|
Motorcycles » uk.rec.motorcycles » Tour de France
| Tour de France [message #787365] |
Tue, 18 July 2006 10:55 |
|
Jeeze, great roads but 187km in a day. On a push bike. On mountains. -
I've been knackered after less than that with petrol providing the
power...
http://uk.sports.yahoo.com/060718/2/ljcv.html
|
|
|
| Re: Tour de France [message #787376 ] |
Tue, 18 July 2006 11:27 |
|
On 18 Jul 2006 01:55:42 -0700, toad_oftoadhall [at] yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>Jeeze, great roads but 187km in a day. On a push bike.
A bit much, I agree. Although a few years back I'd happily do 60-80
miles on a ride, just for pleasure like.
>On mountains. -
But not on mountains, I must admit.
More importantly, I'd be averaging about 15mph (including rests)
whereas they'll be up close to double that, I imagine. Respect.
Actually, you're talking about the Alpe d'Huez section, right? So they
won't be _that_ fast up there.
--
_______
..'_/_|_\_'. Ace (brucedotrogers a.t rochedotcom)
\`\ | /`/ GSX-R1000K3
`\\ | //' BOTAFOT#3, SbS#2, UKRMMA#13, DFV#8, SKA#2, IBB#10
`\|/`
`
|
|
|
| Re: Tour de France [message #787382 ] |
Tue, 18 July 2006 11:36 |
|
Ace wrote:
> Actually, you're talking about the Alpe d'Huez section, right? So they
> won't be _that_ fast up there.
I don't know the Alpe d'Huez road - it's a dead end and I don't do dead
ends. [2] However I do know Izoard and du Lautaret, so I'm talking
about them, I guess. Agony.
Mind you the drugs those boys are on probably dull any sense of pain.
[2] ...but I might nip up there this summer now I've seen the road. [3]
[3] Yeah, there's no [1]. Fooled you, eh!
|
|
|
| Re: Tour de France [message #787409 ] |
Tue, 18 July 2006 12:20 |
|
"Ace" <seesig [at] virgin.net> wrote in message
news:f5apb2p9nvaqf4dlb96sgddbg37ano2g91 [at] 4ax.com...
> On 18 Jul 2006 01:55:42 -0700, toad_oftoadhall [at] yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>
>>Jeeze, great roads but 187km in a day. On a push bike.
>
> A bit much, I agree. Although a few years back I'd happily do 60-80
> miles on a ride, just for pleasure like.
>
>>On mountains. -
>
> But not on mountains, I must admit.
>
> More importantly, I'd be averaging about 15mph (including rests)
> whereas they'll be up close to double that, I imagine. Respect.
>
> Actually, you're talking about the Alpe d'Huez section, right? So they
> won't be _that_ fast up there.
Really? Here's the record ...
Marco Pantini - 36 minutes, 50 seconds. 13.8km at an average gradient of
8.1% with 21 hairpin bends, 1850 metres (6,069 ft) high.
I'm sure some of you maths monkeys can work this out, but I'm thinking his
average up the Alp de Huez is faster than your average on the flat.
|
|
|
| Re: Tour de France [message #787414 ] |
Tue, 18 July 2006 12:27 |
|
elyob wrote:
> "Ace" <seesig [at] virgin.net> wrote in message
> news:f5apb2p9nvaqf4dlb96sgddbg37ano2g91 [at] 4ax.com...
> > On 18 Jul 2006 01:55:42 -0700, toad_oftoadhall [at] yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> >
> >>Jeeze, great roads but 187km in a day. On a push bike.
> >
> > A bit much, I agree. Although a few years back I'd happily do 60-80
> > miles on a ride, just for pleasure like.
> >
> >>On mountains. -
> >
> > But not on mountains, I must admit.
> >
> > More importantly, I'd be averaging about 15mph (including rests)
> > whereas they'll be up close to double that, I imagine. Respect.
> >
> > Actually, you're talking about the Alpe d'Huez section, right? So they
> > won't be _that_ fast up there.
>
> Really? Here's the record ...
>
> Marco Pantini - 36 minutes, 50 seconds. 13.8km at an average gradient of
> 8.1% with 21 hairpin bends, 1850 metres (6,069 ft) high.
>
> I'm sure some of you maths monkeys can work this out, but I'm thinking his
> average up the Alp de Huez is faster than your average on the flat.
Just over 20km/h innit.
Call it 12mph.
If you assume I'd be a girl on the hairpins it's _just_ possible that
they could go up faster than I could go down.
|
|
|
| Re: Tour de France [message #787421 ] |
Tue, 18 July 2006 12:38 |
|
<toad_oftoadhall [at] yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1153218464.291516.186030 [at] 35g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> elyob wrote:
>> "Ace" <seesig [at] virgin.net> wrote in message
>> news:f5apb2p9nvaqf4dlb96sgddbg37ano2g91 [at] 4ax.com...
>> > On 18 Jul 2006 01:55:42 -0700, toad_oftoadhall [at] yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>> >
>> >>Jeeze, great roads but 187km in a day. On a push bike.
>> >
>> > A bit much, I agree. Although a few years back I'd happily do 60-80
>> > miles on a ride, just for pleasure like.
>> >
>> >>On mountains. -
>> >
>> > But not on mountains, I must admit.
>> >
>> > More importantly, I'd be averaging about 15mph (including rests)
>> > whereas they'll be up close to double that, I imagine. Respect.
>> >
>> > Actually, you're talking about the Alpe d'Huez section, right? So they
>> > won't be _that_ fast up there.
>>
>> Really? Here's the record ...
>>
>> Marco Pantini - 36 minutes, 50 seconds. 13.8km at an average gradient of
>> 8.1% with 21 hairpin bends, 1850 metres (6,069 ft) high.
>>
>> I'm sure some of you maths monkeys can work this out, but I'm thinking
>> his
>> average up the Alp de Huez is faster than your average on the flat.
>
> Just over 20km/h innit.
>
> Call it 12mph.
22.38 kph = 13.91 mph
> If you assume I'd be a girl on the hairpins it's _just_ possible that
> they could go up faster than I could go down.
Oh, I dunno, my fastest down the road from Ditchling Beacon on a mountain
bike is 53.3mph .. yes, the .3 is important.
|
|
|
| Re: Tour de France [message #787422 ] |
Tue, 18 July 2006 12:39 |
|
On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 11:20:30 +0100, "elyob" <newsprofile [at] gmail.com>
wrote:
>
>"Ace" <seesig [at] virgin.net> wrote in message
>news:f5apb2p9nvaqf4dlb96sgddbg37ano2g91 [at] 4ax.com...
>> More importantly, I'd be averaging about 15mph (including rests)
>> whereas they'll be up close to double that, I imagine. Respect.
>>
>> Actually, you're talking about the Alpe d'Huez section, right? So they
>> won't be _that_ fast up there.
>
>Really? Here's the record ...
>
>Marco Pantini - 36 minutes, 50 seconds. 13.8km at an average gradient of
>8.1% with 21 hairpin bends, 1850 metres (6,069 ft) high.
>
>I'm sure some of you maths monkeys can work this out,
You clearly can't. It's 14mph over a short distance. Hell of a climb,
sure, and as I said, respect is due. But nothing like their average
speed over the longer distance.
>but I'm thinking his
>average up the Alp de Huez is faster than your average on the flat.
You're wrong then. And while I was never a racer and I wouldn't dream
of comparing myself to these gods in any way, my quoted 'average' on
the flat was over a full day _including_stops_. I'd normally have been
cycling at about 18mph, or 20mph for a shorter (1 hour) stint.
--
_______
..'_/_|_\_'. Ace (brucedotrogers a.t rochedotcom)
\`\ | /`/ GSX-R1000K3
`\\ | //' BOTAFOT#3, SbS#2, UKRMMA#13, DFV#8, SKA#2, IBB#10
`\|/`
`
|
|
|
| Re: Tour de France [message #787426 ] |
Tue, 18 July 2006 12:34 |
|
On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 11:20:30 +0100, "elyob" <newsprofile [at] gmail.com>
wrote:
>
>"Ace" <seesig [at] virgin.net> wrote in message
>news:f5apb2p9nvaqf4dlb96sgddbg37ano2g91 [at] 4ax.com...
>> On 18 Jul 2006 01:55:42 -0700, toad_oftoadhall [at] yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>>
>>>Jeeze, great roads but 187km in a day. On a push bike.
>>
>> A bit much, I agree. Although a few years back I'd happily do 60-80
>> miles on a ride, just for pleasure like.
>>
>>>On mountains. -
>>
>> But not on mountains, I must admit.
>>
>> More importantly, I'd be averaging about 15mph (including rests)
>> whereas they'll be up close to double that, I imagine. Respect.
>>
>> Actually, you're talking about the Alpe d'Huez section, right? So they
>> won't be _that_ fast up there.
>
>Really? Here's the record ...
>
>Marco Pantini - 36 minutes, 50 seconds. 13.8km at an average gradient of
>8.1% with 21 hairpin bends, 1850 metres (6,069 ft) high.
He may have been fast but he was also a cheat.
--
http://www.addict-racing.com
|
|
|
| Re: Tour de France [message #787432 ] |
Tue, 18 July 2006 12:43 |
|
elyob wrote:
> Oh, I dunno, my fastest down the road from Ditchling Beacon on a mountain
> bike is 53.3mph .. yes, the .3 is important.
Fuck me.
In the alps I've seen push bikes that gave me a run for my money
downhill (Overtaking a push bike at 60mph+ is a bit weird - especially
when I brake for hairpins and they don't seem to) but I always got past
soon enough. However, I can safely say down that shitty gravel strewn
twisty down from Ditchling Beacon you'd be quicker on a pushbike than
me on a B12.
Of course, you'd get your arse kicked by me on the A23 going home.
|
|
|
| Re: Tour de France [message #787435 ] |
Tue, 18 July 2006 12:46 |
|
Ben wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 11:20:30 +0100, "elyob" <newsprofile [at] gmail.com>
> >Marco Pantini - 36 minutes, 50 seconds. 13.8km at an average gradient of
> >8.1% with 21 hairpin bends, 1850 metres (6,069 ft) high.
>
> He may have been fast but he was also a cheat.
They all are. At the pace it's done at today without the drugs there
would simply be no finishers. Or so I read. Somewhere.
|
|
|
| Re: Tour de France [message #787443 ] |
Tue, 18 July 2006 12:50 |
|
<toad_oftoadhall [at] yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1153219390.303245.278310 [at] i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> elyob wrote:
>
>> Oh, I dunno, my fastest down the road from Ditchling Beacon on a mountain
>> bike is 53.3mph .. yes, the .3 is important.
>
> Fuck me.
>
> In the alps I've seen push bikes that gave me a run for my money
> downhill (Overtaking a push bike at 60mph+ is a bit weird - especially
> when I brake for hairpins and they don't seem to) but I always got past
> soon enough. However, I can safely say down that shitty gravel strewn
> twisty down from Ditchling Beacon you'd be quicker on a pushbike than
> me on a B12.
>
> Of course, you'd get your arse kicked by me on the A23 going home.
Aha, this was down the main road on the London to Brighton bike ride. I want
to do it on a race bike with bigger gears. Reckon I could 70mph down there.
|
|
|
| Re: Tour de France [message #787444 ] |
Tue, 18 July 2006 12:51 |
|
"Ace" <seesig [at] virgin.net> wrote in message
news:baepb2pqb4ftjdnjit449qpce53scrcrb8 [at] 4ax.com...
> On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 11:20:30 +0100, "elyob" <newsprofile [at] gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Ace" <seesig [at] virgin.net> wrote in message
>>news:f5apb2p9nvaqf4dlb96sgddbg37ano2g91 [at] 4ax.com...
>
>>> More importantly, I'd be averaging about 15mph (including rests)
>>> whereas they'll be up close to double that, I imagine. Respect.
>>>
>>> Actually, you're talking about the Alpe d'Huez section, right? So they
>>> won't be _that_ fast up there.
>>
>>Really? Here's the record ...
>>
>>Marco Pantini - 36 minutes, 50 seconds. 13.8km at an average gradient of
>>8.1% with 21 hairpin bends, 1850 metres (6,069 ft) high.
>>
>>I'm sure some of you maths monkeys can work this out,
>
> You clearly can't. It's 14mph over a short distance. Hell of a climb,
> sure, and as I said, respect is due. But nothing like their average
> speed over the longer distance.
Forunate that I did post it before you posted this then. Couldn't be arsed
before.
>>but I'm thinking his
>>average up the Alp de Huez is faster than your average on the flat.
>
> You're wrong then. And while I was never a racer and I wouldn't dream
> of comparing myself to these gods in any way, my quoted 'average' on
> the flat was over a full day _including_stops_. I'd normally have been
> cycling at about 18mph, or 20mph for a shorter (1 hour) stint.
I thought you said 15 mph .. As he's averaging near 14mph I think that's
"close enough".
|
|
|
| Re: Tour de France [message #787446 ] |
Tue, 18 July 2006 12:56 |
|
On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 11:51:30 +0100, "elyob" <newsprofile [at] gmail.com>
wrote:
>
>"Ace" <seesig [at] virgin.net> wrote in message
>news:baepb2pqb4ftjdnjit449qpce53scrcrb8 [at] 4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 11:20:30 +0100, "elyob" <newsprofile [at] gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>but I'm thinking his
>>>average up the Alp de Huez is faster than your average on the flat.
>>
>> You're wrong then. And while I was never a racer and I wouldn't dream
>> of comparing myself to these gods in any way, my quoted 'average' on
>> the flat was over a full day _including_stops_. I'd normally have been
>> cycling at about 18mph, or 20mph for a shorter (1 hour) stint.
>
>I thought you said 15 mph .. As he's averaging near 14mph I think that's
>"close enough".
FFS can't you read?
--
_______
..'_/_|_\_'. Ace (brucedotrogers a.t rochedotcom)
\`\ | /`/ GSX-R1000K3
`\\ | //' BOTAFOT#3, SbS#2, UKRMMA#13, DFV#8, SKA#2, IBB#10
`\|/`
`
|
|
|
| Re: Tour de France [message #787447 ] |
Tue, 18 July 2006 12:56 |
|
<toad_oftoadhall [at] yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1153219597.769779.216600 [at] b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Ben wrote:
>> On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 11:20:30 +0100, "elyob" <newsprofile [at] gmail.com>
>
>> >Marco Pantini - 36 minutes, 50 seconds. 13.8km at an average gradient of
>> >8.1% with 21 hairpin bends, 1850 metres (6,069 ft) high.
>>
>> He may have been fast but he was also a cheat.
>
> They all are. At the pace it's done at today without the drugs there
> would simply be no finishers. Or so I read. Somewhere.
>
It's been the same since day 1, so why do people make such an issue of it?
Pantani was never proved, although there were suspicious red blood cell
counts. No denying drug abuse on the last day though, bearing in mind he
took half of Columbia with him.
|
|
|
| Re: Tour de France [message #787450 ] |
Tue, 18 July 2006 12:52 |
|
On 18 Jul 2006 03:46:37 -0700, toad_oftoadhall [at] yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>Ben wrote:
>> On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 11:20:30 +0100, "elyob" <newsprofile [at] gmail.com>
>
>> >Marco Pantini - 36 minutes, 50 seconds. 13.8km at an average gradient of
>> >8.1% with 21 hairpin bends, 1850 metres (6,069 ft) high.
>>
>> He may have been fast but he was also a cheat.
>
>They all are. At the pace it's done at today without the drugs there
>would simply be no finishers. Or so I read. Somewhere.
Being a cyclist I'm a fan of the TDF and I'd like to believe that they
are making in-roads into the doping that has been rife in road racing.
Certainly this years event seems to be taking it pretty seriously by
booting out riders who there is even the slightest bit of suspicion.
The speeds they do are possible by normal training, but like any sport
there will always be someone who will cheat to get ahead.
--
http://www.addict-racing.com
|
|
|
| Re: Tour de France [message #787455 ] |
Tue, 18 July 2006 13:30 |
|
"elyob" <newsprofile [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
news:44bcbceb$1 [at] news1.homechoice.co.uk...
> Aha, this was down the main road on the London to Brighton bike ride. I
want
> to do it on a race bike with bigger gears. Reckon I could 70mph down
there.
>
>
Bloke was done (or maybe just severely ticked off) some years ago for going
significantly over 70mph on his pushbike somewhere up in north of Scotland.
|
|
|
| Re: Tour de France [message #787456 ] |
Tue, 18 July 2006 13:16 |
|
"Ace" <seesig [at] virgin.net> wrote in message
news:hhfpb21urtmcivnb0g0q90j17keo1kslf7 [at] 4ax.com...
> On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 11:51:30 +0100, "elyob" <newsprofile [at] gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Ace" <seesig [at] virgin.net> wrote in message
>>news:baepb2pqb4ftjdnjit449qpce53scrcrb8 [at] 4ax.com...
>>> On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 11:20:30 +0100, "elyob" <newsprofile [at] gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>
>>>>but I'm thinking his
>>>>average up the Alp de Huez is faster than your average on the flat.
>>>
>>> You're wrong then. And while I was never a racer and I wouldn't dream
>>> of comparing myself to these gods in any way, my quoted 'average' on
>>> the flat was over a full day _including_stops_. I'd normally have been
>>> cycling at about 18mph, or 20mph for a shorter (1 hour) stint.
>>
>>I thought you said 15 mph .. As he's averaging near 14mph I think that's
>>"close enough".
>
> FFS can't you read?
"I'd be averaging about 15mph". I can cut and paste too. What's your fucking
problem anyway?
|
|
|
| Re: Tour de France [message #787473 ] |
Tue, 18 July 2006 13:33 |
|
..
> > elyob wrote:
> >
> >> Oh, I dunno, my fastest down the road from Ditchling Beacon on a mountain
> >> bike is 53.3mph .. yes, the .3 is important.
> Aha, this was down the main road on the London to Brighton bike ride. I want
> to do it on a race bike with bigger gears. Reckon I could 70mph down there.
When I did the London to Brighton bike ride this year everyone I saw
was going UP Ditchling Beacon. Bet it was a bit hairy going down with
26,999 other riders coming towards you. I managed to get up without
stopping but nowhere near 53.3 mph.
--
Mark Reid
CBR1100XX
BOTAFOT#62
|
|
|
| Re: Tour de France [message #787480 ] |
Tue, 18 July 2006 13:40 |
|
On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 12:16:06 +0100, "elyob" <newsprofile [at] gmail.com>
wrote:
>
>"Ace" <seesig [at] virgin.net> wrote in message
>news:hhfpb21urtmcivnb0g0q90j17keo1kslf7 [at] 4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 11:51:30 +0100, "elyob" <newsprofile [at] gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"Ace" <seesig [at] virgin.net> wrote in message
>>>news:baepb2pqb4ftjdnjit449qpce53scrcrb8 [at] 4ax.com...
>>>> You're wrong then. And while I was never a racer and I wouldn't dream
>>>> of comparing myself to these gods in any way, my quoted 'average' on
>>>> the flat was over a full day _including_stops_. I'd normally have been
>>>> cycling at about 18mph, or 20mph for a shorter (1 hour) stint.
>>>
>>>I thought you said 15 mph .. As he's averaging near 14mph I think that's
>>>"close enough".
>>
>> FFS can't you read?
>
>"I'd be averaging about 15mph". I can cut and paste too.
"over a full day _including_stops_"
>What's your fucking problem anyway?
Your comprehension.
--
_______
..'_/_|_\_'. Ace (brucedotrogers a.t rochedotcom)
\`\ | /`/ GSX-R1000K3
`\\ | //' BOTAFOT#3, SbS#2, UKRMMA#13, DFV#8, SKA#2, IBB#10
`\|/`
`
|
|
|
| Re: Tour de France [message #787483 ] |
Tue, 18 July 2006 13:42 |
|
Ben wrote:
> The speeds they do are possible by normal training,
According to this article the problem isn't speed, it's the fact they
do it day after day after day.
It argued that you simlpy couldn't do it _without_ drug assistance and
the past attidude of the sport to dope testing suggests that's the case.
|
|
|
| Re: Tour de France [message #787488 ] |
Tue, 18 July 2006 13:49 |
|
"Mark Reid" <mark.reid [at] osborne.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1153222398.569008.54840 [at] p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
>
> .
>> > elyob wrote:
>> >
>> >> Oh, I dunno, my fastest down the road from Ditchling Beacon on a
>> >> mountain
>> >> bike is 53.3mph .. yes, the .3 is important.
>
>> Aha, this was down the main road on the London to Brighton bike ride. I
>> want
>> to do it on a race bike with bigger gears. Reckon I could 70mph down
>> there.
>
> When I did the London to Brighton bike ride this year everyone I saw
> was going UP Ditchling Beacon. Bet it was a bit hairy going down with
> 26,999 other riders coming towards you. I managed to get up without
> stopping but nowhere near 53.3 mph.
Ditchling Beacon is the high point, i.e. a beacon. I cycled up Ditchling
Beacon and went down the other side. When I did it a few years back (when
the trains allowed you to come back on them) a few people did cycle 'against
the traffic'. Muppets.
I cycled all the way up, but no way managed to get up without stopping a
couple of times. Too many people not able to keep left when walking.
|
|
|
| Re: Tour de France [message #787496 ] |
Tue, 18 July 2006 13:57 |
|
"Ace" <seesig [at] virgin.net> wrote in message
news:22ipb251pcptqrr8hrg9jtnf0qqd9vo4nd [at] 4ax.com...
> On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 12:16:06 +0100, "elyob" <newsprofile [at] gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Ace" <seesig [at] virgin.net> wrote in message
>>news:hhfpb21urtmcivnb0g0q90j17keo1kslf7 [at] 4ax.com...
>>> On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 11:51:30 +0100, "elyob" <newsprofile [at] gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>"Ace" <seesig [at] virgin.net> wrote in message
>>>>news:baepb2pqb4ftjdnjit449qpce53scrcrb8 [at] 4ax.com...
>
>>>>> You're wrong then. And while I was never a racer and I wouldn't dream
>>>>> of comparing myself to these gods in any way, my quoted 'average' on
>>>>> the flat was over a full day _including_stops_. I'd normally have been
>>>>> cycling at about 18mph, or 20mph for a shorter (1 hour) stint.
>>>>
>>>>I thought you said 15 mph .. As he's averaging near 14mph I think that's
>>>>"close enough".
>>>
>>> FFS can't you read?
>>
>>"I'd be averaging about 15mph". I can cut and paste too.
>
> "over a full day _including_stops_"
Pantini's was over a full day too, just that he didn't have to stop.
Don't know why you're getting so worked up about it though.
|
|
|
| Re: Tour de France [message #787498 ] |
Tue, 18 July 2006 14:00 |
|
On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 12:57:50 +0100, "elyob" <newsprofile [at] gmail.com>
wrote:
>
>"Ace" <seesig [at] virgin.net> wrote in message
>news:22ipb251pcptqrr8hrg9jtnf0qqd9vo4nd [at] 4ax.com...
>> "over a full day _including_stops_"
>
>Pantini's was over a full day too, just that he didn't have to stop.
Not the stuff you quoted, YTC. His full day average would be _much_
faster than that.
>Don't know why you're getting so worked up about it though.
I'm not. I just want you to learn to read. It's for your own good, I
promise.
--
_______
..'_/_|_\_'. Ace (brucedotrogers a.t rochedotcom)
\`\ | /`/ GSX-R1000K3
`\\ | //' BOTAFOT#3, SbS#2, UKRMMA#13, DFV#8, SKA#2, IBB#10
`\|/`
`
|
|
|
| Re: Tour de France [message #787515 ] |
Tue, 18 July 2006 14:52 |
|
"Ace" <seesig [at] virgin.net> wrote in message
news:h8jpb25hrc3jjburt9e0nkh8n475iofnjt [at] 4ax.com...
> On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 12:57:50 +0100, "elyob" <newsprofile [at] gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Ace" <seesig [at] virgin.net> wrote in message
>>news:22ipb251pcptqrr8hrg9jtnf0qqd9vo4nd [at] 4ax.com...
>
>>> "over a full day _including_stops_"
>>
>>Pantini's was over a full day too, just that he didn't have to stop.
>
> Not the stuff you quoted, YTC. His full day average would be _much_
> faster than that.
Okay, I fucked that round up.
>>Don't know why you're getting so worked up about it though.
>
> I'm not. I just want you to learn to read. It's for your own good, I
> promise.
Well, I've got better things to do, like work, that don't involve having an
online debate. I'll go and do that instead. At least I can then be insulted
by people who pay me for the privilege.
|
|
|
| Re: Tour de France [message #787517 ] |
Tue, 18 July 2006 14:54 |
|
elyob wrote:
> At least I can then be insulted
> by people who pay me for the privilege.
I'll give you a tenner if I can call you a cunt.
|
|
|
| Re: Tour de France [message #787561 ] |
Tue, 18 July 2006 16:00 |
|
<toad_oftoadhall [at] yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1153227284.753663.170130 [at] h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> elyob wrote:
>
>> At least I can then be insulted
>> by people who pay me for the privilege.
>
> I'll give you a tenner if I can call you a cunt.
>
I think you just did for free ...
|
|
|
| Re: Tour de France [message #787569 ] |
Tue, 18 July 2006 16:13 |
|
elyob wrote:
> <toad_oftoadhall [at] yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:1153227284.753663.170130 [at] h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> > elyob wrote:
> >
> >> At least I can then be insulted
> >> by people who pay me for the privilege.
> >
> > I'll give you a tenner if I can call you a cunt.
> >
>
> I think you just did for free ...
Well I could say you're 'pretty much' a cunt but Ace would probably
come along and say you're 3mph away from true cunthood and therefore
not a cunt at all. Nothing like, oh dear me no.
|
|
|
| Re: Tour de France [message #787685 ] |
Tue, 18 July 2006 22:26 |
|
On 18 Jul 2006 02:36:02 -0700, toad_oftoadhall [at] yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>Ace wrote:
>
>> Actually, you're talking about the Alpe d'Huez section, right? So they
>> won't be _that_ fast up there.
>
>I don't know the Alpe d'Huez road - it's a dead end and I don't do dead
>ends. [2] However I do know Izoard and du Lautaret, so I'm talking
>about them, I guess. Agony.
>
>Mind you the drugs those boys are on probably dull any sense of pain.
>
>[2] ...but I might nip up there this summer now I've seen the road. [3]
>
>[3] Yeah, there's no [1]. Fooled you, eh!
--
-Pip
|
|
|
| Re: Tour de France [message #787747 ] |
Wed, 19 July 2006 01:54 |
|
<toad_oftoadhall [at] yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1153232014.755607.308320 [at] h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> elyob wrote:
>> <toad_oftoadhall [at] yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
>> news:1153227284.753663.170130 [at] h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>> > elyob wrote:
>> >
>> >> At least I can then be insulted
>> >> by people who pay me for the privilege.
>> >
>> > I'll give you a tenner if I can call you a cunt.
>> >
>>
>> I think you just did for free ...
>
> Well I could say you're 'pretty much' a cunt but Ace would probably
> come along and say you're 3mph away from true cunthood and therefore
> not a cunt at all. Nothing like, oh dear me no.
<last word>
|
|
|
| Re: Tour de France [message #789139 ] |
Sat, 22 July 2006 23:25 |
|
On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 11:52:27 +0100, Ben <ukrm [at] bensales.com> wrote:
>On 18 Jul 2006 03:46:37 -0700, toad_oftoadhall [at] yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>
>>Ben wrote:
>>> On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 11:20:30 +0100, "elyob" <newsprofile [at] gmail.com>
>>
>>> >Marco Pantini - 36 minutes, 50 seconds. 13.8km at an average gradient of
>>> >8.1% with 21 hairpin bends, 1850 metres (6,069 ft) high.
>>>
>>> He may have been fast but he was also a cheat.
>>
>>They all are. At the pace it's done at today without the drugs there
>>would simply be no finishers. Or so I read. Somewhere.
>
>Being a cyclist I'm a fan of the TDF and I'd like to believe that they
>are making in-roads into the doping that has been rife in road racing.
Which is pretty much my view of things. I find it terribly disappointing
when people are being dragged out because of cheating but I imagine the
pressure on people to succeed is enormous.
I do boggle at what the cyclists actually do and how they do it.
>Certainly this years event seems to be taking it pretty seriously by
>booting out riders who there is even the slightest bit of suspicion.
And Ulrich has been booted off the T Mobile team permanently. He also
faces potential prosecution in Germany. This is looking very bad indeed.
>The speeds they do are possible by normal training, but like any sport
>there will always be someone who will cheat to get ahead.
Well this year's Tour has been a yo-yo event like nothing I've seen for
years. The almost sole break away by Landis the other day to regain
almost the 8 minutes he lost the day before was incredible.
--
Paul C - "the big camp bastard" (tm d.a.r.s.y)
VFR800 | ZX6R | R1150GS
BOD#5, two#4, BOTAFOT#23, BOTAFOF#4, URMSBC#09, COFF#09
Admits to working for London Underground!
|
|
|
| Re: Tour de France [message #789181 ] |
Sun, 23 July 2006 07:53 |
|
Ace wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 11:20:30 +0100, "elyob" <newsprofile [at] gmail.com>
> >Marco Pantini - 36 minutes, 50 seconds. 13.8km at an average gradient of
> >8.1% with 21 hairpin bends, 1850 metres (6,069 ft) high.
> You clearly can't. It's 14mph over a short distance. Hell of a climb,
> sure, and as I said, respect is due. But nothing like their average
> speed over the longer distance.
The amazing thing is that they may pass several "cols" closely tough as
the Alpe d'Huez over nearly 200kms.
To be noticed: Pantani was disqualified several years later for ilegal
drugs usage and eventually died in strange conditions. Concerning the
use of stimulants in professional cycling, a cyclist said "you can't do
those things going on spaghetti".
|
|
|
Gehe zu:
aktuelle Zeit: Thu Jan 8 00:27:04 CET 2009
Insgesamt benötigte Zeit, um die Seite zu erzeugen: 0.12177 Sekunden |
