Page 1 of 1

Acoustic Bike WTF?!?!

Posted: Fri Oct 15, 2010 9:08 am
by DerGolgo
<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/BkkTSVVrPYk?fs ... ram><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/BkkTSVVrPYk?fs=1&hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

I mean, seriously, WTF?

"The world record for standing still on a bicycle is actually over three hours, but not on a competitive level."

I dare say, you can put too much strategy into a sport.

Someone, please enlighten me.

Posted: Fri Oct 15, 2010 9:46 am
by Pattio
The key here is that we're not talking about the whole sport, just one of many variations of man-machine-finish line within that sport. Consider the difference between a road stage, where the first across the line is the winner, with a myriad of team dynamics, alliances, and strategy playing in, and a time trial, the Race of Truth, where the lowest elapsed time is the winner and teamwork is ruled out. Both are competitions, both have their specialists.

You can see a (less extreme) example of this every year on the final turn at Daytona, because the effect of drafting is so important. Riders will dice and scheme _not_ to be the leading rider in that last turn, because the rider in their draft can and will slingshot around them. The lead position is a disadvantage at that moment, and that's exactly what's going on here. First across the line wins, not lowest elapsed time.

Posted: Fri Oct 15, 2010 10:01 am
by rolly
I would think that one could win an unassailable advantage by going for it while the other wanker is wanking about, but I guess that's not the case.

Posted: Fri Oct 15, 2010 10:26 am
by Pattio
Consider a samurai sword fight. Those guys didn't chase each other around the castle clashing blades and swinging off tapestries- just two guys, two swords, maybe a long staredown, and then something you can't even see happens and somebody's ded.

Posted: Fri Oct 15, 2010 12:28 pm
by SpecialK
Yeah, I mean, how boring would all those Clint Eastwood movies be if he just shot the guy? It's all about the stare down.

Posted: Fri Oct 15, 2010 12:41 pm
by Pattio
<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/anEuw8F8cpE?fs ... ram><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/anEuw8F8cpE?fs=1&hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

Posted: Fri Oct 15, 2010 1:39 pm
by rolly
SpecialK wrote:Yeah, I mean, how boring would all those Clint Eastwood movies be if he just shot the guy? It's all about the stare down.
Now I'm picturing Eastwood, Lee Van Cleef and Eli Wallach all standing on one leg, twitching back and forth as they try to maintain balance while the Ecstasy Of Gold builds to a crescendo.