Yes, but anything can be a race if you set your mind to it, which is why we have terms like the "Embankment Peloton" to describe a class of aerodynamically-optimised road cyclists that commute eastwards during rush hour on their way to London's banking and legal centres:
Correct. A more widely used term (in my experience) for this sort of thing is a "pace line", which isn't always as wide as a peloton due to lack of road closure.
Riders form a paceline because of the crosswind which forces everyone to look for draft on the left or the right side of a rider in front of you. Eventually, there's not enough road for everyone to be in the draft and the first paceline is formed (also called an echelon).
More specifically though, paceline refers to the mechanics of the echelon, the way riders rotate, or take turns at the front to stay in the echelon. This rotation is the paceline.
Pelotons - the race variety of a paceline - can only be safely formed with road closures because they typically swell to fill at least one lane of the road. They are not just 1 rider behind another, but often 2-4 riders wide.
Pacelines for group rides and the like can be formed whenever, and they do not form just because of a crosswind. When I used to train with a group, we would almost always form pacelines in single file, on every ride.
Interesting, I’m not a French speaker but my Spanish is OK. Always thought it was rooted in “pelota” as ball - but after looking both meanings are accurate just one being a bit more literal
1630s, "a small body of soldiers acting together but separate from the main body of troops," from French peloton "platoon, group of people," literally "little ball" (15c.), hence, "agglomeration," diminutive of Old French pelote "ball" (see pellet).
They are indeed the same number of words, but as headlines go they are extremely weak compared to the original. In my view they are not at all close.
The original (before HN edited the title) told you what the subject was immediately. It went from specific to general.
"Planet's most energy efficient ..." is the most terrestrially broad introduction one could use.
Likewise, "New research finds ..." is such a common phrase that it almost repels people (particularly since much research is bogus).
It's only a subset of US English speaking people which will be confused by the original title. To the subset of US residents who have never heard of the company Peleton, and the hundreds of millions of English speakers outside the US, this headline wouldn't have been confusing at all.
It's not the "strength of the brand", it's a brand name that should have never been allowed in the first place because of that kind of confusion, that's specially why they went with that name, they knew, it is market manipulation, for the same reason Phone is not allowed as a phone brand
There's a difference between whether a name is sufficiently distinguished to trademark and whether it is prohibited as "market manipulation." One certainly could not trademark the word "phone," but it would be perfectly legal to sell a phone branded as such.
...and? Yes, there's a difference, but Peloton isn't just selling "peloton bikes," they've trademarked the name Peloton. Unless you are agreeing that a phone company named "Phone" would be as bad as a company named "Peloton"