Re: bad move by Lance



M

Mad Dog

Guest
Bill Lloyd says...

>Dumbass -

>Get perspective. He gained 7 seconds.

Penis Breath -

You forgot the time bonus for finishing 2nd. So make that 19 seconds.

>He's going to lose 2 MINUTES in the last time trial.

>The number of further finishes where he can get away in the last
>kilometer and have a crash give him a gap due to rain is, what, 3 more?
> So 21 seconds goes into 2 minutes almost 6 times.

19 x 3 = 57, which goes into 2 minutes just over twice. You look like a dumbass
when you bungle simple math.

>Not a problem at all, especially with climbs.

The problem is that you seem to think the 2 minute TT advantage is in the bag.
Nothing is in the bag, which is why they actually have to ride the stages. What
if Lance flats at a bad time? After the clip at the tire factory that mentions
that Lance has never flatted in the TdF, I wouldn't be surprised to see it
happen.

Don't get me wrong - I'm not experiencing a Lance Anxiety Attack, and will not
lose any sleep regardless of his finish. I tend to think it's his race to win,
but am not yet ready to bet the farm on it. He certainly looks to be the
strongest rider out there at present, but there are so many possibilities for
little things to go wrong. Who will make the fewest mistakes? Those that
minimize errors AND ride well will be on the podium.
 
"The problem is that you seem to think the 2 minute TT advantage is in
the bag.
Nothing is in the bag, which is why they actually have to ride the
stages. What
if Lance flats at a bad time? After the clip at the tire factory that
mentions
that Lance has never flatted in the TdF, I wouldn't be surprised to see
it
happen. "


....and what if Vino flats? What if? What if? What if?

-Ken
 
k.papai wrote:
> "The problem is that you seem to think the 2 minute TT advantage is in
> the bag.
> Nothing is in the bag, which is why they actually have to ride the
> stages. What
> if Lance flats at a bad time? After the clip at the tire factory that
> mentions
> that Lance has never flatted in the TdF, I wouldn't be surprised to see
> it
> happen. "
>
>
> ...and what if Vino flats? What if? What if? What if?
>

19 seconds is exactly 19 seconds and probably not that large in the big
scheme of things. It's been a while (16 years?) since 19 seconds would
have decided the winner.

On the other hand, the number of times that a legitimate challenger
attacked and ended up gaining ground on Armstrong was small last year
(Basso did once, I think) and was looking remote after the ITT and TTT
this year. Armstrong is on form but it's nice to see someone else do
well too. It opens up possibilities that seemed more remote yesterday.

Go VINO!!!
 
Tim Lines wrote:
>
> k.papai wrote:
> > "The problem is that you seem to think the 2 minute TT advantage is in
> > the bag.
> > Nothing is in the bag, which is why they actually have to ride the
> > stages. What
> > if Lance flats at a bad time? After the clip at the tire factory that
> > mentions
> > that Lance has never flatted in the TdF, I wouldn't be surprised to see
> > it
> > happen. "
> >
> >
> > ...and what if Vino flats? What if? What if? What if?
> >
>
> 19 seconds is exactly 19 seconds...

Apparently not.

"Time hasn't a single objective quality about it." -- D. A. Howe,
NIST-Boulder, doc. _What Time Is_

"There is no such thing as a singular true time derived from natural
phenomena." -- Allan, Ashby, Hodge
http://www.allanstime.com/Publications/DWA/Science_Timekeeping/TheScienceOfTimekeeping.pdf

Just kidding. I know what you mean.

> ...and probably not that large in the big
> scheme of things. It's been a while (16 years?) since 19 seconds would
> have decided the winner.

Ya neva know.

> On the other hand, the number of times that a legitimate challenger
> attacked and ended up gaining ground on Armstrong was small last year
> (Basso did once, I think) and was looking remote after the ITT and TTT
> this year. Armstrong is on form but it's nice to see someone else do
> well too. It opens up possibilities that seemed more remote yesterday.
>
> Go VINO!!!

Yes. At least he doesn't lay down like a loser.
 
Mad Dog wrote:
> Bill Lloyd says...
>
> >Dumbass -
>
> >Get perspective. He gained 7 seconds.
>
> Penis Breath -
>
> You forgot the time bonus for finishing 2nd. So make that 19 seconds.



Dumbass -

You've got your head up your ass.

If all LANCE's rivals attack in the last few k's of a sprinter's stage,
it will work to his benefit in the long run. The great majority of the
attacks won't work, the few that do won't gain a lot of time, but most
importantly, his rivals will be using up reserves while he rests.

One of the many reasons that LANCE has won 6 in a row is that he isn't
indiscriminate about his energy use - he expends it when it's
necessary.

It's also why you won't see Basso or Ullrich doing such moves. Vino
gets a free hand, but it's because Ullrich is the acknowledged T-Mobile
GC man (perhaps incorrectly).

thanks,

K. Gringioni.
 
On 7 Jul 2005 17:21:39 -0700, "Kurgan Gringioni"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>

>One of the many reasons that LANCE has won 6 in a row is that he isn't
>indiscriminate about his energy use - he expends it when it's
>necessary.

He can afford to play the odds.

His 'rivals' have nothing to show for playing safe.

>It's also why you won't see Basso or Ullrich doing such moves.

They don't want it badly enough ?
 
Not one rider can win it alone. Not Vino, not Lance. Can Vino respond
to Dicovery´s attacks day after day. And Armstrong has to follow
team´s wheels. I´v seen Ulle in Swiss Tour. He can climb well on
stage, but can not REPEAT it two stages in a row. Neither can Kloden.
He´s in a really bad form. So, who is going to pull Vino uphill, day
by day?
 
"danko" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
Not one rider can win it alone. Not Vino, not Lance. Can Vino respond
to Dicovery´s attacks day after day. And Armstrong has to follow
team´s wheels. I´v seen Ulle in Swiss Tour. He can climb well on
stage, but can not REPEAT it two stages in a row. Neither can Kloden.
He´s in a really bad form. So, who is going to pull Vino uphill, day
by day?


Things change, people change. You may be right, but we will see....

Laz
 
"> Good call.

It takes a chiseling, witless, adolescent puke to trim a posting
this way. Are you a journalist? ?"

Ilan thinks he's a funny guy but I doubt he has EVER turned a wheel in
anger.

He's an excellent armchair quarterback and for him to talk **** to Bill
Lloyd is pure lunacy on Ilan's part. Just goes to show you what kind of
people haunt the newsgroups -- those that do (take part and copntribute
like Bill) and those that sit back and criticize and wouldn't know
intensity even if it bit them in the ass (Ilan).

-Ken
 
gwhite says...

>Tim Lines wrote:

>> k.papai wrote:

>> Go VINO!!!

>Yes. At least he doesn't lay down like a loser.

Makes it better than a boring blowout, no doubt. Anyone want to try to predict
who and when the first serious attack on the yellow jersey is going to happen?
Seeing the response will tell much.
 
[email protected] says...

>>It's also why you won't see Basso or Ullrich doing such moves.

>They don't want it badly enough ?

It's too early for them to play their hands. And they probably intend on trying
more straightforward attacks - if they have the power to pull it off. Those
kinds of things are easy to plan in advance in the dreaming stages, but reality
can be a tough customer. If Lance's condition is really as good relative to the
competition as the prologue TT and TTT made it look, it's gonna be tough for
anyone to put big hurt on him.
 
Funny how the commentators spend so much time saying that DSC will
want to turn the yellow jersey over to someone else. Then they talk
about how he wishes he had more of a lead.

So we want to give the jersey over to someone who is absolutely no
threat but we also want to gain some time on other GC contenders, or
at least not lose any time to them.

Meanwhile, you have 4 teams with tough sprinters who are determined to
bring back the breaks by the end.

Other than the little risky Vino incident I think you pretty much got
what you're going to get. The opening TT and the TTT are where the
time came from, was going to come from, would come from if we started
over.

How much better shape could Armstrong even be in? He's not god. If he
wanted more time then he should have made a fking break for it. Did he
think he should have gotten more time on the GC rivals in the TT? No.
Does he think he should have gotten more time on them in the TTT? No.
Does he think they should have cracked on these flat stages? No.

It is exactly what it is. Minus the Vino incident there is nothing
that could be different barring misfortune.

Saying Armstrong wishes he had more of a lead is like saying I wish I
made 10 million dollars a year....... no ****! But it's not gonna
happen.

D
 
Mad Dog wrote:
> Turdgan Gringioni says...
>
> >You've got your head up your ass.
>
> Turdgan: You're the only colon-sniffer on this group. You may think we all
> reek, but that's because your nostrils are fecal-impacted pooptubes.
>
> >If all LANCE's rivals attack in the last few k's of a sprinter's stage,
> >it will work to his benefit in the long run. The great majority of the
> >attacks won't work, the few that do won't gain a lot of time, but most
> >importantly, his rivals will be using up reserves while he rests.
>
> I'm not talking about ALL of Lance's rivals. It only take one or two to make a
> difference.



Dumbass -

If one or two of LANCE's rivals consistently attack during field
sprints, those one or two guys won't be rivals for long.

It's not a good use of energy. The other GC contenders rest and most of
the time field momentum (from sprinters' teams trying to position their
man) brings them back.

thanks,

K. Gringioni.
 
On Fri, 08 Jul 2005 16:51:55 -0400, David Ferguson
<[email protected]> wrote:

>How much better shape could Armstrong even be in? He's not god. If he
>wanted more time then he should have made a fking break for it. Did he

Huh? You're sounding a bit naive; I'm surprised. LA is an expert at
parceling out the energy exactly when it's needed, as you well know.

>think he should have gotten more time on the GC rivals in the TT? No.

You -do- realize that he got virtually the same time as Z, but with -no-
tailwind. That he was more than a minute ahead of -everyone- should tell
you something. OK, part of it may have been the bike, part may have been
the 'strawberry' he caught, lol. He rode the first part of the ITT at 92%
HRMax. To me that says he is a cycling 'god'.

>Does he think he should have gotten more time on them in the TTT? No.
>Does he think they should have cracked on these flat stages? No.

Huh? What? Who cracked? Nobody cracks on flat stages anymore except maybe
the Lanterne rouge. ;-)

>It is exactly what it is. Minus the Vino incident there is nothing
>that could be different barring misfortune.

Sure it could. LA and Co. are just much smarter than that.

>Saying Armstrong wishes he had more of a lead is like saying I wish I
>made 10 million dollars a year....... no ****! But it's not gonna
>happen.

No, but it's just talk. He's said that every year - i.e. wanting to have at
least two minutes on Ullrich. It's an 'I'd like to...' vs 'I desperately
-need- to'.

jj

>
>D
 
On Fri, 08 Jul 2005 18:01:37 -0400, Jet<[email protected]> wrote:

>On Fri, 08 Jul 2005 16:51:55 -0400, David Ferguson
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>How much better shape could Armstrong even be in? He's not god. If he
>>wanted more time then he should have made a fking break for it. Did he
>
>Huh? You're sounding a bit naive; I'm surprised. LA is an expert at
>parceling out the energy exactly when it's needed, as you well know.

Exactly my point. Things are exactly where they should be. He's not
going to waste his time trying to gain time during these flat stages.
Therefore there is no more time to be had than what he got from the TT
and the TTT. And they did pretty damn good on that.

>
>>think he should have gotten more time on the GC rivals in the TT? No.
>
>You -do- realize that he got virtually the same time as Z, but with -no-
>tailwind. That he was more than a minute ahead of -everyone- should tell
>you something. OK, part of it may have been the bike, part may have been
>the 'strawberry' he caught, lol. He rode the first part of the ITT at 92%
>HRMax. To me that says he is a cycling 'god'.

Tailwind, depending on who you ask. He might be A god, but he's not
THE god. Which is about what it would take to have more time on his
rivals than what he does.


>
>>Does he think he should have gotten more time on them in the TTT? No.
>>Does he think they should have cracked on these flat stages? No.
>
>Huh? What? Who cracked? Nobody cracks on flat stages anymore except maybe
>the Lanterne rouge. ;-)

Precisely, so there is no more time to be gained than what he
currently has. Only time to be defended, which they let Vino get, for
any number of various reasons. Most likely because they weren't
watching for it and weren't in a position to react during such a high
risk moment.

>
>>It is exactly what it is. Minus the Vino incident there is nothing
>>that could be different barring misfortune.
>
>Sure it could. LA and Co. are just much smarter than that.

Ok, "could", but again, what's he gonna do? Attack these flats? No.
The time is exactly where it should be and he couldn't hope for much
more.

>
>>Saying Armstrong wishes he had more of a lead is like saying I wish I
>>made 10 million dollars a year....... no ****! But it's not gonna
>>happen.
>
>No, but it's just talk. He's said that every year - i.e. wanting to have at
>least two minutes on Ullrich. It's an 'I'd like to...' vs 'I desperately
>-need- to'.
>

"Just talk" is right. Lots of talk about fantasies when you're in
about the best possible position is a waste of time, in my opinion.

If we're just going to wish for stuff that's not possible then he
should say that he wishes it was over and he won.

D
 
Kurgan Gringioni says...

>If one or two of LANCE's rivals consistently attack during field
>sprints, those one or two guys won't be rivals for long.

Turdgun, Dumbass -

Then why is Vino still in the hunt? And why was Lance ****** off that he got
away?

>It's not a good use of energy. The other GC contenders rest and most of
>the time field momentum (from sprinters' teams trying to position their
>man) brings them back.

It's a risk, plain and simple. If you had the ability to quantitate energy
expendature (and you don't), you may find that Vino's little sprint was easily
worth the 19 seconds it netted. If you want to blow your ass about energy
expendature, then talk about the long, very hard pulls Lance took in the TTT.
What did those net, like 1.5 seconds? The thing is, you don't have that data,
but we do know that Vino's sprint got: 19. But the odds of him crashing might
be more important than energy loss if you're talking "consistent attacks".
 
danko <[email protected]> wrote:
> So, who is going to pull Vino uphill, day by day?

G.Gurini :)

--
Morten Reippuert Knudsen :) <http://blog.reippuert.dk>

PowerMac G5: 1.6GHz, 1.25GB RAM, 300+300GB SATA, 8xDVD+/-RW, Bluetooth
mus + tastatur, R9600PRO, iSight, eyeTV200 & LaCie Photon18Vision TFT
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

L
Re: bad move by Lance
Replies
0
Views
291
Road Cycling
Laz
L
J
Re: bad move by Lance
Replies
6
Views
417
Road Cycling
Jack Hollis
J
I
Re: bad move by Lance
Replies
0
Views
326
Road Cycling
[email protected]
I
S
Re: bad move by Lance
Replies
0
Views
325
Road Cycling
Stewart Fleming
S
L
bad move by Lance
Replies
62
Views
2K
Road Cycling
David Ferguson
D
Top Bottom Back