I was impressed with the Saunier Duval team the way they played around
at the head of the race. I hadn't seen that since Festina in the 1997
Taking into account that "other hopefuls" include Evans and Menchov
I'd seriously question your last statement. Even the closest rival
Kohl is not a week TTer.
I'm thinking Evans is no threat to Vandevelde's /third place/....
...given that Evans is in first.
You believe that Crash Evans is going to keep his health?
> Favourites by time :
> +1:55 Frank Schleck
> +0:18 Vladimir Efimkin
> -22:05 George Hincapie
I know, I know, but it's still funny.
> Top 3 and favourites standings :
> 1 Cadel Evans 42.29.09
> 2 Frank Schleck 0.01
> 3 Christian Vande Velde 0.38
Bob, I have to question why you keep posting these summaries. They seem
a bit off-topic for rbr: no mentions of drunkenness, politics or sex; no
graphs; no reference to the number of guns various riders may be
equipped with, or to which regular posters are actually computer
simulations. Furthermore, you fail to use the word "dumbass" at all.
Really, I have to question where you're going with this.
My only question for Bob is how long it takes for him to compile the stats.
His posts are one of the few I actually read. I can't help but think Millar
is grumbling under his breath dopee', dopee'...
"Here comes the lightening and here comes the thunder. Ride on the storm and
take it to the sea. "
- Jim Hunter
My question for Bob is why he puts in '...' when he could just as
easily leave in 4th and 8th (and maybe even 11, 12 and 15)?
Otherwise, outstanding job. For me, also, one of my 'must read' posts
>Bob, I have to question why you keep posting these summaries. They seem
>a bit off-topic for rbr: no mentions of drunkenness, politics or sex; no
>graphs; no reference to the number of guns various riders may be
>equipped with, or to which regular posters are actually computer
>simulations. Furthermore, you fail to use the word "dumbass" at all.
>Really, I have to question where you're going with this.
Great posts like yours, Ryan, make it all worthwhile! Thanks.
>My only question for Bob is how long it takes for him to compile the stats.
>His posts are one of the few I actually read.
If nothing goes wrong, about 30 seconds. Of course that's not counting the
hours of programming during the winter, but that's fun.
>My question for Bob is why he puts in '...' when he could just as
>easily leave in 4th and 8th (and maybe even 11, 12 and 15)?
I'm trying to extract the interesting bits rather than repeat the top of the GC,
but I'm always open to suggestions for improvements. Would top 10 + favourites
be more useful?
If I can select the list of favourites accurately there won't be any gaps after stage 21!
>Otherwise, outstanding job. For me, also, one of my 'must read' posts
I have added Vande Velde (or is it Vandevelde?) to my list of favourites
even though he is 72nd in my rankings. As the list is generated automatically
he would not normally have appeared even if I had selected 40 favourites.
He seems to be performing well outside his norm.
I find these useful. I refer to your posts before reading other reports
Do they make argyle cooler boxes ?
It's his first year as a team leader.
The automation is a good system. I don't think it's a good idea to add
random good performers to the favourites halfway through the race. All
races would end with the favourites on top.
My thoughts exactly! In this case I was bowing to pressure ... ;-)
Horner did not want to dope, so he had to go. lol
Perhaps for the 3 grand tours, do the top 10 instead of top 3. That'll
probably take care of Alan's problem in most cases. On the other hand,
the distinction between favourites and surprises will be diminished.
Nothing could make argyle any cooler...
The bloody pubs are bloody dull
The bloody clubs are bloody full
Of bloody girls and bloody guys
With bloody murder in their eyes
remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?
And recode the TOM9000 insult algorithm in obfusticated Perl.
Should I just add another section showing the top 10 on GC?
Is there another type of Perl?
Yes. But randomize the sucker so they aren't in order. People have been
getting a little too complacent and that would be just what they need to
shake them up a bit.
Looks like I wasn't too far off.
Do you still think that Evans is no threat to Vande Velde's third
Yes, it does seem that Cadel has risen (fallen?) to the challenge.