Jump to content
Awful horrible bad shit is happening in the USA right now, if you are afraid of your fucking feelings getting hurt this isn't the website for you. ×

phdhorn

Certifiably Surly
  • Content Count

    3,920
  • Joined

Community Reputation

2,469 Excellent

1 Follower

About phdhorn

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. 10-20 inches (10 has fallen already in parts of the Yucatan), maybe up to 30 in some spots if it does the expected little loop before moving N.
  2. Latest: Still looking like a northward movement, again this is about 20% reliable. If that happens, Austin will actually get hotter and drier (temps near 100) due to being on west side of storm, over-land air being pulled down, condensed and made hotter. Current forecasts keep it to TS level, maybe Cat 1. Again, this is almost a coin flip at this stage. We do know water is about 3-4 degrees above normal down there, which is conducive to formation, but other factors could inhibit it. My guess is it ramps up to Cat 1 or so then down to medium-strong TS about 55-65 mph winds. At least that's what the Magic 8 Ball said when I asked it. Still think though that this isn't going to be a Texas storm, maybe extreme east (Beaumont area) on outer edge.
  3. First good helping of spaghetti shows what I suggested... moving N to NE, central Louisiana right now sorta kinda a little bit maybe could be a landfall. This of course is as reliable as a UT defense since 2010. But it's a start.
  4. You don't play 10 years as a superstar in the Lingerie League and expect to look good afterwards!
  5. 1) There is always, and I mean pretty much always, an early thing that forms off of Mexico each hurricane season. This is right smack dab as usual in something like 7 of the past 10 years. 2) These things seem to go N/NE through the Gulf, even though this one has some spaghetti taking it into the Houston/upper Texas coast area. My guess is that the track will shift eastward. In any event at this point it's unlikely that Austin would get a lot of rain from it, unless it stalls in the Bay of Campeche and we get outer bands which can get pretty rainy, coming in from the SW around the northern end of the low. I'd still roll the dice that the coast from LA east through N/North Central FL will be the area of landfall. Of course it's hard to track something that hasn't formed yet, but upper air patterns this time of year usually push these things a little eastward, whereas later in the summer (later July on) they often push them farther west (big Gulf/Atlantic high hasn't really formed yet as is usual for the summer). 3) Strength? No one knows, and no one can know. As I said last season and quoted an article (I'm sure you remember every word), we're almost to the limit of what the algorithms can do in regard to storm strength forecasting. If it does get to Cat 2 or even 3, at this time of year it usually doesn't last long. I'ma watchin' it, not too concerned right now, we'll see.
  6. Yeah, cycling has always had "medication" even since the painkillers from the 1890's. And for the most part, it was always encouraged and even complimented that one could find "smart" ways of helping themselves along. It's always been a muddy field, but I think morally it became an entirely different story after WWII and the rapid developments of "this means business" drugs like amphetamines (which were given to combat soldiers to alleviate their stress and fatigue). It's likely that most Tour winners were "on" some type of amphetamine in the '50's. But as war technology led to rapid developments of superdrugs, especially through the 50's, it got to be out of hand. Two major changes: 1) no longer did riders merely take stuff to alleviate pain or tiredness, they began to use stuff that actually artificially improved their performance, and 2) they were taking more and more dangerous drugs, which likely killed a few riders. This is when the "illegal" aspect stepped in. Riders were first given a list of "definitely prohibited" drugs and tested first about 1965. After that year, the line between "helping" and "breaking the law" indeed is a thin one, but nevertheless a somewhat clear one. But even through the 70's and most of the 80's, these were marginally helpful (reportedly) at best. The big kicker came in the late 1980's when blood transfusions, anabolic steroids, masking drugs - and most importantly, haematocrit enhancers (red cell increasing) stimulants - yeah, EPO - were taking stage. However none of these, especially EPO, seemed to be widespread until the intervention of Dr. Ferrari by the mid-1990's. Armstrong claims he first doped about 1998 through Ferrari, prior to that didn't dope with anything patently illegal (actually I believe him here). So it's pretty likely that whatever LeMond might have taken to help himself, the EPO craze really didn't hit until after his last Tour win, so it was 1) likely well within the realm of a still vague but legal side of this whole thing, and 2) not EPO or blood enhancers. At the least, he was nowhere near some sort of unique position of enhancement, and at most, I believe he took nothing outside of stuff to ease pain and fatigue, not stuff to actively increase his blood composition. He candidly admitted that he was told in '95 that he would never win again if he didn't dope, but he didn't. In fact he retired in 1994 due to the increased speeds (likely due to doping) of other riders, and that he was in constant pain and agony as he pushed himself harder to keep up. Since he really wanted to win five tours, it would seem very likely that he would have doped to do this as he understood the changing landscape around him. But he chose to retire and not to dope. To this day he thinks the hunting accident kept toxins in his body that actually increased with heavier training, and he felt he certainly could have won two more Tours between '90 and '94 minus the hunting accident. So the fact that he was at his peak before the widespread use of EPO, and that he chose to retire instead of doping to get his two more Tour wins, leads me to believe he clearly was not interested in the "new" paradigm of blood doping, and didn't in the most severe way. The only real evidence of anything even remotely approaching treatment anyone knows about is his anemia treatments during the 1989 Giro d'Italia, two months before his first Tour win - and that was completely legal and known. I just think he's a great guy and if it turns out he's ever been proven to dope, I have no bedboard posters or altar pictures I'd have to burn of him. It wouldn't affect me that much except to be disappointing. But still to me there has never, ever been a moment like that time trial of 1989 - when it was almost impossible to believe he would overcome a 50 second deficit on the last day and win - putting the FIRST AMERICAN EVER on the winner's podium. But I saw it and was excited for a day or two afterwards. I hope that that excitement and thrill - done by a "good guy" and a real human being - will stand. But you're right, guess we'll really never know.
  7. To an extent I agree, but man you just watch the guy and you can see his (still) anger at being busted and his clear still-wanting-revenge-for-being-busted tone and attitude. He made it clear he was an asshole but his biggest "fault" was that he got caught. He even said he "fessed up" not out of true remorse, but to hopefully mediate the blowback and set him up for some type of comeback or at least "understanding". He was still a scary mother in this thing, even if he at times had what I call "instantaneous remorse" - that is, the impact of his shittiness hitting him in momentary thoughts - but I still don't see him as all that remorseful, I don't think he's capable of it - he just doesn't have that gene. It helped him to the top but probably will keep him at the bottom. As to the peloton etc. my guess is that not everyone doped, only the guys that were deemed "competitive" by the various teams/coaches. That's probably just as bad but I do think a lot of good people were in it. The entire strategy of this type of cycling is whacked anyway - all this "serving the leader" shit and then actually believing it when they say "you're next" and most of the time that was claptrap. Landis did the right thing and finally came clean, but his problem was actually believing that line of bullshit, so he's not really all that admirable to me. His being "betrayed" is pretty much cycling's middle name. On another topic out of here (I guess) I am, and have always been, first and foremost, a Greg LeMond fan. And, I really, really don't think he ever took a pindrop of controversial or illegal substances. The only thing he might have done "wrong" is caved to Armstrong when Armstrong threatened to get 10 liars to say LeMond doped, and put LeMond's bike line out of business (he essentially did the latter), he himself lied and said he believed Armstrong never doped. But again, even his vaunted person was potential roadkill for the Armstrong juggernaut, so I guess like most people he had to feed his family and look out for personal welfare. He since of course said he was wrong to issue a "correction" he knew wasn't true. But I think he never doped, had his own lesser physical problem (shot in the leg) from which he came back, and actually put the USA on the cycling map, not Armstrong (Armstrong just fortified it). He would have won > 3 Tours but he was naive enough to play the "servant" and himself got double-crossed. But I've always been a big fan of his, mostly because he did not dope (IMHO) and was truly a hard worker and gifted rider - and most of all - a nice guy. Sometimes nice guys don't finish last - they finish first.
  8. Saw the entire thing (both parts). Random thoughts: - Armstrong is fucking crazy. I've decided that that's what it is. Amorally narcissistic, that's the only way he could do what he did. - The series was generally (IMHO) shaving the rough edges off of him, trying to put him in "context," i.e. a bit sympathetic. - It did a generally lousy job of showing exactly how and why he absolutely ruined so many lives, and caused many people to have to get mental help. He was pure evil, the worst of the worst demons incarnate. Granted in 2 parts you couldn't totally cover such a piece of shit's destructive legacy, but it really was kind of vague. - Should have done much more to highlight the courage of the Andreus, especially Betsy. At the peak of his power, she wouldn't back down, as he repeatedly threatened to "destroy" her. That was really the first crack in the entire thing, and she stood her ground under enormous pressure all the way back in 2006 when no one else had the courage to do so. She was probably the key player in his eventual deserved downfall (as well as Times reporter David Walsh, who had to endure a three-minute public assripping by Armstrong in a "press conference" when the Feds dropped the charges and he alone continued to take up the cause). If it weren't for those two people specifically (Walsh and Betsy), Armstrong would have gotten away with it - their courage led to other cyclists finally dumping en masse the truth concerning Armstrong. I would have liked to see their roles highlighted more. All in all, I think this was good but not as good as the other two main docs I've seen, The Armstrong Lie (2013) and especially Stop at Nothing: The Lance Armstrong Story (2014). Highly recommend those two, especially the latter, to get a better idea of how he was such an evil prick to others.
  9. phdhorn

    2020 Rain Thread

    Yep, these storms are actually in the forecast area (west of us and a lot of SW too). Looks like they'll swipe west of Austin, thankfully. Watching for buildup but so far mostly out west. That's a NASTY storm going west of Fredericksburg.
  10. phdhorn

    2020 Rain Thread

    Yeah, still "officially" a chance but i doubt it very much. The low's moving off, we've had the atmosphere stabilized a good bit from last night, and the bulk of the risk area is well NE of us. Jinxed it? I don't think so. We were lucky around here last night. The storms that rolled through Austin about 7 had calmed down a good bit. Then they fired up again down near Luling and caused some wind and hail damage.
  11. phdhorn

    2020 Rain Thread

    the storms coming over North Austin actually have weakend, I don't think there's going to be much, but it yes it can get still very windy and you could get some pea-size hail here or there but I think the severe threat is almost over for our area. Not so much West in southwest of us tho, looks like a tornado is about to ramp up not affecting ATX.
  12. phdhorn

    2020 Rain Thread

    Not real likely at this point maybe 20%. tornado warning for storm west of Fredericksburg but it's heading Southeast well west of Austin, not a factor for us.
  13. phdhorn

    2020 Rain Thread

    I'll never get over Glocca Morra.
  14. phdhorn

    2020 Rain Thread

    Not looking good. A big complex is moving into San Saba heading SE. Might sweep north of Drip but I don't think so. Estimate it'll get here between 6 and 7.
Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Recruiting ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Help ... For Sale ... Politics ... Board Discussion
×
×
  • Create New...