Cav not doing the Giro...
Comments
-
Essex Rouleur wrote:
Isnt that what i was saying in a roundabout way?RichN95 wrote:Cavendish strikes me as the sort of rider who wants to win lots of things once rather than one thing many times.
With that in mind, I think his primary remaining targets are:
Gent-Wevelgem
Olympic Gold medal
Tour de France yellow jersey
Merckx's Tour stage record
No. There's a difference to what you could win and what you want to win.Twitter: @RichN950 -
RichN95 wrote:
Yes you can. Because the number of races with or without a leadout are not the same. The vast majority of the time he will have a leadout so the number of wins will be far greater (especially as it obviously confers an advantage).frenchfighter wrote:If you win 100 times with a lead out train and 5 times without a lead out train you cant argue that you are A ok without a leadout train.
Just FYI.
No-one is suggesting he is just as good without a leadout - no sprinter is - just that he can manage without one (more effectively than most of his contemporaries)
I disagree, i dont think Cav does manage without a lead out train as good as Sagan.
Call Sagan what you like, but you cant knock the fact hes won the green jersey with an all round approach to stage wins, intermediate sprints and bunch sprints in a way Cav cant match. Hence the reason why i said Cav wont win the green jersey whilst Sagan is about. Hills or no hills, he just wont.
If Cav does win it this year i'll buy you all pint
0 -
RichN95 wrote:Essex Rouleur wrote:
Isnt that what i was saying in a roundabout way?RichN95 wrote:Cavendish strikes me as the sort of rider who wants to win lots of things once rather than one thing many times.
With that in mind, I think his primary remaining targets are:
Gent-Wevelgem
Olympic Gold medal
Tour de France yellow jersey
Merckx's Tour stage record
No. There's a difference to what you could win and what you want to win.
No there isn't.0 -
But Sagan very rarely wins bunch sprints against top competition. Most of the bunch sprints he wins are in smaller races with big team support.Essex Rouleur wrote:I disagree, i dont think Cav does manage without a lead out train as good as Sagan.
Call Sagan what you like, but you cant knock the fact hes won the green jersey with an all round approach to stage wins, intermediate sprints and bunch sprints in a way Cav cant match. Hence the reason why i said Cav wont win the green jersey whilst Sagan is about. Hills or no hills, he just wont.
If Cav does win it this year i'll buy you all pint
You appear to be making the mistake of equating the Green Jersey with the best sprinter.Twitter: @RichN950 -
RichN95 wrote:
But Sagan very rarely wins bunch sprints against top competition. Most of the bunch sprints he wins are in smaller races with big team support.Essex Rouleur wrote:I disagree, i dont think Cav does manage without a lead out train as good as Sagan.
Call Sagan what you like, but you cant knock the fact hes won the green jersey with an all round approach to stage wins, intermediate sprints and bunch sprints in a way Cav cant match. Hence the reason why i said Cav wont win the green jersey whilst Sagan is about. Hills or no hills, he just wont.
If Cav does win it this year i'll buy you all pint
You appear to be making the mistake of equating the Green Jersey with the best sprinter.
No im not Rich, im simply making the point that Cav wont win the green jersey whilst Sagan is about. Sagan isnt the best sprinter, hes not as good as Cav in a pure head on sprint for example. But given the fact the TDF is over three weeks and comprises of all terrain with intermediate sprints dotted about then Cav cant compete with Sagan over the entire course. Sagan will always do enough to keep ahead on points even if that means breaking away from his lead out train and following Cavs just for points damage limitation. But you wont see Cav doing that, its all or nothing.
You can quote last years Giro but who was Cav up against? And if i remember rightly nobody fought Cav for intermediate points on the last stage because they knew he should probably get it, thats why Nibali didnt bother going for the points, but also Cav didnt have much competition in that race. Not from top sprinters anyway which is why Nibs and Cadel Evans were second and third in the points standings.
If the green jersey was based purely on 21 days of flat out sprints then money would be on Cav without a doubt, but it isnt.0 -
Essex Rouleur wrote:RichN95 wrote:Essex Rouleur wrote:
Isnt that what i was saying in a roundabout way?RichN95 wrote:Cavendish strikes me as the sort of rider who wants to win lots of things once rather than one thing many times.
With that in mind, I think his primary remaining targets are:
Gent-Wevelgem
Olympic Gold medal
Tour de France yellow jersey
Merckx's Tour stage record
No. There's a difference to what you could win and what you want to win.
No there isn't.
0 -
Essex Rouleur wrote:
No im not Rich, im simply making the point that Cav wont win the green jersey whilst Sagan is about. Sagan isnt the best sprinter, hes not as good as Cav in a pure head on sprint for example. But given the fact the TDF is over three weeks and comprises of all terrain with intermediate sprints dotted about then Cav cant compete with Sagan over the entire course. Sagan will always do enough to keep ahead on points even if that means breaking away from his lead out train and following Cavs just for points damage limitation. But you wont see Cav doing that, its all or nothing.
You can quote last years Giro but who was Cav up against? And if i remember rightly nobody fought Cav for intermediate points on the last stage because they knew he should probably get it, thats why Nibali didnt bother going for the points, but also Cav didnt have much competition in that race. Not from top sprinters anyway which is why Nibs and Cadel Evans were second and third in the points standings.
If the green jersey was based purely on 21 days of flat out sprints then money would be on Cav without a doubt, but it isnt.
You see, what you have done is classic internet debating. You started off with a lazy contentious opinion 'Cav can't win without a train'. Then it's been disproved so you morph it into an argument that those that proved you wrong actually agree with 'Cav is unlikely to win the green jersey' and claim victory. You even introduce a non-existing opposition argument 'You can quote last years Giro' so you can argue against it.Twitter: @RichN950 -
Essex Rouleur wrote:RichN95 wrote:
But Sagan very rarely wins bunch sprints against top competition. Most of the bunch sprints he wins are in smaller races with big team support.Essex Rouleur wrote:I disagree, i dont think Cav does manage without a lead out train as good as Sagan.
Call Sagan what you like, but you cant knock the fact hes won the green jersey with an all round approach to stage wins, intermediate sprints and bunch sprints in a way Cav cant match. Hence the reason why i said Cav wont win the green jersey whilst Sagan is about. Hills or no hills, he just wont.
If Cav does win it this year i'll buy you all pint
You appear to be making the mistake of equating the Green Jersey with the best sprinter.
No im not Rich, im simply making the point that Cav wont win the green jersey whilst Sagan is about. Sagan isnt the best sprinter, hes not as good as Cav in a pure head on sprint for example. But given the fact the TDF is over three weeks and comprises of all terrain with intermediate sprints dotted about then Cav cant compete with Sagan over the entire course. Sagan will always do enough to keep ahead on points even if that means breaking away from his lead out train and following Cavs just for points damage limitation. But you wont see Cav doing that, its all or nothing.
You can quote last years Giro but who was Cav up against? And if i remember rightly nobody fought Cav for intermediate points on the last stage because they knew he should probably get it, thats why Nibali didnt bother going for the points, but also Cav didnt have much competition in that race. Not from top sprinters anyway which is why Nibs and Cadel Evans were second and third in the points standings.
If the green jersey was based purely on 21 days of flat out sprints then money would be on Cav without a doubt, but it isnt.
Been reading your ramblings for a while and I thought I would look into it to see if I could get some stats:
Sagan won in 2012, 3 stages and 4 Intermediate sprints, he also had 6, 5, 6, 2, 2, 9, 3, 2. This equated to (assuming all points are for Flat stages) 135, 80, 211.
2013 he won 1 stage and 3 intermediate sprints., he also had 2, 2, 3, 2, 4, 3, 2, 4. This equated to (assuming all points are for flat stages) 45, 60, 252.
Neither accounts for other placings in int sprints.
It is clear to see the high placings in stages has a better impact on his tally rather than his Int sprint wins. Not all stages were flat and it was evident he was able to place in the medium mountain stages (which do have different points) in the tour as well as the flats, this means he has more points available to him than the other 'pure sprinters'. For anyone who says that it is the fact he competes in the int sprints that wins him the jersey is being silly imo and these points show that.0 -
Above The Cows wrote:^^That uphill one in Brittany was on the day his dog died. God how do I remember this useless crap?
We were there! 100m from the finish! I've got a brilliant photo of our son (who was barely toddling) looking very excited at the prospect of a Cav victory! Everyone was looking at me like a lunatic because I jumped up and down, screaming like an idiot when he won 0 -
TMR wrote:Above The Cows wrote:^^That uphill one in Brittany was on the day his dog died. God how do I remember this useless crap?
We were there! 100m from the finish! I've got a brilliant photo of our son (who was barely toddling) looking very excited at the prospect of a Cav victory! Everyone was looking at me like a lunatic because I jumped up and down, screaming like an idiot when he won
My mate's young 'un bursts into tears whenever Cav doesnt win
0 -
Tusher hasn't been about in a while.“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0
-
Above The Cows wrote:TMR wrote:Above The Cows wrote:I think that is my all time favourite Cav win. It was awesome.
It was an amazing win. My favourite win is the Champs-Élysées from the 2010 TdF with Renshaw in the background. He was a kilometre ahead!
Aye that was also a good one. Also his one without Renshaw in 2011 when he came streaming past Hushovd and whoever else on the other side of the road.
Bordeaux, 3rd last stage. I was in last 100m and the speed difference was amazing. Looked like Petacchi was his lead out man...
I got loads of Haribo that day, too. Didn't need any lunch or dinner!0 -
pinarello001 wrote:Merckx's stage win record has mountain top finishes and TT wins in it, anything Cav does, is not comparable.
Nothing is comparable to Merckx. But Cav would still be the most prolific stage winner in Tour history if he manages it. That's a remarkable achievement whichever way you look at it.
Cavendish wins most of his races as part of a bunch sprint with a lead-out train, but has won with little or no support in the past. Sagan wins most of his races as part of a smaller finishing group, with no lead-out trains at all, but can occasionally win bunch sprints.
That's a summary of the last 3 pages for anyone wanting to speed read.0 -
On the subject of Sagan (and this may deserve it's own thread), in the latest edition of Procycling, reference is made to his natural physiological talent, but they don't/won't say what it is - any ideas?
After testing him in Nov 2013, trainer Sebastian Weber was "impatient to discover Sagan's secret."
Weber says results answered his questions, but won't say why. "There was one thing that came up pretty clearly and quickly, but I don't know if he [Sagan] wants me to tell you".
They mention his high lactic acid tolerance in the previous sentence, so it's not that... The obvious other parameter is haematocrit - is that it?0 -
OCDuPalais wrote:On the subject of Sagan (and this may deserve it's own thread), in the latest edition of Procycling, reference is made to his natural physiological talent, but they don't/won't say what it is - any ideas?
After testing him in Nov 2013, trainer Sebastian Weber was "impatient to discover Sagan's secret."
Weber says results answered his questions, but won't say why. "There was one thing that came up pretty clearly and quickly, but I don't know if he [Sagan] wants me to tell you".
They mention his high lactic acid tolerance in the previous sentence, so it's not that... The obvious other parameter is haematocrit - is that it?
VO2?0 -
Oh yeah - and VO2... So obvious I forgot about it...
Anything else it could be?
Sebastian Weber - former trainer with T-Mobile, HTC and Katusha... Now, I bet he's got some rider stats that many would like a gawp at...0 -
VO2 is largely irrelevant when comparing pros. The lactate uptake is the key factor.OCDuPalais wrote:Oh yeah - and VO2... So obvious I forgot about it...
Anything else it could be?
Sebastian Weber - former trainer with T-Mobile, HTC and Katusha... Now, I bet he's got some rider stats that many would like a gawp at...
Something that rarely gets mentioned is the efficiency of the human body as a machine. Only a certain percentage (typically around 23-24 I believe, happy to be corrected) of energy produced goes to powering the bike. Now find someone who operates at 25-26% and you have a big advantage.Twitter: @RichN950 -
RichN95 wrote:
VO2 is largely irrelevant when comparing pros. The lactate uptake is the key factor.OCDuPalais wrote:Oh yeah - and VO2... So obvious I forgot about it...
Anything else it could be?
Sebastian Weber - former trainer with T-Mobile, HTC and Katusha... Now, I bet he's got some rider stats that many would like a gawp at...
Something that rarely gets mentioned is the efficiency of the human body as a machine. Only a certain percentage (typically around 23-24 I believe, happy to be corrected) of energy produced goes to powering the bike. Now find someone who operates at 25-26% and you have a big advantage.
Utterly agree - this is an understanding I arrived at after years of cycling (with the usual smattering of bike mag articles and potted knowledge of biology as your average cycling fan) - and have had countless discussions about.
It is also the nearest definition I can come up with for what "natural talent" actually means: the ability to transfer generated energy efficiently to the bike.
Out of interest, did you come by this notion the same way as me or have you got reliable scientific sources for this?
But back to the Procycling article - they mentioned lactate, so it's not that...0 -
The main way I came by this notion was by doing an engineering degree. But specifically regarding cycling, I read something in which Tim Kerrison was discussing it.OCDuPalais wrote:
Out of interest, did you come by this notion the same way as me or have you got reliable scientific sourcesTwitter: @RichN950 -
Clearly, we now have our first assumption – the efficiency. Lance Armstrong’s efficiency was measured as 23.12%. Other studies find values that range between 21% and 27%, though values over 25% are hotly debated, and basically dismissed as an artefact of testing and equipment.
- Ross Tucker, Science of Sport guy. I also recall Kerrison talking about the shocking inefficiency of the human body as a cycing engine, noting the huge potential to increase power output if it could only be improved..
I can't find that particulr Kerrison interview but this is pretty interesting http://www.biscuittinmedia.com/tim-kerrison-training-wiggins/...a rare 100% loyal Pro Race poster. A poster boy for the community.0 -
Richmond Racer wrote:TMR wrote:Above The Cows wrote:^^That uphill one in Brittany was on the day his dog died. God how do I remember this useless crap?
We were there! 100m from the finish! I've got a brilliant photo of our son (who was barely toddling) looking very excited at the prospect of a Cav victory! Everyone was looking at me like a lunatic because I jumped up and down, screaming like an idiot when he won
My mate's young 'un bursts into tears whenever Cav doesnt win
I admit to crying when he didn't win last year on the Champs, in my defence I had drunk quite a lot of wine by that point.RoadPainter wrote:Bordeaux, 3rd last stage. I was in last 100m and the speed difference was amazing. Looked like Petacchi was his lead out man...
I got loads of Haribo that day, too. Didn't need any lunch or dinner!
Another great one. Bernie was a beast that day. Cav and Bernie *sob*
Correlation is not causation.0 -
^never to be together again
*sniffs*0 -
Have you both been at the wine?0
-
Oh god I've been rumbled. :oops:
Sadly, no I haven't, although a quick slurp might help me on my way to finishing this damn albatross of an article. Best not though, I have to make a phone call in Dutch later and I come over a bit too German when speaking Dutch a little inebriated.Correlation is not causation.0 -
0
-
*hic*
Correlation is not causation.0 -
Above The Cows wrote:Oh god I've been rumbled. :oops:
Sadly, no I haven't, although a quick slurp might help me on my way to finishing this damn albatross of an article. Best not though, I have to make a phone call in Dutch later and I come over a bit too German when speaking Dutch a little inebriated.
I know how you feel - sometimes it takes me two or three attempts to get to the end of a Peter Hitchens article.
It's not been worth it once...0 -
RichN95 wrote:Essex Rouleur wrote:
No im not Rich, im simply making the point that Cav wont win the green jersey whilst Sagan is about. Sagan isnt the best sprinter, hes not as good as Cav in a pure head on sprint for example. But given the fact the TDF is over three weeks and comprises of all terrain with intermediate sprints dotted about then Cav cant compete with Sagan over the entire course. Sagan will always do enough to keep ahead on points even if that means breaking away from his lead out train and following Cavs just for points damage limitation. But you wont see Cav doing that, its all or nothing.
You can quote last years Giro but who was Cav up against? And if i remember rightly nobody fought Cav for intermediate points on the last stage because they knew he should probably get it, thats why Nibali didnt bother going for the points, but also Cav didnt have much competition in that race. Not from top sprinters anyway which is why Nibs and Cadel Evans were second and third in the points standings.
If the green jersey was based purely on 21 days of flat out sprints then money would be on Cav without a doubt, but it isnt.
You see, what you have done is classic internet debating. You started off with a lazy contentious opinion 'Cav can't win without a train'. Then it's been disproved so you morph it into an argument that those that proved you wrong actually agree with 'Cav is unlikely to win the green jersey' and claim victory. You even introduce a non-existing opposition argument 'You can quote last years Giro' so you can argue against it.
And what you've done is classic egotistical internet spitting your dummy out. You see yourself as an experienced internet debater on these forums so have made the mistake of getting personal by saying i have 'lazy contentious opinions' in the hope that your ego will be bolstered by the other long-term users of this forum who will back you up by saying things like '+1 Rich" and "agree Rich". But once it gets personal the gloves are off arent they, so lets assume they are off.
My 'lazy contentious opinion' comes from over 20 years experience of watching pro racing-you have made the mistake that because im new to this forum i dont know anything. So lets look at what else i know, I have a degree in sports psychology, alongside a career in publishing where i actually worked on various cycling magazines. Trust me, my 'lazy opinion' im guessing, far outweighs anything you might think of your 'sitting at home watching Eurosport' opinion then racking up on here in the hope you'll pull Richmond Racer one night and get in her knickers. Believe it or not Rich, you're not the only one with an opinion. So when you throw insults about, sit up and think that maybe the person you're debating with does actually have an opinion based on more than just 'lazy assumptons'.
Secondly, where was it disproved? what? a couple of people came up with a few stage wins where Cav won without a train? whoopeedoo. Shall we compare Cav stage wins with a train against Cav stage wins where he did it on his own and stage losses where he had a full on sprint train? because i would hate to shoot your ego down in flames but i think if you look through the history books, Cavs win percentage is far superior WITH a sprint train. His stage wins without one are FAR less. If you followed road racing, you would know this. At no point have i morphed anything into believing that those with this opinion are now backing up my thoughts because 1. i dont care what other people think and 2. i know im right and wont be proved wrong come this years TDF. The difference between me and you is i put my money where my mouth is, i don't sit on the fence waiting for people on here to rub my ego.
And lastly, bringing up last years Giro wasn't using me using a non-existent opposition argument, it was in response to another poster who said Cav won the points jersey last year over hilly terrain and does go for intermediate points. I was merely pointing out that last years Giro: 1. didn't have any decent sprinter of note that Cav would normally be up against which was backed up by Nibali and Evans finishing 2nd and 3rd, and secondly that Cav wasn't pressured in the intermediate sprint points in the same way he would be at the TDF. Its not a phantom argument, its fact.
You aren't the only one who watches Eurosport Rich, some of us actually go to these races. You need to back down and use your head a bit more 'Rich'. :roll:0 -
Essex Rouleur wrote:RichN95 wrote:Essex Rouleur wrote:
No im not Rich, im simply making the point that Cav wont win the green jersey whilst Sagan is about. Sagan isnt the best sprinter, hes not as good as Cav in a pure head on sprint for example. But given the fact the TDF is over three weeks and comprises of all terrain with intermediate sprints dotted about then Cav cant compete with Sagan over the entire course. Sagan will always do enough to keep ahead on points even if that means breaking away from his lead out train and following Cavs just for points damage limitation. But you wont see Cav doing that, its all or nothing.
You can quote last years Giro but who was Cav up against? And if i remember rightly nobody fought Cav for intermediate points on the last stage because they knew he should probably get it, thats why Nibali didnt bother going for the points, but also Cav didnt have much competition in that race. Not from top sprinters anyway which is why Nibs and Cadel Evans were second and third in the points standings.
If the green jersey was based purely on 21 days of flat out sprints then money would be on Cav without a doubt, but it isnt.
You see, what you have done is classic internet debating. You started off with a lazy contentious opinion 'Cav can't win without a train'. Then it's been disproved so you morph it into an argument that those that proved you wrong actually agree with 'Cav is unlikely to win the green jersey' and claim victory. You even introduce a non-existing opposition argument 'You can quote last years Giro' so you can argue against it.
And what you've done is classic egotistical internet spitting your dummy out. You see yourself as an experienced internet debater on these forums so have made the mistake of getting personal by saying i have 'lazy contentious opinions' in the hope that your ego will be bolstered by the other long-term users of this forum who will back you up by saying things like '+1 Rich" and "agree Rich". But once it gets personal the gloves are off arent they, so lets assume they are off.
My 'lazy contentious opinion' comes from over 20 years experience of watching pro racing-you have made the mistake that because im new to this forum i dont know anything. So lets look at what else i know, I have a degree in sports psychology, alongside a career in publishing where i actually worked on various cycling magazines. Trust me, my 'lazy opinion' im guessing, far outweighs anything you might think of your 'sitting at home watching Eurosport' opinion then racking up on here in the hope you'll pull Richmond Racer one night and get in her knickers. Believe it or not Rich, you're not the only one with an opinion. So when you throw insults about, sit up and think that maybe the person you're debating with does actually have an opinion based on more than just 'lazy assumptons'.
Secondly, where was it disproved? what? a couple of people came up with a few stage wins where Cav won without a train? whoopeedoo. Shall we compare Cav stage wins with a train against Cav stage wins where he did it on his own and stage losses where he had a full on sprint train? because i would hate to shoot your ego down in flames but i think if you look through the history books, Cavs win percentage is far superior WITH a sprint train. His stage wins without one are FAR less. If you followed road racing, you would know this. At no point have i morphed anything into believing that those with this opinion are now backing up my thoughts because 1. i dont care what other people think and 2. i know im right and wont be proved wrong come this years TDF. The difference between me and you is i put my money where my mouth is, i don't sit on the fence waiting for people on here to rub my ego.
And lastly, bringing up last years Giro wasn't using me using a non-existent opposition argument, it was in response to another poster who said Cav won the points jersey last year over hilly terrain and does go for intermediate points. I was merely pointing out that last years Giro: 1. didn't have any decent sprinter of note that Cav would normally be up against which was backed up by Nibali and Evans finishing 2nd and 3rd, and secondly that Cav wasn't pressured in the intermediate sprint points in the same way he would be at the TDF. Its not a phantom argument, its fact.
You aren't the only one who watches Eurosport Rich, some of us actually go to these races. You need to back down and use your head a bit more 'Rich'. :roll:
Of course Cavendish wins more with a sprint train then without, if not there would be no point in giving him a train.
Nibali and Evans finishing 2nd and 3rd in the Giro points competition is more indicative of the way points are spread out in the Giro (before the changed for this year anyway). The last time a 'sprinter' won the points competition was Bennati in 2008. In fact the 4 year before Cavendish won it the winner was in the top 5 in GC and twice was won by the GC winner.0 -
Essex Rouleur wrote:And what you've done is classic egotistical internet spitting your dummy out. You see yourself as an experienced internet debater on these forums so have made the mistake of getting personal by saying i have 'lazy contentious opinions' in the hope that your ego will be bolstered by the other long-term users of this forum who will back you up by saying things like '+1 Rich" and "agree Rich". But once it gets personal the gloves are off arent they, so lets assume they are off.
My 'lazy contentious opinion' comes from over 20 years experience of watching pro racing-you have made the mistake that because im new to this forum i dont know anything. So lets look at what else i know, I have a degree in sports psychology, alongside a career in publishing where i actually worked on various cycling magazines. Trust me, my 'lazy opinion' im guessing, far outweighs anything you might think of your 'sitting at home watching Eurosport' opinion then racking up on here in the hope you'll pull Richmond Racer one night and get in her knickers. Believe it or not Rich, you're not the only one with an opinion. So when you throw insults about, sit up and think that maybe the person you're debating with does actually have an opinion based on more than just 'lazy assumptons'.
Secondly, where was it disproved? what? a couple of people came up with a few stage wins where Cav won without a train? whoopeedoo. Shall we compare Cav stage wins with a train against Cav stage wins where he did it on his own and stage losses where he had a full on sprint train? because i would hate to shoot your ego down in flames but i think if you look through the history books, Cavs win percentage is far superior WITH a sprint train. His stage wins without one are FAR less. If you followed road racing, you would know this. At no point have i morphed anything into believing that those with this opinion are now backing up my thoughts because 1. i dont care what other people think and 2. i know im right and wont be proved wrong come this years TDF. The difference between me and you is i put my money where my mouth is, i don't sit on the fence waiting for people on here to rub my ego.
And lastly, bringing up last years Giro wasn't using me using a non-existent opposition argument, it was in response to another poster who said Cav won the points jersey last year over hilly terrain and does go for intermediate points. I was merely pointing out that last years Giro: 1. didn't have any decent sprinter of note that Cav would normally be up against which was backed up by Nibali and Evans finishing 2nd and 3rd, and secondly that Cav wasn't pressured in the intermediate sprint points in the same way he would be at the TDF. Its not a phantom argument, its fact.
You aren't the only one who watches Eurosport Rich, some of us actually go to these races. You need to back down and use your head a bit more 'Rich'. :roll:
As an experienced armchair psychologist with many years of field work to my name, we can conclude that you are very adept at rubbing your own ego.0
This discussion has been closed.
