The UCI: Always looking for the most important issues...

[[email protected]]

13:02 EDT
Bobby is looking good. He is moving around on his seat trying to get
comfortable. He is wearing a hydration pak on his back which he has
worn in all the major races including the Olympics, but apparently on
the start line the officials weren't happy with him wearing it. He has
no time to take it off, so Scott Sunderland, team director is waiting
to hear what they are going to say about it at the end.

[Peter Allen]

wrote:
> 13:02 EDT
> Bobby is looking good. He is moving around on his seat trying to get
> comfortable. He is wearing a hydration pak on his back which he has
> worn in all the major races including the Olympics, but apparently on
> the start line the officials weren't happy with him wearing it. He has
> no time to take it off, so Scott Sunderland, team director is waiting
> to hear what they are going to say about it at the end.

The UCI might want to be more concerned about what Floyd Landis is doing to
come up with these results, off the same page right now...

a.. 1 Floyd Landis (Phonak) 29'58"09
a.. 2 Dave Zabriskie (CSC) 40'17"06
a.. 3 Nathan O'Neill (Navigators) 40'41"09
a.. 4 Brian Vanborg (CSC) 41'46"10

Peter

[gds]

typos can make one look sooo.. good.
Read 39 not 29.
Still a great effort!

[Si]

"gds" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> typos can make one look sooo.. good.
> Read 39 not 29.
> Still a great effort!
>

Lance so far down? Will he make this year's tour a lap of honour?

[David Ferguson]

On Thu, 21 Apr 2005 20:51:52 +0100, "Si"
> wrote:

>
>"gds" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>> typos can make one look sooo.. good.
>> Read 39 not 29.
>> Still a great effort!
>>
>
>Lance so far down? Will he make this year's tour a lap of honour?
>


So far down? 9th at 1:42 down with 2 mountain stages coming up. Not
perched like a cat but I wouldn't call him "so far down".

Especially with 6 of the 8 in front of him being Americans.

GO FLOYD!!!

D

[Tim Lines]

gds wrote:
> typos can make one look sooo.. good.

Oooh! And I don't think they've got a test for typos yet!

[Stewart Fleming]

Tim Lines wrote:

> gds wrote:
>
>> typos can make one look sooo.. good.
>
>
> Oooh! And I don't think they've got a test for typos yet!

When it happens (and it will), RBR got there first. We have the
definitive typo standard. The error in Floy'ds result counts as one (by
the adjaceny rule), the one in the "Mercyx" thread doesn't (by the same
token).

[Howard Kveck]

In article >,
Stewart Fleming > wrote:

> Tim Lines wrote:
>
> > gds wrote:
> >
> >> typos can make one look sooo.. good.
> >
> >
> > Oooh! And I don't think they've got a test for typos yet!
>
> When it happens (and it will), RBR got there first. We have the
> definitive typo standard. The error in Floy'ds result counts
^^^^^^^

Definitive standards indeed! (heh)

--
tanx,
Howard

Butter is love.

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?

[Mathias Koerber]

Stewart Fleming said the following on 22/4/2005 14:52:


> When it happens (and it will), RBR got there first. We have the
> definitive typo standard. The error in Floy'ds result counts as one (by
> the adjaceny rule), the one in the "Mercyx" thread doesn't (by the same
> token).

But Mercyx was not a type, the many times is was misspelt in
that post...