Richmond 2015 World Championships, Sep 19-27

Page 71 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Re: Re:

Zinoviev Letter said:
Armchair cyclist said:
I also found it a more interesting race than I had predicted (this is a thread about the RRWC, isn't it?)

It was. Now it's a semi-dead thread with people talking about the winner of the WCRR's post race ramblings.

That's ok. Conversations are organic; they tend to take a life of their own. Talk about Sagan's win would be as boring as how it was achieved.
 
I can't understand how anyone who likes road racing can not like, or at least appreciate, Sagan. What the hell more do u want from a rider?! He can do short climbs, he can sprint, he is probably the best bike handler road cycling has ever seen (that corner at the bottom of the last descent was supreme), and he isn't boring. And he's not ugly! To win the WCs he showed great abilities to short powerclimb, descend and bike handle. What a great performance and a v worthy new champ.
 
Mar 9, 2013
572
0
0
^^^^^^^^^^
Could not agree more.
I was screaming at the TV. The way he took that fast left turn after the downhill.....WOW! Bought himself a few seconds more IMHO
 
Aug 31, 2012
7,550
3
0
Re: Re:

the delgados said:
TMP402 said:
DonEsteban said:
TMP402 said:
the delgados said:
Just want to quickly chime in to take issue with the notion that athletes/actors should keep their yaps shut.
That's total nonsense.
They can say whatever the hell they want.
It's up to everyone else to decide whether their words have merit.

But not everyone is sensible enough to discern informed and uninformed comments.
Yes, so the big brother should decide who can say what ... because we should not be asked to use out small stupid mindsto discern informed and uninformed comments ... and only the big smart politicians should speak about politics, as they are the ones with deep insight ... yes, Yes, YES!

I'd like entertainment and politics to occupy different spheres of civil society. Any serious person would recognise that as an anti-totalitarian stance.

I'm with you on the anti-totalitarian bit, but I fail to grasp how an athlete speaking their mind equates to what you suggest.
Entertainers and politicians have at least one thing in common: They are human beings. Regardless of someone's status, they have a right to voice their opinion in a democratic society. I could be totally misreading this, but to suggest that someone shouldn't speak means to me that one doesn't believe in democracy.
No, a government using its monopoly on violence to censor or prevent speech would mean it's not a democracy. Wishing celebs would exercise their freedom to keep their mouths shut ( alternatively, wishing media wouldn't make it news if they don't keep their mouths shut, or wishing people would be more rational when it comes to forming opinions. Similar effect) is not only not undemocratic, it's a wish whose realisation would improve democracy, because it would improve deliberation and discourse.
 
Re:

Carols said:
Okay I came in here to read about a bike race and find 2 pages of just about anything but bike racing....... :(

Luckily I have a solution for you. Let me suggest that you concentrate your interest on the first 86 pages of the 88 page thread about this race then, rather than 2 pages from a day after the race ended.
 
Re: Re:

The Hitch said:
VeloGirl said:
SeriousSam said:
Sagan saying he won for the people in the world because there's some stuff going on in Europe. I hate that cringeworthy **** where athletes feel the need to play insightful commentators of world affairs.


I don't understand why being an athlete precludes one from having an opinion. It's just a job. He's still a human and a citizen of Europe. Why can't he have an opinion.
People are always telling athletes/actors/musicians to shut it when it comes to politics and world events. I never understood that. Whatever their profession, they are still part of society.

And just because they are celebrities doesn't mean they should buy into their own hype and think that their opinion is worth more than anyone elses.

I absolutely hate it when I get fliers in the post from the political parties here and it often has some actor's picture on it, telling you (insert actor) says (insert party name) are the best for Britain's future.

Most of them (like 90% at least here in Britain) come from filthy rich families, go to private schools, never have to work a day in their lives and get into the movie industry because of the connections their parents have.

How does this qualify them to stand with politicians at rallies telling you who you should vote for.

Once in 2010 harry potter's picture was on the Lib Dem flier. What the **** does he know about politics? He got fast tracked to being a millionaire because some producers of a kids film decided when he was still in nappies that he looks a bit like what they imagine a character from a book would look like. And because of this he knows what people with real problems need from their politicians?

A few years ago ashley judd announced she was going to run for senate. She had 0 political experience and has 0 knowledge of the kind of problems ordinary people have to live with. She's been insulated from pretty much all the world's problems since she got paid millions to show of her body in a few films decades ago. A few decades living in mansions partying up and now she thinks, now that middle age is here, why not have some fun and get into politics. Too famous to work her way up, through local councils and all that boring nonesence, nah **** having to actually work for it, she wants to go straight to the top - national senator. So she announces she's going to run for Senate in I think it was Missouri.

So what happens. Well on the other hand you have guys and girls who when Ashley Judd was partying on yachts, went to college, did work experience, did work, worked their way up through local councils and all the other hard grafts. Had to get mortgages had to pay off their college, negotiate debts etc. And after 20 years of hard work they can finally see their reward - a once in a lifetime shot at a Senate seat, suddenly some entitled Valley girl swoons in from California and takes it from them.

Its not enough for these people to just take millions for a job anyone could do. They just can't help themselves from inserting themselves into the political side of it all too. The arrogance is astounding.

I can't believe the things people let bother them. You seriously let some actors running for office get you this worked up, Hitch? Personally, I find it interesting when celebrities let their opinions be known. Hell, I'm incredibly entertained by Trump right now - he's a riot. :p

And you're way overstating the Wire/non-actor thing. The overwhelming majority of the major characters are trained actors.
 
Re: Re:

LaFlorecita said:
jaylew said:
hrotha said:
Jancouver said:
endless bashing without any reasoning
This is blatantly false. LS spells out their reasons often enough, including in this very thread.
Their? You trying to confirm that the two of you post as a collective under two different usernames?

BigMac said:
Please, Libertine is entitled to their opinion, no need to go personal. I am yet to see them doing so with any of us, their beef is with Sagan.
Edit: Ok, another one. Is this some kind of forum joke I missed?
Many of us don't know if Libertine is a lady or a gent. I believe LS is female but I am not sure.

Really? Well that seems rather silly. Why is it a big secret? Never crossed my mind Libertine was anything other than male. What, people think he's a woman because he follows women's cycling a bunch?
 
Re:

hrotha said:
I don't think LS is a woman. I just don't assume LS is a man, because they have never identified as such as far as I know. Neutral they exists just for this kind of situation.

'He' is the neutral, and was for centuries, until a bunch of vagrants who have no love for the English language took it upon themselves to make a deliberate assault on my culture and language and that of my ancestors. The use of the plural to indicate an individual drives me up the wall; you may as well spit in my face.
 
Then maybe you should take issue with "you" for the singular too. Neutral they is a perfectly organic development to fill a perceived gap in the English language, and it's also older than you seem to think.

edit: Uton sprecan ymb "they" and englisces gereordes lufe, gif þe lyst. And ymb þine yldran.
 
Re: Re:

jaylew said:
LaFlorecita said:
jaylew said:
hrotha said:
Jancouver said:
endless bashing without any reasoning
This is blatantly false. LS spells out their reasons often enough, including in this very thread.
Their? You trying to confirm that the two of you post as a collective under two different usernames?

BigMac said:
Please, Libertine is entitled to their opinion, no need to go personal. I am yet to see them doing so with any of us, their beef is with Sagan.
Edit: Ok, another one. Is this some kind of forum joke I missed?
Many of us don't know if Libertine is a lady or a gent. I believe LS is female but I am not sure.

Really? Well that seems rather silly. Why is it a big secret? Never crossed my mind Libertine was anything other than male. What, people think he's a woman because he follows women's cycling a bunch?

For some reason I recall at some point in my time on cn forums that Libertine identified as a woman. I'm almost sure of it.
 
Re:

willbick said:
I can't understand how anyone who likes road racing can not like, or at least appreciate, Sagan. What the hell more do u want from a rider?! He can do short climbs, he can sprint, he is probably the best bike handler road cycling has ever seen (that corner at the bottom of the last descent was supreme), and he isn't boring. And he's not ugly! To win the WCs he showed great abilities to short powerclimb, descend and bike handle. What a great performance and a v worthy new champ.

+1000

Again we saw how strongest rider of the day does not necessarily win, but smartest, canniest. Ok, in a way he was the strongest of course, but. You know. I bet he was thinking and whatching Dege quite a bit before he decided to go.

And his political opinion. I think it was quite refreshing after a while to see trade team athlete with an opinion like that. It wasn't HC political act, it was a human act.
 
Re: Re:

Angliru said:
For some reason I recall at some point in my time on cn forums that Libertine identified as a woman. I'm almost sure of it.

I thought it was more subtle than that - for a long-time Libertine had a profile picture of a female cyclist (might have been Marianne Vos) and lots of posters assumed it as a picture of Libertine themselves. That then prompted discussion of Libertine's gender, which to my memory Libertine has never actually commented on - presumably preferring a bit of mystery.

It's quite interesting it's become a forum meme really. I'm sure there are lots of 'famous' posters on here who have never formally identified their gender, but no one gives it a second thought. But yet people obsess over Libertine's gender for some reason!
 
Re:

willbick said:
I can't understand how anyone who likes road racing can not like, or at least appreciate, Sagan. What the hell more do u want from a rider?! He can do short climbs, he can sprint, he is probably the best bike handler road cycling has ever seen (that corner at the bottom of the last descent was supreme), and he isn't boring. And he's not ugly! To win the WCs he showed great abilities to short powerclimb, descend and bike handle. What a great performance and a v worthy new champ.

I had more appreciation for Sagan when he was riding against Cav for the green jersey because he was the lesser of two evils. But this year, the interminable tongue baths he got at the TDF from Phil and Paul made it impossible for me to enjoy anything about Sagan. He hasn't done enough to justify all the hype IMO until this past weekend. I will be interested to see if he is able to pick up a monument in 2016.
 
"For this reason it should not be a matter for surprise
that the Anglo-Saxon mania for sport gains ground day by day: the
ideal of the modern world is the 'human animal' who has developed
his muscular strength to the highest pitch; its heroes are athletes,
even though they be mere brutes; it is they who awaken popular
enthusiasm, and it is their exploits that ,command the passionate
interest of the crowd. A world in which such things are seen has
indeed sunk low and seems near its end."

René Guénon in "The Crisis of the Modern World" (1927)
 
Re: Re:

phanatic said:
hrotha said:
I don't think LS is a woman. I just don't assume LS is a man, because they have never identified as such as far as I know. Neutral they exists just for this kind of situation.

'He' is the neutral, and was for centuries, until a bunch of vagrants who have no love for the English language took it upon themselves to make a deliberate assault on my culture and language and that of my ancestors. The use of the plural to indicate an individual drives me up the wall; you may as well spit in my face.

This is an embarrassing post to read. English is a living, adapting language and always has been. 'He' in that sense is a social construct for a variety of purposes and is outdated, just like the use of 'mankind' to describe humanity. It is not an assault on British culture. Nothing is permanent, everything that survives changes.
 
Jul 11, 2013
3,340
0
0
I think the last few pages has become a bit too much off topic.

Time to move on, or move potential further linguistic discussion to the proper thread.

And certainly a discussion/debate of a member's private information will not carry on.

Thank you.
 
Jun 3, 2012
418
0
0
EBH was the biggest loser of the day and put on the dumbest tactical performance of the year. All he had to do was rotate with GGG while Sagan tired himself out alone, then catch Sagan and outsprint GGG for the win. Sagan only had like five seconds coming out of the left corner at the bottom of the descent.