31 seconds covers the podium

If the time gaps don't change, this will be the smallest time spread
to cover the podium spots.

In article .com,
wrote:

If the time gaps don't change, this will be the smallest time spread
to cover the podium spots.

The fast end of the bell curve has been pruned off. Maybe Jeannie Longo
could have won this year.

The more interesting question:

Is this a small enough difference for Evans to give it a go on Sunday?

My guess is yes, but that Disco will be able to shut down the possible
moves too easily.

I would bet on every sprint point being contested by Evans and
Leipheimer, though.

Is it likely there will be any wind on the course tomorrow?

--
Ryan Cousineau http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos

On Jul 28, 11:01 am, wrote:
If the time gaps don't change, this will be the smallest time spread
to cover the podium spots.

Since the winner was pulled from the race should Leipheimer claim the
winner's time bonus on the Aubisque?
That would make the GC even tighter.

DR

wrote in message
oups.com...
If the time gaps don't change, this will be the smallest time spread
to cover the podium spots.


On the other hand, if there hadn't been bonuses, the GC of 1932 would have
been:

1. Leducq
2. Stoepel 0'04"
3. Camusso 0'21"

Benjo

DirtRoadie wrote:
On Jul 28, 11:01 am, wrote:
If the time gaps don't change, this will be the smallest time spread
to cover the podium spots.

Since the winner was pulled from the race should Leipheimer claim the
winner's time bonus on the Aubisque?

Michael Rasmussen is still the winner of stage 16, even if he gets a
third warning for not beeing in Mexico. If he gets a third warning it
will lead to a diciplinary case in witch he can get a 3 -12 months
quarenteene. A third warning will not lead to a doping case. Those are
the rules of WADA, witch funny enough are the rules that ASO says they
want's to follow.

Compare it to a soccer game. A player scores a goal, later in the game
the player gets a red card for foul play and no more goals are scored.
The team with who scored the goal wins the game by 1:0. That is how a
sporting event works.

Up until today when ASO publicied that they are leaving UCI, they
where bound by the laws of UCI and CAS. From now on they don't have to
follow other rules than civil law. Now, If they want to they could
give Sylvian Chavanel a 3 hours time bonus for having the nicest
haircut or the cutest turtle.

Up until yesterday TDF was a sporting event, in the future its a
showbuiz event like World Wrestling, the Oscars or a Beatles concert..

--
Morten Reippuert Knudsen :-) http://blog.reippuert.dk

Merlin Works CR-3/2.5 & Campagnolo Chorus 2007.

a écrit dans le message de news:
...
| If the time gaps don't change, this will be the smallest time spread
| to cover the podium spots.
|

Would have even smaller if Leipheimer hadn't received a 10 second penalty
for a bidon pull in stage 8.

On Jul 28, 2:15 pm, "Tom Grosman" wrote:
a écrit dans le message de news:
. com...
| If the time gaps don't change, this will be the smallest time spread
| to cover the podium spots.
|

Would have even smaller if Leipheimer hadn't received a 10 second penalty
for a bidon pull in stage 8.

And if Leipheimer hadn't gotten the bidon pull, the gaap
might have been larger. OTOH, if he hadn't punctured, he
might not have needed the bidon pull. And if Evans hadn't
broken his collarbone so many times, his shoulder might
not have a lump and his CdA might be 0.0001 smaller.

At the very end of stage 16 on the Col d'Aubisque, Disco
let Leipheimer ride away from Contador to put time on Evans.
He had a 9 sec gap on Contador plus 4 sec in time bonuses
(12 sec for LL, 8 for AC). At the time it seemed like an
odd choice, and it still does a little. It turned out
not to make any difference, but very close.

Ben

On Jul 28, 4:27 pm, Morten Reippuert wrote:
DirtRoadie wrote:
On Jul 28, 11:01 am, wrote:
If the time gaps don't change, this will be the smallest time spread
to cover the podium spots.
Since the winner was pulled from the race should Leipheimer claim the
winner's time bonus on the Aubisque?

Michael Rasmussen is still the winner of stage 16, even if he gets a
third warning for not beeing in Mexico. If he gets a third warning it
will lead to a diciplinary case in witch he can get a 3 -12 months
quarenteene. A third warning will not lead to a doping case. Those are
the rules of WADA, witch funny enough are the rules that ASO says they
want's to follow.

Compare it to a soccer game. A player scores a goal, later in the game
the player gets a red card for foul play and no more goals are scored.
The team with who scored the goal wins the game by 1:0. That is how a
sporting event works.

Up until today when ASO publicied that they are leaving UCI, they
where bound by the laws of UCI and CAS. From now on they don't have to
follow other rules than civil law. Now, If they want to they could
give Sylvian Chavanel a 3 hours time bonus for having the nicest
haircut or the cutest turtle.

Up until yesterday TDF was a sporting event, in the future its a
showbuiz event like World Wrestling, the Oscars or a Beatles concert..

--
Morten Reippuert Knudsen :-) http://blog.reippuert.dk

Merlin Works CR-3/2.5 & Campagnolo Chorus 2007.

How many other lucrative pro sports are controlled by an amateur
organization the way the UCI controls pro cycling? I dont see
NBA,MLB,Soccer, etc getting slapped around by everyone else the way
the UCI does, and these sports have their problems too..

If ASO,RCS and unipublic get together, they have most of the very top
races except for Flanders. They can set up a league no problem...this
isnt indy cars

"shane" wrote in message
oups.com...
On Jul 28, 4:27 pm, Morten Reippuert wrote:
DirtRoadie wrote:
On Jul 28, 11:01 am, wrote:
If the time gaps don't change, this will be the smallest time spread
to cover the podium spots.
Since the winner was pulled from the race should Leipheimer claim the
winner's time bonus on the Aubisque?

Michael Rasmussen is still the winner of stage 16, even if he gets a
third warning for not beeing in Mexico. If he gets a third warning it
will lead to a diciplinary case in witch he can get a 3 -12 months
quarenteene. A third warning will not lead to a doping case. Those are
the rules of WADA, witch funny enough are the rules that ASO says they
want's to follow.

Compare it to a soccer game. A player scores a goal, later in the game
the player gets a red card for foul play and no more goals are scored.
The team with who scored the goal wins the game by 1:0. That is how a
sporting event works.

Up until today when ASO publicied that they are leaving UCI, they
where bound by the laws of UCI and CAS. From now on they don't have to
follow other rules than civil law. Now, If they want to they could
give Sylvian Chavanel a 3 hours time bonus for having the nicest
haircut or the cutest turtle.

Up until yesterday TDF was a sporting event, in the future its a
showbuiz event like World Wrestling, the Oscars or a Beatles concert..

--
Morten Reippuert Knudsen :-) http://blog.reippuert.dk

Merlin Works CR-3/2.5 & Campagnolo Chorus 2007.

How many other lucrative pro sports are controlled by an amateur
organization the way the UCI controls pro cycling? I dont see
NBA,MLB,Soccer, etc getting slapped around by everyone else the way
the UCI does, and these sports have their problems too..

If ASO,RCS and unipublic get together, they have most of the very top
races except for Flanders. They can set up a league no problem...this
isnt indy cars

Which was exactly the way it was going a few decades ago, the time that the
highest authority in the cycling world did not rest with the federations but
with the organizers of the most important races. In those days the UCI had
almost nothing to say and did exactly what Goddet and Lévitan (TdF,
P-Roubaix, P-Tours) with their croonies from the Gazetta dello Sport (Giro,
Milan-San Remo and Lombardia), Sportwereld (Flandres) and Les Sport
(P-Bruxelles, LBL, Fl. Wallone) told them to do. It couldn't be better (for
the organizers anyway), but it all changed when the authorities started
their anti-doping politics. Soccer, tennis, etc.all had a strong central
body to protect itself against outside intervention, but the UCI, poorly
organized and having few connections in political circles, made cycling like
a sitting duck. Which IMO is exactly the reason why the plans of the ASO
will have little effect. It won't be too difficult to win a power struggle
against the UCI, but the organizers of the top races are even more exposed
to the whims of the policital authorities than they were in the 1960's. The
French government would never have dared to close down the Tour after
Simpson's dead or even after the Festina scandal. But right now? I'm afraid
a lot of Frenchmen would be quite happy.

Benjo

Dans le message de ,
benjo maso a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :
The French government would
never have dared to close down the Tour after Simpson's dead or even
after the Festina scandal. But right now? I'm afraid a lot of
Frenchmen would be quite happy.
Benjo

It's rare for me to find disagreement with you, but I have an opposite view.
The government is so intent on imposing and superimposing order, they could
find this an opportunity, not a bundle of trash to be disposed of.

A second, larger reason is the usual one - money. Tourism is the second
industry in France (after bureaucracy - no kidding), and the event(s) do
much more for the treasury than something like Roland Garros. The fatted
calf has a long life to live.
--
Bonne route !

Sandy
Verneuil-sur-Seine FR