...
As an associated aside: I was hiking  a circuit of Lake St. Claire in Tasmania some years ago. Now I can shift a bit over broken terrain but there was no way I was able to catch this guy in front of me. He was like a machine but as I got closer I realised he was using a pair of walking poles/sticks and to my mind had hit peak walking speed. ...

I go backpacking with one trekking pole, but sometimes carry a second one strapped to my pack if I might need two for difficult terrain, like fording a creek.

I use the pole when going uphill, but on flat ground or downhill, I just carry the pole in my hand.  I think the pole makes me a bit faster up the hills, specifically I think my cadence is the same but stride is a bit longer when I use the pole on uphills.

I have done several tours with a former co-worker and friend.  He trains for a bike tour with interval training, but never more than an hour.  I instead do a lot of long distance endurance types of training.

So, on a tour, I have trouble keeping up with him during the first hour.  After two hours, he is lagging and I stop on occasion to give him a chance to catch up.  And after 30 miles, he is exhausted.  But when I do solo tours, sometimes I have 60 to 80 mile days where my occasional touring partner has trouble making 40 miles. 

That is one reason that I have done several solo tours.

If you're worried about the appearance of your clearly neglected saddle, buy some neat foot oil from your local saddlery (more £$%^&* horses), pour the contents of the can into a baking dish or a bowl large enough to take the saddle and soak first the top and then bottom in the neat foot oil, 10-20 minutes per side.

This could be useful some day. When you say top/bottom, does that mean you are first putting the whole top half of the saddle in oil and therefore also soaking the underside? After both sides are done, the entire saddle has been submerged in oil. After that, do you wipe off excess oil... and then let dry for a few days?
Thanks, Mike

edit, our saddles have always received TLC, just thought this soaking might be good to know about.

hint that they alone amongst bicycle manufacturers fully understand the relationship between head angle and fork offset that governs perfect handling. I really don’t buy that.

That they would offer a 370 and 410mm length fork for the same frame, does seem to make a mockery of that idea. 
The rational for not offering the geometry (Though they now publish more than before) is the argument that a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing.  There is some truth in this, I have seen people comparing TT lengths without HT and ST angles, with no understanding how each effects the other. Weight is the other big one of course, if a frame is designed to do a task well, it'll weigh what it weighs. I went to an entertaining talk by a renowned frame builder some years ago, he said that the two most frequently asked questions were wheelbase and weight and that both were the result of design not a part of it.

I’ve never understood why thorn have always been so coy about publishing geometry tables for their frames. Critical numbers that are conspicuously absent include both head and seat tube angles. Thorn claims it’s commercially sensitive information, and hint that they alone amongst bicycle manufacturers fully understand the relationship between head angle and fork offset that governs perfect handling. I really don’t buy that.

In fairness their customer care goes above and beyond, and they do offer extended test rides for Rohloff equipped bikes and a generous 100-day money back guarantee. I was a bit surprised to see that test rides for derailleur equipped bikes are not now available, and the money back guarantee only extends to 14 days. I’m sure this wasn’t previously the case.