a partial ten race ride with newly re-branded Richard Petty Motor sports, formerly Gillette Evernham Motor sports.

Not to my surprise, Allmendiger finished the Daytona 500 with his best career finish yet on NASCAR's biggest stage with his third place showing for his new team. The question remains, what does the man have to do to get the full time ride that his former employers refused to give to him? What more does he need to show?

Like Speed, he's young (27), and everything Team Red Bull is looking for and hoping for with Speed they had at their disposal in Allmendinger, yet they refused to acknowledge it by giving him the stability he earned and deserved. He could very well end up being the worst business decision the team ever made along the lines of a "one that got away" scenario.

Some of the comments I read yesterday's race included: "Can you believe my boy 'Dinger is in fourth?" under an appropriately titled thread bearing a similar name, and "Oh my God, that kid is for real." This was before all the expected anti-Team Red Bull rhetoric which followed in separate postings by different users.

Coupled with a catchy and cult-like name, "the Dinger" has a chance to truly be the driver that Richard Petty Motor sports builds their faith and team around, if only they give him the chance that Red Bull did not. I believe he gives Richard Petty is most legitimate chance at reaching Victory Lane since John Andretti last did it at Martinsville in 1999 for Petty Enterprises, in fact, I believe given proper seasoning and support he can achieve this multiple times—before the end of this season.

RPM as part of its overall facelift still has trendy pick Kasey Kahne who at the age of 28 is still young enough to form quite a duo with 'Dinger for years to come as Kahne is typically good for a few wins a year every few years (he gets his wins in bunches). Mix this in with the perfect complement in veteran Elliot Sadler and inconsistent Reed Sorenson and you've got yourself a pretty solid team, one that Richard Petty and his fans could really be proud of.

We've seen what this combination can do in the Daytona 500 with their third, fifth, and ninth place finishes respectively. Three top tens! Not a bad start, but one they can certainly build from. RPM with the financial backing of Montreal Canadiens owner, Geroge Gillette, now have more financial capability than Petty ever could have dreamed of and as long as he maintains a distance relationship by cutting the checks only similar to Roush-Fenway's operation, they may have a formula for success.

It is too soon to know whether Sorsenson who also achieved a top ten in last year's Daytona 500, simply has this individual race down or if he being only 23 himself, similarly has years of unlimited potential that was basically being held down while at Ganassi Racing, his former employer.

Should 'Dinger have a good showing next week in California or whenever the rest of his ten week trial resumes, sponsors may have no choice but to plaster themselves to the very driver suit that A.J. wears to the tracks in which he races and deservedly so.

The fact remains that Allmendiger, who while he only has two career top ten's last year came on strong last year only to be shafted for his good work following the season in which an extension never came.

If anyone ever deserved one, it was him.

His average starting position has improved from 29th in his rookie year of 2007 to 24th last year while running a partial schedule in starting only 29 races. His ability to maintain this competitiveness and desire is impressive considering he not only switched teams but also makes and models ditching a Toyota for a Dodge. Furthermore, it is due to this competitiveness that makes it easy to see that its not the car but the driver that makes this situation successful and shouldn't be surprised that success seems to follow him wherever he goes.

Richard Petty Motorsports, you clearly have a good thing going. Don't make the same mistake Team Red Bull did. Give the man a full time ride and the sponsorship will come and you can sit back to reap the benefits.

Load More Stories

Follow B/R on Facebook

Out of Bounds

Subscribe Now

We will never share your email address

Thanks for signing up.


text:
60 Feet, 6 Inches: SP Secret Weapons

Use your ← → (arrow) keys to browse more stories
60 Feet, 6 Inches: SP Secret Weapons
Scott Cunningham/Getty Images

Everyone needs a secret weapon. Oh, those aces, those perennial Cy Young Award winners, they're paramount to your league championship quest. But leagues are not won merely by outstanding outings by Felix Hernandez, Justin Verlander and Clayton Kershaw. It's the gems tossed by those lesser-known, aspiring aces, that often make the difference.

Load More Stories

Follow B/R on Facebook

Out of Bounds

Fantasy Baseball

Subscribe Now

We will never share your email address

Thanks for signing up.


text:
Peyton Manning Set for Pedestrian-Like Effort vs. Baltimore Ravens in Week 15

Use your ← → (arrow) keys to browse more stories
Peyton Manning Set for Pedestrian-Like Effort vs. Baltimore Ravens in Week 15
Ezra Shaw/Getty Images

Peyton Manning may have had the Baltimore Ravens' number back when he was starring for the Indianapolis Colts, but since things have changed and No. 18 is set to visit M&T Bank Stadium as a member of the Denver Broncos in Week 15.

While many have begun singing MVP chants for Manning, the noise is slightly premature.

After six consecutive weeks of recording a passer rating of 100-plus, Manning has recorded just one 100-plus passer rating in his last four outings. He has also thrown an interception in each of his last four games.

Broncos fans and fantasy owners should anticipate another rare pedestrian-like performance from Manning this weekend, and here's why.

Desperate Opponent

Rob Carr/Getty Images

Having dropped two straight games and recently firing their offensive coordinator, the Baltimore Ravens are on high alert this weekend and will be fighting to ensure a playoff spot on Sunday, something the Broncos have already secured.

Therefore Peyton Manning can expect to see an energized and inspired defense on the other side of the line of scrimmage.

And although many have been taking shots at Baltimore's pass defense this season because it ranks 23rd in the league in terms of yards allowed (246 per game), it must be pointed out that the Ravens have given up fewer touchdowns passing than 30 other teams in the NFL, and are tied with Seattle for first with 12 through 13 games.

Baltimore also ranks 14th in opponent's completion percentage, holding opponents to a percentage of 60.8 on average.

Justin Edmonds/Getty Images

Peyton Manning studies more tape than anyone, but it's been a long time since he's been pitted against the Baltimore Ravens' defense. The last time Manning squared off against the Ravens was when he was with the Indianapolis Colts in the 2009 AFC Divisional playoff round, nearly three years ago.

Manning played solid in that game, but he finished with his lowest passer rating of the 2009 postseason, which included an AFC Championship win over New York and a loss to New Orleans in Super Bowl XLIV.

Manning's last regular season matchup vs. Baltimore also came back in 2009, and although he and the Colts won, it wasn't pretty for No. 18.

The four-time NFL MVP completed 71 percent of his throws for nearly 300 yards, but tossed just one touchdown to two interceptions. That marked one of only two games that season in which Manning had more picks than touchdowns.

Over/Under 1.5 touchdowns for Manning vs. Baltimore?

Submit Vote vote to see results

Sure, Peyton Manning's numbers make him a must-start fantasy quarterback week after week, but he's looked human over the past month or so, setting up a pedestrian-like effort this weekend in Baltimore.

The Ravens have a whole lot to play for, and field a defense that is much better against the pass than many make them out to be. Baltimore will have the added advantage of playing at home as well, where they rarely lose.

In the end, expect a quiet day from Manning and the Broncos on the road against their first playoff bound opponent in weeks.

Week 15 Projection: 21-of-36, 266 yards, one touchdown, one interception

Follow Bleacher Report Featured Columnist Patrick Clarke on Twitter.

Follow _Pat_Clarke on Twitter

Load More Stories

Follow Denver Broncos from B/R on Facebook

Follow Denver Broncos from B/R on Facebook and get the latest updates straight to your newsfeed!

Out of Bounds

Denver Broncos

Subscribe Now

We will never share your email address

Thanks for signing up.


text:
Ohio State vs. Arizona: Game Time, TV Schedule, Spread Info and Predictions

Use your ← → (arrow) keys to browse more stories
Ohio State vs. Arizona: Game Time, TV Schedule, Spread Info and Predictions
Jason Miller/Getty Images

On paper, Ohio State seemingly has the easiest road to the Final Four. All that stands in the path of the No. 2 seed Buckeyes are No. 6 Arizona and the winner of No. 9 Wichita State and No. 13 La Salle.

Of course, the Wildcats will have something to say about that.

Arizona is a tricky team to predict. The talent is obviously there, and the fact that the Wildcats started the season 20-2—with statement wins over Florida, Miami and San Diego State—can't be ignored. Nor can the fact that the team limped to a 5-5 finish and lost to UCLA three times this season.

They meet an Ohio State team that is red hot at the moment, on the heels of 10 straight wins, including two victories over Michigan State and wins over Indiana and Wisconsin. Ohio State is led by do-it-all point guard Aaron Craft and stud forward Deshaun Thomas (19.5 points, 6.5 rebounds per game).

So who will win this Big Ten versus Pac-12 showdown? Let's break it down.

Where: Staples Center, Los Angeles, CA

When: Thursday, March 28 at 7:47 p.m. ET

Watch: TBS

Live StreamMarch Madness On Demand

Betting Line: Ohio State (-3.5), according to Bovada

Ohio State Injuries (via USA Today)

None to report

Arizona Injuries (via USA Today)

F Grant Jerrett, Elbow, Probable

What's at Stake?

Oh, just a trip to the Elite Eight to face the winner of upstarts Wichita State and La Salle. No big deal.

Given how the West Region has shaken out, Ohio State will surely be disappointed with anything less than a trip to the Final Four, while Arizona has to already be pleased with its tournament but has a golden opportunity to far exceed expectations.

Ohio State Player to Watch: Aaron Craft

Jason Miller/Getty Images

Aaron Craft does it all for Ohio State.

He is the team's leader and its heart and soul. He is a lock-down defender often tasked with defending the opponent's best guard, an assignment he'll surely draw against Arizona's Mark Lyons.

He leads Ohio State in assists (4.6 per game) and is second in scoring (9.9 points per game).

And he isn't afraid to step up and take the big shot, as he did by sinking the game-winning three against Iowa State in Ohio's State's 78-75 Round of 32 victory.

Craft isn't the most talented player in the Sweet 16, but he may be the most important. If he steps up and has a big game against Arizona, it's hard to see the Buckeyes losing.

Arizona Player to Watch: Mark Lyons

Streeter Lecka/Getty Images

Mark Lyons has been Arizona's leading scorer all season long, but he's turned his game up to another level in the NCAA tournament, where he's averaging 25 points per game.

The scrappy point guard can absolutely light up an opponent if he gets hot, as he did to Belmont and Harvard. He might not be the all-around performer that Craft is, but he's also far more dangerous on the offensive side of the ball.

For Ohio State, it's pretty simple—contain Lyons and Arizona's offense likely sputters. But if he puts up 20 plus, look out.

Key Matchup: Battle on the Block

Harry How/Getty Images

To be fair, the real key matchup in this game is between Craft and Lyons. Whichever player gets the better of that duel likely will lead their team to victory.

But since we've already covered that above, the other key matchup will be how these teams fare against one another in the paint and on the boards.

I think the team that wins the rebounding battle will likely win this game.

Both units are very efficient (according to KenPom.com, Ohio State is 12th in offensive efficiency and seventh in defensive efficiency, while Arizona is 16th in offensive efficiency and 32nd in defensive efficiency) so neither team will beat themselves with poor possessions or make life easy on the defensive end.

That means every little thing matters. Who will win the turnover battle? Who will get more points in the paint? And most importantly, who will win the rebounding battle?

That's the key to me, as neither team can afford to give the other second-chance buckets or allow easy points in transition. Solomon Hill, Brandon Ashley and Kaleb Tarczewski need to crash the boards hard for Arizona, while Deshaun Thomas, Sam Thompson, Evan Ravenel and Amir Williams must do the same for the Buckeyes.

Which team wins?

Submit Vote vote to see results

The Buckeyes are balanced, extremely efficient on both ends of the floor, battle-tested in the Big Ten, a superior defensive team and have the perfect antidote to Lyons in Craft.

Still, Arizona's talent can't be underestimated, nor can the fact that this game is being played in Pac-12 country.

But I think the Buckeyes will grind out the win here. This should be one of the best games of the Sweet 16, with Craft coming up big again late. Ohio State wins, 68-66.

Link to Printable PDF

Link to Live Bracket

Follow all the exciting NCAA tournament action with March Madness Live

Hit me up on Twitter—my tweets are busting brackets and beating the buzzer all week long.

Follow TRappaRT on Twitter

Load More Stories

Follow B/R on Facebook

Out of Bounds

College Basketball

Subscribe Now

We will never share your email address

Thanks for signing up.


text:
Matt Scott: Video Highlights for Former Arizona QB

« Prev
1 of 9
Next »
Use your ← → (arrow) keys to browse the slideshow
Matt Scott: Video Highlights for Former Arizona QB
Christian Petersen/Getty Images

Described as one of the true "sleepers" in this draft at the quarterback position, Matt Scott is often overlooked despite a productive senior season as an Arizona Wildcat.

Though he has just one year of starting experience under his belt, Scott offers an intriguing blend of passing ability and mobility for the position. In that one year of starting, he threw for over 3,600 yards and 27 touchdowns. Just as impressive was his 500-plus yards rushing.

Where Scott ends up going in the draft remains to be seen, but regardless, he should prove to be one of the better value picks at the position and could end up paying off for an NFL team in a big way down the line.

Here are some highlights of Matt Scott's career as an Arizona Wildcat.

Begin Slideshow »
Load More Stories

Follow B/R on Facebook

Out of Bounds

NFL Draft

Subscribe Now

We will never share your email address

Thanks for signing up.