Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted
1 hour ago, Meezo said:

3 proper likable guys in 3 different teams... no it can't be... life is hard enough as it is

Not that he is nearly as likable as the other 3, but imagine if Remco is added to that mix .... 🙈

Posted
42 minutes ago, Vetplant said:

What I read from that... Campenaerts is DEFINITELY going for the win today.....

 

PS. Manipulation of the Y-Axis grinds my gears. This scale was selected for dramatic effect. Plot it from Zero and I'm sure it doesn't look as dramatic.

Why on earth do you want to include zeros? It's meaningless information and presents nothing (mind the pun) to the bar chart. 

Posted
31 minutes ago, NC_lurker said:

Well someone was watching a different TT yesterday 😆

 

Screenshot_20230719-095347~2.png

Can some PLEASE explain why they flipped the image? Is there some kind of copyright loophole? It's awfully triggering. 

Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, devvydoesdonuts said:

I think Tadej and Jonas will kill him on the climbs, Remco is good but I think he is just a level below them.

It will make things very interesting though with Jonas, Tadej, Primoz and Remco in the same grand tour.

Edited by TheoG
Posted
39 minutes ago, Vetplant said:

What I read from that... Campenaerts is DEFINITELY going for the win today.....

 

PS. Manipulation of the Y-Axis grinds my gears. This scale was selected for dramatic effect. Plot it from Zero and I'm sure it doesn't look as dramatic.

I so very much do not want to go to a dark place here ... knowing Van Aert wanted to take the TT, (he probably gave it his all), how does Vingegaard take 2min 51s on Van Aert in 22.4km?

 
I would have liked Vingegaard to take the TDF, but now it just seems 'ugh'? That uncomfortable feeling that something is not quite right? .....  

TT.png

Posted
6 minutes ago, mecheng89 said:

Why on earth do you want to include zeros? It's meaningless information and presents nothing (mind the pun) to the bar chart. 

I want better context. Zooming in on the y-axis might over-emphasize the differences:

(It is a gripe that has been a long time coming, in various industries. I prefer the graph on the right)

image.png.cbcb63eadfd63587a98e527f1c49cbe9.png

Posted
11 minutes ago, mecheng89 said:

Can some PLEASE explain why they flipped the image? Is there some kind of copyright loophole? It's awfully triggering. 

I think the fact that they think Jonas needed to go faster might signify that there are challenges bigger than mere image formatting 😄

Posted
13 minutes ago, TheoG said:

It will make things very interesting though with Jonas, Tadej, Primoz and Remco in the same grand tour.

It would be very interesting, not sure if Jumbo would allow two genuine contenders now though? 

 

Posted
1 minute ago, devvydoesdonuts said:

It would be very interesting, not sure if Jumbo would allow two genuine contenders now though? 

 

Agree, Primoz needs to make a move to maybe Ineos, not that I would like him in another team other than JV.

Posted
10 minutes ago, EddieV said:

I so very much do not want to go to a dark place here ... knowing Van Aert wanted to take the TT, (he probably gave it his all), how does Vingegaard take 2min 51s on Van Aert in 22.4km?

 
I would have liked Vingegaard to take the TDF, but now it just seems 'ugh'? That uncomfortable feeling that something is not quite right? .....  

TT.png

Not disputing that the time gaps are rather large...but out of interest did you watch Vingegaard's ride? I'm not sure I've ever seen such aggressive riding on a TT bike. The speed he was going around corners brings to mind Pidcock's descent last year, just insane.

Actually, the only other TT that comes close was Vingegaard's final TT in last year's tour where he eventually sat up to gift the stage to WvA. 

Regardless of his speed on the climb, it appeared he was moving far faster than Tadej on the rest of the course as well.

Posted
23 minutes ago, mecheng89 said:

Can some PLEASE explain why they flipped the image? Is there some kind of copyright loophole? It's awfully triggering. 

There's a left to right rule in photography composition. The rule says to compose shots (or position yourself) so that movement is left to right, and if not possible to do so you flip the image afterwards unless there is text in the image. So yeah, they are in gross violation here!

Posted
26 minutes ago, mecheng89 said:

Can some PLEASE explain why they flipped the image? Is there some kind of copyright loophole? It's awfully triggering. 

It’s usually done in desktop publishing when you have an image on the one page, say the right side. For aesthetically pleasing appeal, it is always better for a car, person, bike to move/look off the page than towards the middle of the page (spine). Was taught in Varsity/Technicon for Graphic Designers; but seems anyone can do it these days.

Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, bleedToWin said:

There's a left to right rule in photography composition. The rule says to compose shots (or position yourself) so that movement is left to right, and if not possible to do so you flip the image afterwards unless there is text in the image. So yeah, they are in gross violation here!

They could have “blacked out” the logo, or used ChatGPT.  
 

Sarcastic font is in italics? Asking for a friend

Edited by Frosty

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Settings My Forum Content My Followed Content Forum Settings Ad Messages My Ads My Favourites My Saved Alerts My Pay Deals Help Logout