Re: Tour de Ducks (spoiler)

[Peter B]

"elyob" > wrote in message
...
> It's lethal out there ...

But Millar takes it!!!!!! :-)

Pete

[elyob]

"Peter B" > wrote in message
...
>
> "elyob" > wrote in message
> ...
> > It's lethal out there ...
>
> But Millar takes it!!!!!! :-)
>

Yup fantastic news. I thought Ullrich was going to skid on his bum all the
way to the finish line ....

[elyob]

"Peter B" > wrote in message
...
>
> "elyob" > wrote in message
> ...
> > It's lethal out there ...
>
> But Millar takes it!!!!!! :-)
>

Hmm ... it's pretty ****ing cool ... straight from the horse's mouth.

[Tony W]

"Garry Broad" > wrote in message
...
> >
>
> I really must learn to not log in here before 7.00pm and ITV2 :-)

That's why it says Spoiler in the title -- as agreed for the benefit of
those poor souls who cannot handle knowing the result before watching the
stage.

>
> So tell me people, you knowledgeable ones of the 'racing boys', how
> good is David Millar? Damn sight quicker than me that's for sure, and
> obviously good enough to win today's heat (which would make him pretty
> damn hot), but is he good enough to take the crown outright some day?
> How does he rank with the very best of them?


The consensus seems to be that he has most of the physical attributes but is
not dedicated enough to put in the work day in, day out.

Maybe that will come. Armstrong was a bit of an enfant terrible until his
illness. Was it the illness or maturity that made the difference?

Millar could wake up one morning and realise he has the necessary kit of
parts to do it and knuckle down to the grunt work to make it reality.

T

[lbockhed]

"Just zis Guy, you know?" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 26 Jul 2003 18:41:11 +0100, Garry Broad
> > wrote:
>
> >is he good enough to take the crown outright some day?
> >How does he rank with the very best of them?
>
> I don't think he'll win the Tour - next year my money is on Hamilton
> or Vinokourov - but I can see him as a regular on the podium in the
> near future. But I know bugger all about cycle racing, I just watch
> it on the telly ;-)
>

no next year Cadel Evans

> Guy
> ===
> ** WARNING ** This posting may contain traces of irony.
> http://www.chapmancentral.com
> [currently offline awaiting ADSL transfer to new ISP]

[elyob]

"Tony W" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Garry Broad" > wrote in message
> ...
> > >
> >
> > I really must learn to not log in here before 7.00pm and ITV2 :-)
>
> That's why it says Spoiler in the title -- as agreed for the benefit of
> those poor souls who cannot handle knowing the result before watching the
> stage.
>
> >
> > So tell me people, you knowledgeable ones of the 'racing boys', how
> > good is David Millar? Damn sight quicker than me that's for sure, and
> > obviously good enough to win today's heat (which would make him pretty
> > damn hot), but is he good enough to take the crown outright some day?
> > How does he rank with the very best of them?
>
>
> The consensus seems to be that he has most of the physical attributes but
is
> not dedicated enough to put in the work day in, day out.
>
> Maybe that will come. Armstrong was a bit of an enfant terrible until his
> illness. Was it the illness or maturity that made the difference?
>
> Millar could wake up one morning and realise he has the necessary kit of
> parts to do it and knuckle down to the grunt work to make it reality.
>

He's a jockey, not a rider IMHO. Fantastically quick, will never win 'the
race'. I'm more interested in Nicole Cooke in cycling.

[iddqdATworldonline.dk]

Tony W wrote:
> Maybe that will come. Armstrong was a bit of an enfant terrible until his
> illness. Was it the illness or maturity that made the difference?
>
Illness - he lost his excess bodyfat and managed to not get it back when
recovering.

Kind regards

Bruno

[James Annan]

Danny Colyer wrote:

> *But* the title says nothing about it referring to a specific stage.
> After
> reading the first post I (like Garry, presumably) had concluded that,
> despite the header, it had nothing to do with the race. For the heading
> "Tour de Ducks" to tell us that it was about the TdF TT would require
> the
> reader to know something about the weather conditions during the stage,
> which is unlikely before having seen the stage.
>
> Anyway, I've decided not to read urc during the TdF next year. I've
> just
> had too many stages spoiled this year by people not making clear in
> their
> headers that they're about to do it.

Seems a bit bizarre to complain that the 'spoiler' header was not
adequate warning - perhaps you would rather it said 'spoiler, this post
mentions that millar won the TT'?

James

[Danny Colyer]

Garry Broad wrote:
> > I really must learn to not log in here before 7.00pm and ITV2 :-)

prompting Tony W to reply:
> That's why it says Spoiler in the title -- as agreed for the benefit
> of those poor souls who cannot handle knowing the result before
> watching the stage.

*But* the title says nothing about it referring to a specific stage.
After
reading the first post I (like Garry, presumably) had concluded that,
despite the header, it had nothing to do with the race. For the heading
"Tour de Ducks" to tell us that it was about the TdF TT would require
the
reader to know something about the weather conditions during the stage,
which is unlikely before having seen the stage.

Anyway, I've decided not to read urc during the TdF next year. I've
just
had too many stages spoiled this year by people not making clear in
their
headers that they're about to do it.

--
Danny Colyer (remove safety to reply) ( http://www.juggler.net/danny )
Recumbent cycle page: http://www.speedy5.freeserve.co.uk/recumbents/
"He who dares not offend cannot be honest." - Thomas Paine

[Danny Colyer]

James Annan wrote:
> Seems a bit bizarre to complain that the 'spoiler' header was not
> adequate warning - perhaps you would rather it said 'spoiler, this
> post mentions that millar won the TT'?

I would rather it mentioned which stage it contained a spoiler for. The
main part of the header (Tour de Ducks) suggests that it might actually
be
something completely unrelated (unless you happen to know what the
weather
was like in France yesterday).

--
Danny Colyer (remove safety to reply) ( http://www.juggler.net/danny )
Recumbent cycle page: http://www.speedy5.freeserve.co.uk/recumbents/
"He who dares not offend cannot be honest." - Thomas Paine

[elyob]

"Danny Colyer" > wrote in message
...
> James Annan wrote:
> > Seems a bit bizarre to complain that the 'spoiler' header was not
> > adequate warning - perhaps you would rather it said 'spoiler, this
> > post mentions that millar won the TT'?
>
> I would rather it mentioned which stage it contained a spoiler for. The
> main part of the header (Tour de Ducks) suggests that it might actually
> be
> something completely unrelated (unless you happen to know what the
> weather
> was like in France yesterday).
>

My original message mentioned the weather conditions, which you can get
anywhere. It says nothing about who won, who raced, who fell off.... I don't
think that knowing it was raining on the tour de france was an issue. BTW,
it's dry in Paris today.

[elyob]

"Danny Colyer" > wrote in message
...
> Garry Broad wrote:
> > > I really must learn to not log in here before 7.00pm and ITV2 :-)
>
> prompting Tony W to reply:
> > That's why it says Spoiler in the title -- as agreed for the benefit
> > of those poor souls who cannot handle knowing the result before
> > watching the stage.
>
> *But* the title says nothing about it referring to a specific stage.
> After
> reading the first post I (like Garry, presumably) had concluded that,
> despite the header, it had nothing to do with the race. For the heading
> "Tour de Ducks" to tell us that it was about the TdF TT would require
> the
> reader to know something about the weather conditions during the stage,
> which is unlikely before having seen the stage.
>

It had "TdF: Tour de Ducks (spoiler)" as the title. Which bit didn't hint
that it was about the tour de france? I certainly thought TdF was a *huge*
hint. Spoiler in the title is hinting that there is a spolier in the thread,
even though I didn't put one in. Knowing the weather was wet would have made
me race home in *huge* anticipation. Continuing to read the thread marked
"spoiler" is pretty stupid if you didn't want to know the result. I cannot
help you with that problem.

> Anyway, I've decided not to read urc during the TdF next year. I've
> just
> had too many stages spoiled this year by people not making clear in
> their
> headers that they're about to do it.
>

How about having a practice today ... ? Don't want to spoil the result for
you .. ooh, who'll win le tour? I've had friends and family do spoilers,
it's not just here you'll get them. I'd suggest hiding in a large box until
the ITV2 coverage starts.

[James Annan]

Danny Colyer wrote:

> I would rather it mentioned which stage it contained a spoiler for. The
> main part of the header (Tour de Ducks) suggests that it might actually
> be
> something completely unrelated (unless you happen to know what the
> weather
> was like in France yesterday).

Well I guess you could complain the original message _didn't_ contain a
spoiler that you were obviously hoping to see (since you read the
thread), or that
the reference to the weather in the subject line had ruined your fun. But
I don't really think you can reasonably complain that thread with 'TdF'
and 'spoiler' in the subject line contains...a 'spoiler' about the 'TdF'.

BTW Lance won today! oops...it just slipped out...sorry!

James

[Danny Colyer]

elyob wrote:
> It had "TdF: Tour de Ducks (spoiler)" as the title. Which bit didn't
> hint that it was about the tour de france? I certainly thought TdF
> was a *huge* hint. Spoiler in the title is hinting that there is a
> spolier in the thread, even though I didn't put one in.

I know. I'm not blaming you. I don't really understand why you put
spoiler in the header, given that you didn't post a spoiler.

But you might notice that by the time Peter B posted the first actual
spoiler, 'TdF' had been removed from the header. Someone who had
downloaded that post before yours would have had no way of knowing that
the thread related to the TdF.

> Continuing to read the thread marked "spoiler" is pretty stupid if
> you didn't want to know the result. I cannot help you with that
> problem.

The body of your post actually contained no hint that it referred to the
TdF. To quote the entire post:
"It's lethal out there ..."

That sounds like someone who's just come in from a ride commenting on
road conditions, with a tantalising hint that there might be an
interesting "w*nker in a car" story about to follow. Having read that
post, and concluded that despite the header it actually had nothing to
do with the TdF, why would I not continue?

> How about having a practice today ... ? Don't want to spoil the
> result for you .. ooh, who'll win le tour? I've had friends and
> family do spoilers, it's not just here you'll get them. I'd suggest
> hiding in a large box until the ITV2 coverage starts.

A lot of spoilers have come just from glancing at the BBC news website,
which has tended to have headlines along the lines of "Armstrong keeps
yellow" or "Tyler takes it" on the front page :-(

The only relevance of the ITV2 coverage is that most spoilers have come
from ITV2 viewers who forget that a lot of people neither have nor want
more than the 5 terrestrial analogue channels.

--
Danny Colyer (remove safety to reply) ( http://www.juggler.net/danny )
Recumbent cycle page: http://www.speedy5.freeserve.co.uk/recumbents/
"He who dares not offend cannot be honest." - Thomas Paine

[Arthur Clune]

iddqdATworldonline.dk > wrote:
: Tony W wrote:
:> Maybe that will come. Armstrong was a bit of an enfant terrible until his
:> illness. Was it the illness or maturity that made the difference?
:>
: Illness - he lost his excess bodyfat and managed to not get it back when
: recovering.

It wasn't fat he lost - it was upper body muscle. He's wasn't exaclty porky
before.

Arthur

[Peter B]

"Danny Colyer" > wrote in message
...
>
> But you might notice that by the time Peter B posted the first actual
> spoiler, 'TdF' had been removed from the header.

Sorry if I spoiled it Danny but on my OE6 the original header is still there
as "Re: Tour de Ducks (spoiler)" .
If I'm missing something please explain so I don't repeat the same mistake
next year :-)

Pete

[Danny Colyer]

Peter B wrote:
> Sorry if I spoiled it Danny

That's OK, I *should* have expected a spoiler really.

> but on my OE6 the original header is
> still there as "Re: Tour de Ducks (spoiler)" .
> If I'm missing something please explain so I don't repeat the same
> mistake next year :-)

The original header was not "Tour de Ducks (spoiler)". It was "TdF:
Tour de Ducks (spoiler)". I was trying to make the point that a spoiler
for the TdF ought to have "TdF" or similar somewhere in the header.

--
Danny Colyer (remove safety to reply) ( http://www.juggler.net/danny )
Recumbent cycle page: http://www.speedy5.freeserve.co.uk/recumbents/
"He who dares not offend cannot be honest." - Thomas Paine

[Tim Hall]

On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 16:55:03 +0000 (UTC), "Peter B"
> wrote:

>
>"Danny Colyer" > wrote in message
...
>>
>> But you might notice that by the time Peter B posted the first actual
>> spoiler, 'TdF' had been removed from the header.
>
>Sorry if I spoiled it Danny but on my OE6 the original header is still there
>as "Re: Tour de Ducks (spoiler)" .
>If I'm missing something please explain so I don't repeat the same mistake
>next year :-)
>

I think this is the problem. The first posting was TDF: Tour de Ducks
(spoiler). On my news client (Free Agnet) a second thread got started
called Re: Tour de Ducks (spoiler). See the difference? Some news
clients (I think OE does this) strip anything in front of a colon and
replace it with "Re" when responding, spawning a new thread.

Anyway it was a bit more subtle than our American friend down there
posting his "Tour de Lance" thread. That kind of gave the game away
and spoiled my weekends tape watching. Almost. Watching Millar win the
TT was excellent, or "*&^%ing cool" as ITV" had it.


Tim
In space no one can eat ice cream

[Jim Price]

Tim Hall wrote:

> Watching Millar win the TT was excellent, or "*&^%ing cool" as ITV" had it.

Sometimes I think our[1] Mr. Millar needs some performance enhancing
drugs to improve his interview technique.

[1] I suppose he's "ours" again, as he's won something recently.

--
Jim Price

http://www.jimprice.dsl.pipex.com

Conscientious objection is hard work in an economic war.

[James Annan]

"Danny Colyer" > wrote in message >...

> The original header was not "Tour de Ducks (spoiler)". It was "TdF:
> Tour de Ducks (spoiler)". I was trying to make the point that a spoiler
> for the TdF ought to have "TdF" or similar somewhere in the header.

Yes, I'd worked that out. Presumably due to an automatic replacement
of '*:' with 'Re:' by a newsreader. Of course if your newsreader had
threaded the articles correctly there wouldn't have been a problem...

Still seems pretty unreasonable that you need people to use _your_
preferred abbreviation of 'TdF' and that you think that 'Tour' and
'spoiler' weren't enough themselves. As I said before, the only valid
complaint that I can see is that the subject itself was perhaps a
minor spoiler by referring rather obviously to the weather. Anyway, if
it's that hard for you to work out what a thread is likely to contain,
then indeed you'd better stay away from usenet this time next year!

James

[Dave Larrington]

Tim Hall wrote:

> I think this is the problem. The first posting was TDF: Tour de Ducks
> (spoiler). On my news client (Free Agnet) a second thread got started
> called Re: Tour de Ducks (spoiler). See the difference? Some news
> clients (I think OE does this) strip anything in front of a colon and
> replace it with "Re" when responding, spawning a new thread.

For my sins, I am using Lookout Excess to for reading newsfroups, and can
thus state that the subject of the original post remains:

TdF: Tour de Ducks (spoiler)

Responses from Garry Broad and elyob carry the subject:

Re: TdF: Tour de Ducks (spoiler)

Wasn't that interesting?

Dave Larrington - http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/
================================================== =========
Editor - British Human Power Club Newsletter
http://www.bhpc.org.uk/
================================================== =========

[Dan Gregory]

"Garry Broad" > wrote in message
> So tell me people, you knowledgeable ones of the 'racing boys', how
> good is David Millar? Damn sight quicker than me that's for sure, and
> obviously good enough to win today's heat (which would make him pretty
> damn hot), but is he good enough to take the crown outright some day?
> How does he rank with the very best of them?
He ranks very highly, and shows great promise. When he gets his head totally
together, and improves a little in the mountains, and if the heat is not too
excessive for his allergies, then he could do it. A lot of ifs but him and
VDB both could become great champions.
All the best
Dan Gregory

[Dan Gregory]

"lbockhed" > wrote in message
> no next year Cadel Evans
Beloki
Mayo
Millar
VDB
:-))