So, about the Tour de Hans und Franz

Freewheeling

Let's see if I can summarize it so far:

Prologue: Everyone went like a bat out of hell for about 4
miles, and a Swiss specialist won. Lance was second.

Stage 1: Breakaway, catch, slip-n-slide, breakaway, catch,
slip-n-slide, breakaway, catch... sprint.

Stage 2: Breakaway, catch, breakaway, catch, breakaway,
catch... sprint.

Yawn.

I can see why this hasn't became a major American spectator
sport. Still, it's actually extremely interesting... if
slightly repetitive. Maybe tomorrow it'll be like:

Stage 3: Breakaway, catch, breakaway, catch,
breakaway... sprint.

That'd be different.

Heh.

--
--Scott

Dave Larrington

Freewheeling wrote:

> I can see why this hasn't became a major American
> spectator sport. Still, it's actually extremely
> interesting... if slightly repetitive.

There is much to be said for watching just the highlights...
Though it gets a bit more interesting once they throw a few
mountains into the equation.

> Maybe tomorrow it'll be like:
>
> Stage 3: Breakaway, catch, breakaway, catch,
> breakaway... sprint.
>

I reckon it'll be more like:

Breakaway, catch, breakaway, big pile of borken riders in
the middle of the cobbled bit, repeat from above with
variations.

Oh, and note to ITV2. PLEASE take Beloki's crash from last
year out of the opening credits. It hurts just watching it.

--

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

Velvet

Freewheeling wrote:
> Let's see if I can summarize it so far:
>
> Prologue: Everyone went like a bat out of hell for about 4
> miles, and a Swiss specialist won. Lance was second.
>
> Stage 1: Breakaway, catch, slip-n-slide, breakaway, catch,
> slip-n-slide, breakaway, catch... sprint.
>
> Stage 2: Breakaway, catch, breakaway, catch, breakaway,
> catch... sprint.
>
> Yawn.
>
> I can see why this hasn't became a major American
> spectator sport. Still, it's actually extremely
> interesting... if slightly repetitive. Maybe tomorrow
> it'll be like:
>
> Stage 3: Breakaway, catch, breakaway, catch,
> breakaway... sprint.
>
> That'd be different.
>
> Heh.
>

I've recently (as in, started halfway through last year's)
started watching this. While *watching* it for the duration
of the live coverage soon gets tedious, it's good to have on
while I'm working, so I can glance up periodically and see
how they're getting on.

I also find it inspirational, being a relative newbie and
only just getting my legs this year - and that's compared to
what I started out like, not other regular riders :-) Those
guys work damn hard to do what they do, and I think they
deserve some respect for dedicating their lives to it. I've
watched them sprint, I've watched them climb, I've watched
them 'tootling' (in their scheme of things) along when the
peloton doesn't need to catch a breakaway. I've learnt quite
a lot of things.

I'm not sure I could ride as fast as they do in the wet even
if I had the legs to do it, giving it all they've got, even
though they know the chances of coming off and sliding down
the tarmac is high... or knowing that chances are if they do
come off, they'll break a bone.

Knowing the risks and seeing them give it their all anyway
makes it really quite watchable for me, I admire their
courage, and determination. It's a long way to ride (ok, so
maybe you americans with your RAAM and presumably other
things have similar events, I'm not sure)
- and riding virtually every day for three weeks is a long
time to be riding that fast and that competitively.

I'd be sorry to see it turned into an event that's more
suited to the 'American spectator sports' to be honest,
because it'd lose what it's all about. Yes they all ride
for the team, but they all ride for themselves too, there's
a great deal of personal pride in there. I can't see any
way that you could change the tour and still call it a
tour, either - shortening it to compress the excitement
into an hour or two each day to make it more watcheable
just won't work.

At the risk of inflaming those on the far side of the pond,
I'd say <tongue-in-cheek> perhaps it's about time they
learnt that not all sports come in neatly packaged
entertainment slots that allow for copious ad breaks, and
watching the tour de france is an excellent way to practice
extending their attention spans :-) </tongue-in-cheek>

Getting slightly more serious again though, if you view it
as just something to watch to find out what happens each day
it gets repetitive, but if you follow the positions of the
riders/teams in their pursuit for the overall win it takes
on a whole new dimension as each day's win/loss affects the
overall standings, and watching the tactics of which riders
will be at the fore for which stages is interesting. Well, I
find it is, anyway :-)

--

Velvet

Freewheeling

"At the risk of inflaming those on the far side of the pond, I'd say
<tongue-in-cheek> perhaps it's about time they learnt that not all
sports come in neatly packaged entertainment slots that allow for
copious ad breaks, and watching the tour de france is an excellent way
to practice extending their attention spans :-) </tongue-in-cheek>"

Yet there seem to be plenty of Americans "in the fray," huh?
And OLN's coverage is excellent, except for Kirsten Gum who
probably doesn't know a crankset from a hair net.

"Getting slightly more serious again though, if you view it
as just something to watch to find out what happens each day
it gets repetitive, but if you follow the positions of the
riders/teams in their pursuit for the overall win it takes
on a whole new dimension as each day's win/loss affects the
overall standings, and watching the tactics of which riders
will be at the fore for which stages is interesting. Well, I
find it is, anyway :-)"

Actually the strategies are extremely important, and as a
result of a strategic move that took advantage of some
misfortunes in the runup to the cobbles one of the major
contenders is all-but-out of it. Over four minutes back,
with a relatively weak team ant lousy TT skills he's just
not going to catch up.

--
--Scott "Velvet" <velvet@not.a.valid.domain> wrote in
message newsNtGc.686$lN1.8571017@news-
text.cableinet.net...
> Freewheeling wrote:
> > Let's see if I can summarize it so far:
> >
> > Prologue: Everyone went like a bat out of hell for about
> > 4 miles, and a Swiss specialist won. Lance was second.
> >
> > Stage 1: Breakaway, catch, slip-n-slide, breakaway,
> > catch, slip-n-slide, breakaway, catch... sprint.
> >
> > Stage 2: Breakaway, catch, breakaway, catch, breakaway,
> > catch... sprint.
> >
> > Yawn.
> >
> > I can see why this hasn't became a major American
> > spectator sport.
Still,
> > it's actually extremely interesting... if slightly
> > repetitive. Maybe tomorrow it'll be like:
> >
> > Stage 3: Breakaway, catch, breakaway, catch,
> > breakaway... sprint.
> >
> > That'd be different.
> >
> > Heh.
> >
>
> I've recently (as in, started halfway through last year's)
> started watching this. While *watching* it for the
> duration of the live coverage soon gets tedious, it's good
> to have on while I'm working, so I can glance up
> periodically and see how they're getting on.
>
> I also find it inspirational, being a relative newbie and
> only just getting my legs this year - and that's compared
> to what I started out like, not other regular riders :-)
> Those guys work damn hard to do what they do, and I think
> they deserve some respect for dedicating their lives to
> it. I've watched them sprint, I've watched them climb,
> I've watched them 'tootling' (in their scheme of things)
> along when the peloton doesn't need to catch a breakaway.
> I've learnt quite a lot of things.
>
> I'm not sure I could ride as fast as they do in the wet
> even if I had the legs to do it, giving it all they've
> got, even though they know the chances of coming off and
> sliding down the tarmac is high... or knowing that chances
> are if they do come off, they'll break a bone.
>
> Knowing the risks and seeing them give it their all anyway
> makes it really quite watchable for me, I admire their
> courage, and determination. It's a long way to ride (ok,
> so maybe you americans with your RAAM and presumably other
> things have similar events, I'm not sure)
> - and riding virtually every day for three weeks is a long
> time to be riding that fast and that competitively.
>
> I'd be sorry to see it turned into an event that's more
> suited to the 'American spectator sports' to be honest,
> because it'd lose what it's all about. Yes they all ride
> for the team, but they all ride for themselves too,
> there's a great deal of personal pride in there. I can't
> see any way that you could change the tour and still call
> it a tour, either - shortening it to compress the
> excitement into an hour or two each day to make it more
> watcheable just won't work.
>
> At the risk of inflaming those on the far side of the
> pond, I'd say <tongue-in-cheek> perhaps it's about
> time they learnt that not all sports come in neatly
> packaged entertainment slots that allow for copious ad
> breaks, and watching the tour de france is an
> excellent way to practice extending their attention
> spans :-) </tongue-in-cheek>
>
> Getting slightly more serious again though, if you view it
> as just something to watch to find out what happens each
> day it gets repetitive, but if you follow the positions of
> the riders/teams in their pursuit for the overall win it
> takes on a whole new dimension as each day's win/loss
> affects the overall standings, and watching the tactics of
> which riders will be at the fore for which stages is
> interesting. Well, I find it is, anyway :-)
>
> --
>
>
> Velvet

Pat

> At the risk of inflaming those on the far side of the pond, I'd say
> <tongue-in-cheek> perhaps it's about time they learnt that not all
> sports come in neatly packaged entertainment slots that allow for
> copious ad breaks, and watching the tour de france is an excellent way
> to practice extending their attention spans :-) </tongue-in-cheek>
>
> Velvet

You are making a common mistake: attributing the thoughts of
one writer to an entire nation. Just because ONE guy posts
something, it is not time to say that everyone in America is
like him or thinks like him. How would you like it if the
"favor" were returned, eh?

Pat in TX

Velvet

Pat wrote:
>>At the risk of inflaming those on the far side of the
>>pond, I'd say <tongue-in-cheek> perhaps it's about
>>time they learnt that not all sports come in neatly
>>packaged entertainment slots that allow for copious ad
>>breaks, and watching the tour de france is an
>>excellent way to practice extending their attention
>>spans :-) </tongue-in-cheek>
>>
>>Velvet
>
>
> You are making a common mistake: attributing the thoughts
> of one writer to an entire nation. Just because ONE guy
> posts something, it is not time to say that everyone in
> America is like him or thinks like him. How would you like
> it if the "favor" were returned, eh?
>
> Pat in TX
>
>

Oh, it's been done t'other way too - there are those on both
sides of the pond that are guilty of it... but I wasn't
being serious! Did you not see the tongue in cheek and
smiley bit?

--

Velvet

Pat

> > You are making a common mistake: attributing the thoughts of one writer
to
> > an entire nation. Just because ONE guy posts something,
> > it is not time
to say that everyone in America is like him or thinks like
him. How would
you> like it if the "favor" were returned, eh?
> >
> > Pat in TX
> >
> >
>
> Oh, it's been done t'other way too - there are those on
> both sides of the pond that are guilty of it... but I
> wasn't being serious! Did you not see the tongue in cheek
> and smiley bit?

If you truly were not being serious, that is okay. But, I
have seen too many of these lectures which are truly lectures-
and then a smiley face at the end as if to take away the
sting. So, I'm leary.

Pat in TX

Velvet

Pat wrote:

>>>You are making a common mistake: attributing the thoughts
>>>of one writer
>
> to
>
>>>an entire nation. Just because ONE guy posts something,
>>>it is not time
>
> to say that everyone in America is like him or thinks like
> him. How would
> you> like it if the "favor" were returned, eh?
>
>>>Pat in TX
>>>
>>>
>>
>>Oh, it's been done t'other way too - there are those on
>>both sides of the pond that are guilty of it... but I
>>wasn't being serious! Did you not see the tongue in cheek
>>and smiley bit?
>
>
> If you truly were not being serious, that is okay. But, I
> have seen too many of these lectures which are truly lectures-
> and then a smiley face at the end as if to take away the
> sting. So, I'm leary.
>
> Pat in TX
>
>

No, I really wasn't :-) Though having been on the recieving
end of it myself when generalisations and assumptions are
made in the other direction, sometimes the urge to slip a
quick comment in *is* strong sometimes, in this case it
really was meant as banter and nothing more, hence the
tongue in cheek bits to try and emphasise that. Smileys can
be ambiguous linked to that sort of comment, never know if
it's smiling with or smiling at, and that sort of thing.

If I'm being serious, you'd know about it, that's for sure
:-)

--

Velvet

Zippy The Pinhe

On Tue, 6 Jul 2004 00:11:41 -0400, "Freewheeling"
<email_at_bottomofpost@bigfoot.com> wrote:

>Let's see if I can summarize it so far: snip...
>
>Yawn.

There are those who get it, and those who never will.
>
>I can see why this hasn't became a major American
>spectator sport.

No. Major American spectator sports go, run, run,
pass, punt.

OR Ball Strike Ball Ball. Step out of the batter's box.
Scratch nuts. Step back into batter's box. Step off
pitcher's mound. Scratch nuts. Repeat Steps 5 through 9 ad
libitum ad nauseam.

OR Lap. Lap. Lap. Crash. Lap. Lap. Commerical.

OR flying scissor kick, referee's hold. Here's the
count, one, two OOOH, two only, he reverses, overhead
slam, bad guy wins.