ChezGiven

Teetotal sunday, 10km run and healthy food. Still feeling shit from Saturday night's drinking.

Was just going to post the same thing. Fucking Chablis with dessert! What a waste. Your typical dessert wines are great (Sauternes etc) but i've got some sweet reds which go lush with chocolate desserts. As does Port.

I once went to Heaven to see Digweed on a Thursday night (was about 26) and went to work without sleeping. We even had a team lunch. Was absolutely fine. Used to have massive weekend sessions, finish late Sunday / Monday morning and still go to work. Nowadays if I have 3 pints, am a mess.

Aye. I was 37 when I hit the wall, which is quite late apparently.

Basically Sallet is full of shit and the inventors of cricket don't cheat

Just checked, yes it is. The blog doesn't make the adjustment. Game over?

Isn't that to do with the 6% adjustment that Sky makes to account for some error?

Not all of it, sorry. Just the bit about Quintana not being a doper because he was the best young rider. Froome's development timeline is not evidence for him being a doper and Quintana not, that's a specious argument at best.

That's a rubbish argument. Here's a good one http://www.insightdatascience.com/blog/vammer_on_tour_de_france.html

And Armstrong's 0.3% advantage over the race would have been gained in the 10% or less of the race when they were actually racing, meaning it was 3% improvement over non-doped competitors. That does sound significant.

Which all makes sense and thanks for the explanation. Still seems a very small advantage over Quintana. I don't think its a question of watching cycling, it's more a question of reading about doping. So why is that 2 minute advantage considered so likely to be due to drugs? If they are only really racing for 10% of the time, the 2 minutes is less than 0.5% improvement in performance over a competitors for just those 8 hours of racing and equivalent performance for 72 hours. Why does Froome need drugs to be 2 minutes better than Quintana? Over 80 hours it seems like a very reasonable margin of improvement due to natural ability. The only way I can see it making sense is if it is assumed that Quintana is on drugs too and that not the case, is it?

Not completely, more of a roundabout way to ask a question; how come everyone is convinced Froome is on drugs when the margin between him and other riders is so small? 2 minutes as a % of 80 hours of racing is tiny. Compare that to the 0.1 second Johnson knocked off the 100 metres when on drugs. Those drugs were 1000 times more effective for a start. Were all the riders behind Armstrong on drugs too? Where were the riders who were not on drugs? If you tried to have these drugs registered for their performance enhancing effects, you wouldn't be able to convince anyone that the effect was real if they give you 2 minutes overall performance improvement over 80 hours of racing.

After nearly 79 hours of racing Froome is 2 minutes ahead of Quintana and 7 minutes ahead of Contador. Is he the only one of the leading riders who people are accusing of being a doper? How much difference do these drugs make because that's a very very small margin? It's less than 1000th of a % point of overall time which is such a slender margin, there is no clinical study in the world which would be able to say that that margin was due to the effect of the drugs. Or are they all on drugs still because if it's just Froome they must be shit?

NASA is expected to reveal the existence of another Earth at 5pm today. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/11757429/Has-Nasa-found-another-Earth-in-corner-of-Milky-Way.html

Villa are interested in Adebayor too.

If you want to remain cynical, one way of looking at the supposed change is that it comes off the back of one relegation and 2 bee near misses. In the case of the 2 misses arguably random chance has saved us, rather than having enough to stay up. If the outcome of the policy 'maintaining our premierhsip status by aiming for mid table' leads to serious chances of relegation then perhaps the best way to 'secure' being in the premiership is a higher level of investment. The strategy may not have changed, just the tactical amount of investment required has been revised upwards to reduce the probability of relegation to a comfortable level.

Bono at that gig in Barrowlands "every time I clap my hands ('clap') a child in Africa dies ('clap')" Some Glaswegian in the crowd "well stop clapping your fucking hands then".

Indeed. I assume its going to happen though as we've just signed our 3rd and 4th most expensive players. What is less clear is that i dont think any of the players we could potentially sell have a high enough 'stock' right now for it to be a foregone conclusion. Perhaps Cisse as his numbers speak for themselves but i cant see bids above 10m for anyone in the squad right now.

Its great to see the investment and the new faces. I don't know enough about him to judge but he looks a 'bit of unit' too so doesnt look like he will have to deal with the same issues as e.g. Cabella did in terms of physicality. Interesting (or more accurately, sadly) the only issue this summer is whether they will retain the bodies in the squad to give us the options we will need. I'm not really concerned about losing any of Sissoko, Cabella, Perez or Cisse in particular. Obviously Perez / Sissoko would be a disappointment but we'd only truly miss Perez's (albeit large) potential if the rest stay and we continue bringing in players. If we can get Austin and e.g. let Cisse go then the attacking options are going to be strong. I doubt we will keep everyone we currently have. Looks like we are getting the bodies in before letting some players go. Which makes sense, the end of the window is more of a sellers market.

"See this defender we're looking at is African" "Aye he has 4 birthdays but he's bound to be a bit of unit" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KctO7S62ZfY

I would only consider the 70s as an alternative in the 'best decade' debate.

Is this like Louis CK's mild racism?

You might have a point.

You can go finger your own ring to appalling Eurovision ditties if you dont like The Fall.