2013 Paris Nice

[El Pistolero]

BMC RACING TEAM

61 BLYTHE Adam United Kingdom
62 EVANS Cadel Australia
63 KOHLER Martin Switzerland
64 PHINNEY Taylor United States
65 QUINZIATO Manuel Italy
66 SCHÄR Michael Switzerland
67 VAN AVERMAET Greg Belgium
68 CUMMINGS Steven United Kingdom

blythe is leader for bmc then in strade bianche? just give it a rest

Do you really think that's done on alphabetical order?

 

[Netserk]

Do you really think that's done on alphabetical order?

How about this one then:

Also a team without any leaders?

 

[The Hitch]

seems not to have understood the very common tactic of arranging the numbers of the other 7 riders by alphabetical order, but giving the designated leader the number 1.

Not always

The term "very common" does not mean "always". In fact it means usually but not always . The way the term "very common" was placed into the middle of that sentence, i would hazzard a guess that it was put there deliberately, precisely to point out that there are exceptions.

 

[BlenJones2]

surely you can agree that there is no one rule to who is designated just general themes

 

[search]

Do you really think that's done on alphabetical order?

Cummings might be the replacement for Wyss though, as he is out for a couple of days because his wife is giving birth to their second child.

 

[El Pistolero]

How about this one then:

Also a team without any leaders?

No, that's clearly done on alphabetical order. BMC however isn't done on alphabetical order.

 

[Miburo]

BMC RACING TEAM

61 BLYTHE Adam United Kingdom
62 EVANS Cadel Australia
63 KOHLER Martin Switzerland
64 PHINNEY Taylor United States
65 QUINZIATO Manuel Italy
66 SCHÄR Michael Switzerland
67 VAN AVERMAET Greg Belgium
68 CUMMINGS Steven United Kingdom

blythe is leader for bmc then in strade bianche? just give it a rest

You do realise that 68 is Cummings?

 

[Ryo Hazuki]

You do realise that 68 is Cummings?

he is a last minute replacement

 

[The Hitch]

BMC RACING TEAM

61 BLYTHE Adam United Kingdom
62 EVANS Cadel Australia
63 KOHLER Martin Switzerland
64 PHINNEY Taylor United States
65 QUINZIATO Manuel Italy
66 SCHÄR Michael Switzerland
67 VAN AVERMAET Greg Belgium
68 CUMMINGS Steven United Kingdom

blythe is leader for bmc then in strade bianche? just give it a rest

Lol, your arguments are more impotent than Jose Rujano on a time trial bike.

It has been explained to you that the - leader of the team gets the first number, rule, is not always used, but that it is most likely being used in this case (Paris Nice).

Examples have been shown to you to show that this was the case last time round in this race with this team.

And yet you ignore these valid arguments and shut them down by showing some random lists from some random, unrelated races, who's validity is clearly of lesser importance than the ones shown to you.

In fact you seem totally unaware of the fact that the rule mentioned by myself above has ever been used.

Take a look at the Vuelta starlist from last year for example, and notice how almost in every team the number 1 rider is almost never the one who came first alphabetically.

Why was Cobo given the number 1 at the Vuelta over Castroviejo? Was it because those morons at Movistar can't spell? Yes, that must be it, or they would have given Quintana the leadership

 

[Geraint Too Fast]

If Rui Costa were called Zulu Zimbabwe he'd still have the no. 1 on his back. He's the obvious leader. He could well be overshadowed by Quintana, of course.

He was the obvious leader for Algarve as well...

31 CASTROVIEJO NICOLAS Jonathan
32 FARIA DA COSTA Rui Alberto
33 DOWSETT Alex
34 HERRADA LOPEZ Jesús
35 HERRADA LOPEZ José
36 KARPETS Vladimir Russia
38 SANZ UNZUE Enrique

 

[Ryo Hazuki]

he is a last minute replacement

No, that's clearly done on alphabetical order. BMC however isn't done on alphabetical order.

the only guy not on alphabetical order is cummings, he replaces wyss, Wyss

rings a bell now?

 

[Ryo Hazuki]

Lol, your arguments are more impotent than Jose Rujano on a time trial bike.

It has been explained to you that the - leader of the team gets the first number, rule, is not always used, but that it is most likely being used in this case (Paris Nice).

Examples have been shown to you to show that this was the case last time round in this race with this team.

And yet you ignore these valid arguments and shut them down by showing some random lists from some random, unrelated races, who's validity is clearly of lesser importance than the ones shown to you.

In fact you seem totally unaware of the fact that the rule mentioned by myself above has ever been used.

Take a look at the Vuelta starlist from last year for example, and notice how almost in every team the number 1 rider is almost never the one who came first alphabetically.

Why was Cobo given the number 1 at the Vuelta over Castroviejo? Was it because those morons at Movistar can't spell? Yes, that must be it, or they would have given Quintana the leadership

we shall see if quintana is going to work for costa

 

[El Pistolero]

the only guy not on alphabetical order is cummings, he replaces wyss, Wyss

rings a bell now?

Lol, I know all that, I find it hilarious that you're giving an example of a team that's listed on alphabetical order and you actually managed to find the only team that wasn't done so.

 

[Ryo Hazuki]

Lol, I know all that, I find it hilarious that you're giving an example of a team that's listed on alphabetical order and you actually managed to find the only team that wasn't done so.

what? bmc is listed alphabetical. what part don't you get?

 

[The Hitch]

we shall see if quintana is going to work for costa

I didnt say Quintana would work for Costa, or that he isnt co-leader.

What I said that Costa was given number 1 deliberately by his team as the official designated leader, and not, like you claim, simply because of the first letter of his surname.

 

[Netserk]

I didnt say Quintana would work for Costa, or that he isnt co-leader.

What I said that Costa was given number 1 deliberately by his team as the official designated leader, and not, like you claim, simply because of the first letter of his surname.

Then explain post 284.

 

[Miburo]

what? bmc is listed alphabetical. what part don't you get?

That you posted a list where confusion might arise about it

 

[The Hitch]

Then explain post 284.

It was the Tour of the Algarve. Looking at the 2012 startlist for Algarve Movistar (and half the other teams) didnt bother to give their leader the number 1 then either.

This however is the Paris Nice thread and we are talking about Paris Nice. Where last year and every other year everyone gives a specific rider the number - 1.

Any more questions?

 

[Froome19]

It was the Tour of the Algarve. Looking at the 2012 startlist for Algarve Movistar (and half the other teams) didnt bother to give their leader the number 1 then either.

This however is the Paris Nice thread and we are talking about Paris Nice. Where last year and every other year everyone gives a specific rider the number - 1.

Any more questions?

Yes, how come you didn't imply that earlier?

All you said was

seems not to have understood the very common tactic of arranging the numbers of the other 7 riders by alphabetical order, but giving the designated leader the number 1.

Did you expect us to believe that meant only referring to Paris Nice and other WT races?

I would take very common to mean a sizeable percentage, so when one race has 50% of its teams not like that I would not say it is very common.

 

[cocteau_ireland]

So who has the numerical advantage?

 

[The Hitch]

Yes, how come you didn't imply that earlier?

All you said was


Did you expect us to believe that meant only referring to Paris Nice and other WT races?

I would take very common to mean a sizeable percentage, so when one race has 50% of its teams not like that I would not say it is very common.

I don't the words "very common" do necessarily mean "more than 50%". For instance a quick type of those 2 words into google produces the following sentence.

smith is a very common surname

Do I need to start calling polling websites and arrange surveys to find out how many people worldwide have the surname Smith, or will you take my word for it that it the number when expressed as a percentage would be a little bit smaller than 50

 

[argyllflyer]

BMC had Cadel in jersey number 'x3' for Oman and he was clearly their main GC threat. I thought it odd when I saw the startlist. He may not have had proven form going into the race, so perhaps BMC were going to decide who was leader 'on the road'.

 

[Angliru]

uh, no...

AG2R LA MONDIALE

11 BELLETTI Manuel Italy
12 BETANCUR GOMEZ Carlos Alberto Colombia
13 GADRET John France
14 GASTAUER Ben Luxembourg
15 GEORGES Sylvain France
16 KADRI Blel France
17 IGLINSKIY Valentin Kazahkstan
18 NOCENTINI Rinaldo Italy

or do you think belletti is leader saturday in strade bianche? I picked the first race first team numbers I could find and look already proven right again you are as clueless as ever once again

I think it's a bit less straight forward than what one would think. For instance Andy has likely been wearing the #1 for his team in all of his races during his "slump" and certainly they aren't riding with him actually expected to pull off a result in his state of condition. It's maybe to pacify the rider(s). Some riders are superstitious and want particular #'s (I suppose) and other could care less and are willing take whatever # falls their way. Some are prima-donnas and feel they should be wearing the #1 even if they have no chance in hell of doing anything other than rolling in with the autobus. Most times it is alphabetical with the exception of the leader with the #1.

 

[Ryo Hazuki]

It was the Tour of the Algarve. Looking at the 2012 startlist for Algarve Movistar (and half the other teams) didnt bother to give their leader the number 1 then either.

This however is the Paris Nice thread and we are talking about Paris Nice. Where last year and every other year everyone gives a specific rider the number - 1.

Any more questions?

then why did you say this:

seems not to have understood the very common tactic of arranging the numbers of the other 7 riders by alphabetical order, but giving the designated leader the number 1.

 

[The Hitch]

then why did you say this:

seems not to have understood the very common tactic of arranging the numbers of the other 7 riders by alphabetical order, but giving the designated leader the number 1.

Why wouldn't I say it. Its a perfectly sensible sentence that is 100% correct and has withstood easily the 2 or 3 weak challenges made to it.