finally

In article ,
Fred Fredburger wrote:

Donald Munro wrote:
William Asher wrote:
They know where to put the cork.

Fred Fredburger wrote:
You're SO gay.

Is so a superlative in these troubled times ?


"So" is so overused these days that it can mean whatever you want it to
mean.

That is the aggravating part. I do not want to put in the
work finding something for it to mean. Someone writing
"A is so B" is obliged to continue with "that X" where
`X' is an amusing correlative or comparison. If I am to
read your tripe make an effort to entertain.

Bert is so stupid.

Bert is so stupid that he cannot pour **** out of a boot
with the directions written on the heel.

And if Bert is so stupid that he cannot find `X' with his
hands tied behind his back, then, Bert are you listening?,
he should save the time and effort writing `so' and thus
increase his reputation as a composer of English prose.

Oh, yeah, while I am complaining, if you want captions
for a mildly risible picture, then _you_first_.

--
Michael Press

In article ,
Bob Schwartz wrote:

z wrote:
wrote:
Again, the radio makes less difference
than one may think to the excitement.

Ben

But, but, but that refutes Schwartz's argument!

My argument is that the radio makes no difference to the
excitement. That nothing will change.

I've tried to be careful about keeping the code generic.
It's more effective if it's difficult to identify. Look
at how many of you retards still argue with Kunich.

I argue with him, but I am not a retard.

--
Michael Press

In article ,
"Tom Kunich" wrote:

"nmp" wrote in message
...

Just a question. Doesn't it break your heart to see how in a big race
some young talent suddenly feels inspired and goes on an escape, only to
be shouted back into the column through the radio?

Perhaps you have an example of that? In case you missed it, the teams have
directors that each evening give them the plan for the coming day. And
"young talent" that ignored those orders and went on his own way would not
be on a pro team long.

That's just mechanical technology. If everyone more or less keeps up with
that it doesn't change the character of the sport much. However, radios
have changed cycling from a sport that is fought on two wheels on the
road to a sort of game that is played sitting behind the wheel of a car.
With living chess pieces on bicycles. Or that is at least where it is
going with all the younger riders never learning to think for themselves
anymore.

Here's the bottom line for those who don't understand what has happened -
the people who have won have told people how and why they did it. That has
changed the methods and strategy that people use in the grand tours. It has
NOTHING to do with "radio communications" as will be shown if they're stupid
enough to actually kick radios out of pro racing.

This analysis does not account for the use of radios.
Suppose some teams used radios and others did not.
Would the radios generate a competitive advantage? How much?

--
Michael Press

nmp wrote:
Bob Schwartz wrote:

To follow nmp's thought, racing will be more interesting if dumber
people on bikes are in charge of tactics rather than smarter people in
cars. Do I have that right?

Exactly

It would be more interesting because the people on the bikes would get a
chance to use their brains too. Perhaps/hopefully they turn out to be not
so dumb after all.

You know, you may be right. If we got rid of the radios maybe
we'd see some really crazy ass **** like a mountain biker
(how's *that* for dumb) winning road worlds.

But it'll never happen unless you get rid of the radios. It's
the radios that are keeping them stupid.

Bob Schwartz

Bob Schwartz wrote:
But it'll never happen unless you get rid of the radios. It's the radios
that are keeping them stupid.

Only those of wearing tinfoil helmets to protect us from the radio waves
are immune.

"Bob Schwartz" wrote in message
...
nmp wrote:
Bob Schwartz wrote:


You know, you may be right. If we got rid of the radios maybe
we'd see some really crazy ass **** like a mountain biker
(how's *that* for dumb) winning road worlds.

you mean like this year ?


But it'll never happen unless you get rid of the radios. It's
the radios that are keeping them stupid.

looks like you are wrong ... again


Bob Schwartz




~~~ ~ _@
~~ ~ _- \,
~~ (*)/ (*) . . . bjbear on his treadly

"barry j taylor" wrote in message
...
"Bob Schwartz" wrote in message
...

You know, you may be right. If we got rid of the radios maybe
we'd see some really crazy ass **** like a mountain biker
(how's *that* for dumb) winning road worlds.

you mean like this year ?


But it'll never happen unless you get rid of the radios. It's
the radios that are keeping them stupid.

looks like you are wrong ... again

What else is new?