Let's try and get 1,000,000 replies to this post

Whoa. When did something like that last happen in the UK? For Norway I've heard 1947 mentioned as the last time it was this dry.

I came home yesterday from a six day hike with two friends. Several places, the creeks had dried out and rivers had turned into creeks ... when we arrived at the last hut on Thursday evening, we had to walk to a lake a kilometer away to get drinking water.

Also, for a change there was very few mosquitoes. But more wasps ...
 
Dr. Eddies Wingman said:
Whoa. When did something like that last happen in the UK? For Norway I've heard 1947 mentioned as the last time it was this dry.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure. One of my colleagues did tell me but I've forgotten. It was a few decades ago for sure.

Grass is largely yellow and parched, but now that the heatwave is over the inevitable storms have begun. It's windy with intermittent showers.
 
Black Wizard said:
Roglic's fault for being shit. Criticize him, not Froome.
Click to expand...

I dislike Froome in general. I'm glad that Thomas won this year. He is a far more likeable character. Also that Dumolin stole Froome's stage victory.

Anyways, Roglič's yesterday's performance left some wounds in stamina it seems.
 
Black Wizard said:
Why? He's always very polite and reasonable in interviews. Is it just because he's successful? :confused:
Click to expand...

Nah. Because of his "asthma" problems.

I like Thomas far more. But of course team Sky will always win, because they can pay the best riders. They have a yearly budget of 30 million pounds.
 
I'm not aware that he didn't inform anti-doping about what was in his inhaler. Wasn't it taken under a TUE? Besides, it was demonstrated that the test results were unreliable as dehydration wasn't taken into account. He was racing up mountains in Spain in September - dehydration is likely.

All elite athletes in "repetitive" sports are probably pushing the boundaries with regards to doping i.e. they are taking substances and using methods that are not illegal yet as the governing bodies aren't aware of them. If you think that Roglic or Dumoulin are 100% clean then you're very naive.
 
Black Wizard said:
I'm not aware that he didn't inform anti-doping about what was in his inhaler. Wasn't it taken under a TUE? Besides, it was demonstrated that the test results were unreliable as dehydration wasn't taken into account. He was racing up mountains in Spain in September - dehydration is likely.

All elite athletes in "repetitive" sports are probably pushing the boundaries with regards to doping i.e. they are taking substances and using methods that are not illegal yet as the governing bodies aren't aware of them. If you think that Roglic or Dumoulin are 100% clean then you're very naive.
Click to expand...
I know they aren't. But you can't convert me into a Froome fan here. I know that every team has their ways, Sky even more with their massive resources.

Everyone has their preferences and I don't like Froome. That's mainly because he has had the whole team working only for him, simply because Sky can afford that, while other teams can't. I like they switched it up this year with Thomas.
 
matic22 said:
I know they aren't. But you can't convert me into a Froome fan here. I know that every team has their ways, Sky even more with their massive resources.

Everyone has their preferences and I don't like Froome. That's mainly because he has had the whole team working only for him, simply because Sky can afford that, while other teams can't. I like they switched it up this year with Thomas.
Click to expand...
I'm not trying to convert you into a Froome fan. I just wanted to get the facts (as we know them) straight. As the salbutomol (or whatever) case was thrown out by WADA do you have a problem with Froome for it or not? Is it just because his team works for him? Or because he's so successful? :confused:
 
Black Wizard said:
I'm not trying to convert you into a Froome fan. I just wanted to get the facts (as we know them) straight. As the salbutomol (or whatever) case was thrown out by WADA do you have a problem with Froome for it or not? Is it just because his team works for him? Or because he's so successful? :confused:
Click to expand...
A bit of all. But mainly the first two.
 
JudasMyGuide said:
...well, I did call a piece of work/an ideology of a beloved frontman of the band whose forum this is malignant, didn't I? ;)

That attitude you mention… I'm really sorry it looks that way and I will try not to do it anymore. I certainly don't think youse will hate me because of my faith, but more because of my character - throughout my life I've kept coming across some arguments/theories that are irrelevant, unsubstantiated, illogical and so on and they are usually put forth by people with this "above it all" attitude and I'm not patient with that. And I hated it even when I was still an atheist. Like the "man of science" argument - that's so overused and so... "not clever" in its basis I got this reflex against it, need to count to ten and I also might get somewhat hostile when somebody uses it (or at least it might seem so) and I believe it even already happened on this very forum. :oops: I don't like it, but it happens. Also, I'm a hothead and sometimes my conclusions tend to be drastic and dramatic and I really don't want to come off as SMX II ("you're an idiot, goodbye"), yet I also don't believe in that kind of relativism where "you got your truth, I got mine", no, there is only one truth, one way the facts are and we are obligated to do our best to try and get as close to the truth as possible. And that's not necessarily a religious thing, that's also the basis for all academical education (or, well, at least it should be). But... well, Foro tries to do that, I believe, and it usually ends up with pages of discussions on what your definition of "is" is, lot of hostilities, Medals of Boredom and so on. And religion is a really touchy subject, you wouldn't believe, for atheists sometimes even more so. Combined with the aforementioned hot-headedness, impatience regarding some attitudes and arguments and so on...

And doing this in typing on the net doesn't really help.

And this is how we get to "malignancies" and my pre-emptive apology that unfortunately ended up sounding condescending, obviously. Sorry 'bout that.
Click to expand...

Suppose I wrote an answer of two pages and then cut it to this:
Can't speak for others obviously but I personally have no problem at all to combine my severe dislike for the Abrahamic religions (ok, and the rest of them, don't wanna discriminate anyone, do I now) with the pure pleasure of reading your posts on subjects that matter to you, regardless if I agree or not. But I do agree with @The Flash even though I understand how important the concept of martyrdom is for Catholics.
 
matic22 said:
A bit of all. But mainly the first two.
Click to expand...
Well having the team work for the leader is how road cycling works. It's how sprinters win stages too (apart from Sagan, who doesn't need any help). Team Sky have certainly taken the team work to a whole new level where their climbing domestiques are arguably good enough to challenge for Grand Tour victories themselves. It has killed the racing and unpredictability to a certain extent but the other teams basically let them dominate the peleton and set the pace leading into the climbs. Obviously a big part of that is the caliber of cyclist they are able to recruit with the massive budget you already alluded to. Perhaps the UCI should introduce a budget/salary cap to stop one team building a team of top class climbers and make a more level playing field. Froome hasn't always just relied on his team though. Did you see how he won the Giro this year, or how he came back from a puncture in last years Tour de France?

As for the doping case, he has been cleared of any wrongdoing so unless you know more then the scientists and doctors who looked at the evidence then it just seems like sour grapes. Also bear in mind that Alberto Contador served a doping ban and came back to immediately win the 2012 Vuelta and fractured a bone in his leg during the 2014 Tour de France but miraculously recovered to win the Vuelta that year. Alejandro Valverde also served a doping ban and came back to finish second straight away in the 2012 Vuelta. These are guys who served bans for real offences yet don't get any of the vile abuse that Chris Froome has received. On several occasions Team Sky have released his data to scientists who know what they are talking about and they've all said that there is nothing abnormal about his performances. He has never failed a drugs test either by the way - the result from the Vuelta last year was adverse and it was demonstrated to WADA (who also know what they are talking about) that the results were not abnormal. Everyone should end the WITCH HUNT and move on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top