Thursday, August 25, 2011

Re: Medarticles Request for full text

Buzz It
Te envio tu articulos

2011/8/26 Dipti Sugandh <diptisugandh@gmail.com>
Hello,
Kindly send me fulltext of the following papers:
 
1.Glass Transition and Sticky Point Temperatures and Stability/Mobility Diagram of Fruit Powders

Authors: S. Jaya and H. Das

Food and Bioprocess Technology

Volume 2, Number 1, 89-95,

DOI: 10.1007/s11947-007-0047-5

Link : http://www.springerlink.com/content/x8gr2g6861r26512/

 

2. Determination of dextrose equivalent in starch hydrolyzates using cerium(IV)

Authors :Lee S. Griffith, Peter Sporns

J. Agric. Food Chem., 1990, 38 (6), pp 1356–1358

DOI: 10.1021/jf00096a012

Link : Determination of dextrose equivalent in starch hydrolyzates using cerium(IV)

 

 

Thank you.

 

Regards,

Dipti.S

 

 

--
You can edit your Group Email settings by visiting the following link.
 
http://groups.google.com/group/medarticles/subscribe
 
You can choose abridged email or digest email so that you will receive only one email per day.

--
You can edit your Group Email settings by visiting the following link.
 
http://groups.google.com/group/medarticles/subscribe
 
You can choose abridged email or digest email so that you will receive only one email per day.

Re: Medarticles Request for full text

Buzz It
2nd article is attached

cheers

pvk

On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 11:33 AM, Dipti Sugandh <diptisugandh@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello,
Kindly send me fulltext of the following papers:
 
1.Glass Transition and Sticky Point Temperatures and Stability/Mobility Diagram of Fruit Powders

Authors: S. Jaya and H. Das

Food and Bioprocess Technology

Volume 2, Number 1, 89-95,

DOI: 10.1007/s11947-007-0047-5

Link : http://www.springerlink.com/content/x8gr2g6861r26512/

 

2. Determination of dextrose equivalent in starch hydrolyzates using cerium(IV)

Authors :Lee S. Griffith, Peter Sporns

J. Agric. Food Chem., 1990, 38 (6), pp 1356–1358

DOI: 10.1021/jf00096a012

Link : Determination of dextrose equivalent in starch hydrolyzates using cerium(IV)

 

 

Thank you.

 

Regards,

Dipti.S

 

 

--
You can edit your Group Email settings by visiting the following link.
 
http://groups.google.com/group/medarticles/subscribe
 
You can choose abridged email or digest email so that you will receive only one email per day.



--

Best wishes and regards,

pvk
---------  ---------  ---------
Parijat Kanetkar

Tel. No.  (Cell)    +91-93222 40599
Email - parijatkanetkar@gmail.com
http://in.linkedin.com/in/parijatkanetkar

--
You can edit your Group Email settings by visiting the following link.
 
http://groups.google.com/group/medarticles/subscribe
 
You can choose abridged email or digest email so that you will receive only one email per day.

Medarticles Request for full text

Buzz It
Hello,
Kindly send me fulltext of the following papers:
 
1.Glass Transition and Sticky Point Temperatures and Stability/Mobility Diagram of Fruit Powders

Authors: S. Jaya and H. Das

Food and Bioprocess Technology

Volume 2, Number 1, 89-95,

DOI: 10.1007/s11947-007-0047-5

Link : http://www.springerlink.com/content/x8gr2g6861r26512/

 

2. Determination of dextrose equivalent in starch hydrolyzates using cerium(IV)

Authors :Lee S. Griffith, Peter Sporns

J. Agric. Food Chem., 1990, 38 (6), pp 1356–1358

DOI: 10.1021/jf00096a012

Link : Determination of dextrose equivalent in starch hydrolyzates using cerium(IV)

 

 

Thank you.

 

Regards,

Dipti.S

 

 

--
You can edit your Group Email settings by visiting the following link.
 
http://groups.google.com/group/medarticles/subscribe
 
You can choose abridged email or digest email so that you will receive only one email per day.

rec.bicycles.racing - 25 new messages in 6 topics - digest

Buzz It
rec.bicycles.racing
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing?hl=en

rec.bicycles.racing@googlegroups.com

Today's topics:

* The word is out: It's over. - 17 messages, 10 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/b3183e9e71aa0ba3?hl=en
* USA Pro Tour Challenge, stage 2 summary - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/d60fba3fcdc99ee4?hl=en
* Titanium as a frame material - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/e1da65a14ff20185?hl=en
* Pitiful TV coverage of the USA "PRO" Cycling Challenge - 3 messages, 3
authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/af553971bb2ab7bc?hl=en
* Vuelta a Espana, stage 6 summary - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/eb31a7ee2c79f055?hl=en
* Did Liquidas screw up the finish? (Vuelta) - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/24a8c2edffe5a5f6?hl=en

==============================================================================
TOPIC: The word is out: It's over.
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/b3183e9e71aa0ba3?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 17 ==
Date: Wed, Aug 24 2011 10:18 pm
From: "Mike Jacoubowsky"

"Brad Anders" <pbanders@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:4720cce1-6446-4335-a4a4-0c4d29c6d4df@y39g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
On Aug 23, 11:41 am, Fred Flintstein
<bob.schwa...@sbcremoveglobal.net> wrote:
>
> Go ahead, click on the link and see who he's referencing.

==========
I wasn't surprised. I sure haven't heard much about this incident
since it happened, if there really were some solid, incontrovertible
evidence, you'd think the feds would have filed charges by now (2
months).
==========

These things take time. Remember, "The word is out: It's over."

http://www.cyclingforums.com/t/182735/the-word-is-out-it-s-over

10/15/04

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com


== 2 of 17 ==
Date: Thurs, Aug 25 2011 7:06 am
From: BL


On 8/24/2011 8:40 PM, Jimmy July wrote:
> On 8/23/2011 11:03 AM, Brad Anders wrote:
>> Feds respond to LA's leak complaints
>>
>> http://news.yahoo.com/feds-reply-armstrong-leaks-sealed-filing-141903038.html
>>
>>
>> Not a bright move by the feds to leak what they did, my guess is they
>> won't be sanctioned. Sure is taking a long time for the feds to file
>> charges.
>
> Nice job of trolling Brian! You ROCK!
Moron. Who did you think you were replying to?


== 3 of 17 ==
Date: Thurs, Aug 25 2011 7:08 am
From: BL


On 8/25/2011 1:18 AM, Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
> "Brad Anders"<pbanders@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:4720cce1-6446-4335-a4a4-0c4d29c6d4df@y39g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
> On Aug 23, 11:41 am, Fred Flintstein
> <bob.schwa...@sbcremoveglobal.net> wrote:
>>
>> Go ahead, click on the link and see who he's referencing.
>
> ==========
> I wasn't surprised. I sure haven't heard much about this incident
> since it happened, if there really were some solid, incontrovertible
> evidence, you'd think the feds would have filed charges by now (2
> months).
> ==========
>
> These things take time. Remember, "The word is out: It's over."
>
> http://www.cyclingforums.com/t/182735/the-word-is-out-it-s-over
>
> 10/15/04
>
> --Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
> www.ChainReactionBicycles.com
>
>
It will likely be included in an indictment as an underlying felony
supporting a RICO charge. Duh.........Moron.


== 4 of 17 ==
Date: Thurs, Aug 25 2011 7:29 am
From: Jim Feeley


Fredmaster of Brainerd <bjweiner@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Aug 23, 4:35 pm, Jim Feeley <jfee...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Brad Anders <pband...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Feds respond to LA's leak complaints
>>
>> >http://news.yahoo.com/feds-reply-armstrong-leaks-sealed-filing-141903...
>>
>> > Not a bright move by the feds to leak what they did, my guess is they
>> > won't be sanctioned. Sure is taking a long time for the feds to file
>> > charges.
>>
>> I think I'm missing something. Do we know the feds were the source of the
leaks?
>> Sure, prosecutors are often leaky. But think back to BALCO, specifically
to US v
>> Victor Conte et al. In that case, many thought Novitzky and/or the prosec
utors
>> were leaking grand jury transcripts. But it turns out, a key leaker was d
efense
>> lawyer Troy Ellerman...who then wanted a mistrial because someone of the
leaks.
>> Could be there were other sources for those transcripts, such as the feds
;
>> didn't really establish that one way or the other.
>>
>> In the Armstrong case, I'd guess potential leakers include prosecutors, N
ovitzky
>> and some other FDA investigators, members of the defense team, and grand
jury
>> members.
>>
>> As for the timeline, think how long it took to finally charge Barry Bonds
. Don't
>> really know if that's common or not, but the I don't know if we can read
too
>> much into the pace of the proceedings.
>>
>> Do we know the feds were the source of the leaks?
>>
>
> Troy Ellerman was a defense lawyer for the BALCO
> principals, and he leaked the grand jury transcripts after
> the BALCOns were indicted. I assume that he received
> the transcripts because the prosecutors were required to
> disclose them to the defense after the indictments
> were brought.
>
> Prior to the indictment, I don't think a defense lawyer
> would have had access to the GJ testimony. Armstrong's
> lawyer would know what Armstrong testified to, but not
> the contents of others' testimony.
>
> There is no literal "defense team" in this investigation yet
> because there is no defense, as there are no indictments.
> Obviously we all know that the investigation is looking at
> certain people, but those people's lawyers don't have a
> privileged status giving them access to grand jury testimony,
> I don't think.
>
> GJ members are unlikely to have leaked the information as
> they would have a lot to lose and little to gain.
>
> Fredmaster Ben
> is not a lawyer

Doh! I'm clearly timeline challenged. You're right about the indictment thing.
But aren't witnesses at GJ's allowed, when faced with a tricky question from a
prosecutor, to step outside the room and get advice from their lawyer (who isn't
allowed into the room)?

And though I've never spoken with a grand jury member (I don't usually cover
courts...as is obvious from my previous post), I know some reporters who have.
And witnesses can be chatty.

Anyway, there are still sources of grand jury testimony other than prosecutors.
Though prosecutors are a likely source.

This article in yesterday's NY Daily News was kinda interesting:

Lance Armstrong's attorneys say government response to cyclist's leak accusation
shouldn't be sealed

<http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/iteam/
2011/08/24/2011-08-24_lance_fires_back_at_feds.html
>

Same link shorter:
http://nydn.us/nognrd

Of course with laywers, sometimes where there's smoke there's smoke.

Jim
--
Jim
Jim Feeley
POV Media

== 5 of 17 ==
Date: Thurs, Aug 25 2011 9:45 am
From: BL


On 8/23/2011 2:03 PM, Brad Anders wrote:
> Feds respond to LA's leak complaints
>
> http://news.yahoo.com/feds-reply-armstrong-leaks-sealed-filing-141903038.html
>
> Not a bright move by the feds to leak what they did, my guess is they
> won't be sanctioned. Sure is taking a long time for the feds to file
> charges.

The brief filed Wednesday states that Armstrong's attorneys would gain
access to information that they have no right to see at this point if
the motion is unsealed or redacted. The motion "describes an ongoing,
active, pre-indictment investigation for which secrecy is necessary to
preserve its quality and integrity."
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201....ap/index.html
Looks like Lance is firmly in the Feds cross-hairs.

== 6 of 17 ==
Date: Thurs, Aug 25 2011 9:57 am
From: "Mike Jacoubowsky"


"BL" <bl@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:jYSdnTkBo6vvysvTnZ2dnUVZ_oWdnZ2d@giganews.com...
> On 8/25/2011 1:18 AM, Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
>> "Brad Anders"<pbanders@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:4720cce1-6446-4335-a4a4-0c4d29c6d4df@y39g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
>> On Aug 23, 11:41 am, Fred Flintstein
>> <bob.schwa...@sbcremoveglobal.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> Go ahead, click on the link and see who he's referencing.
>>
>> ==========
>> I wasn't surprised. I sure haven't heard much about this incident
>> since it happened, if there really were some solid, incontrovertible
>> evidence, you'd think the feds would have filed charges by now (2
>> months).
>> ==========
>>
>> These things take time. Remember, "The word is out: It's over."
>>
>> http://www.cyclingforums.com/t/182735/the-word-is-out-it-s-over
>>
>> 10/15/04
>>
>> --Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
>> www.ChainReactionBicycles.com
>>
>>
> It will likely be included in an indictment as an underlying felony
> supporting a RICO charge. Duh.........Moron.

Brian: The point is that we're coming up on SEVEN YEARS since "it's
over." Or, to put it another way, over 350 Tuesdays. That's enough time
to question the effectiveness of the long arm of justice. That's enough
time to claim that justice delayed is justice denied. That's enough time
to wonder if they were ever that serious about it in the first place, or
intentionally delayed until the effect of any sort of "justice" was of
little consequence to Lance.

C'mon guy, why aren't you upset about this? If I felt the way you do
about Lance, or anything else for that matter, and things were dragging
out like this, I'd be a basket case. I'd be calling up my congressmen,
writing letters, kicking the dog. This whole thing borders on the
absurd.

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com


== 7 of 17 ==
Date: Thurs, Aug 25 2011 11:30 am
From: BL


On 8/25/2011 12:57 PM, Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
> "BL"<bl@verizon.net> wrote in message
> news:jYSdnTkBo6vvysvTnZ2dnUVZ_oWdnZ2d@giganews.com...
>> On 8/25/2011 1:18 AM, Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
>>> "Brad Anders"<pbanders@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:4720cce1-6446-4335-a4a4-0c4d29c6d4df@y39g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
>>> On Aug 23, 11:41 am, Fred Flintstein
>>> <bob.schwa...@sbcremoveglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Go ahead, click on the link and see who he's referencing.
>>>
>>> ==========
>>> I wasn't surprised. I sure haven't heard much about this incident
>>> since it happened, if there really were some solid, incontrovertible
>>> evidence, you'd think the feds would have filed charges by now (2
>>> months).
>>> ==========
>>>
>>> These things take time. Remember, "The word is out: It's over."
>>>
>>> http://www.cyclingforums.com/t/182735/the-word-is-out-it-s-over
>>>
>>> 10/15/04
>>>
>>> --Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
>>> www.ChainReactionBicycles.com
>>>
>>>
>> It will likely be included in an indictment as an underlying felony
>> supporting a RICO charge. Duh.........Moron.
>
> Brian: The point is that we're coming up on SEVEN YEARS since "it's
> over." Or, to put it another way, over 350 Tuesdays. That's enough time
> to question the effectiveness of the long arm of justice. That's enough
> time to claim that justice delayed is justice denied. That's enough time
> to wonder if they were ever that serious about it in the first place, or
> intentionally delayed until the effect of any sort of "justice" was of
> little consequence to Lance.

No. The fraud and conspiracy continue to the present and not include
probable witness intimidation. The cycling events are seven years old,
most of them anyway, but the criminal conspiracy continues. There isn't
anything close to justice delayed here, except to the extent that it's
been delayed by Armstrong and friends conspiracy and coverup.

>
> C'mon guy, why aren't you upset about this? If I felt the way you do
> about Lance, or anything else for that matter, and things were dragging
> out like this, I'd be a basket case. I'd be calling up my congressmen,
> writing letters, kicking the dog. This whole thing borders on the
> absurd.

As complex federal investigations go, this one seems to be proceeding
nicely. You won't have to wait much longer to read the indictment.

>
> --Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
> www.ChainReactionBicycles.com
>
>

== 8 of 17 ==
Date: Thurs, Aug 25 2011 11:38 am
From: Fred Flintstein


On 8/24/2011 7:40 PM, Jimmy July wrote:
> On 8/23/2011 11:03 AM, Brad Anders wrote:
>> Feds respond to LA's leak complaints
>>
>> http://news.yahoo.com/feds-reply-armstrong-leaks-sealed-filing-141903038.html
>>
>>
>> Not a bright move by the feds to leak what they did, my guess is they
>> won't be sanctioned. Sure is taking a long time for the feds to file
>> charges.
>
> Nice job of trolling Brian! You ROCK!

Dumbass,

Trolling Laff isn't that hard. Mr OCD responds to everything.
He can't help himself.

F


== 9 of 17 ==
Date: Thurs, Aug 25 2011 11:47 am
From: "William R. Mattil"


On 8/25/2011 1:30 PM, BL wrote:

>
> As complex federal investigations go, this one seems to be proceeding
> nicely. You won't have to wait much longer to read the indictment.
>


You don't have a clue about how the "indictment" is proceeding. Not hard
to imagine this mind you. How would you know ? or is this simply more of
your endless flag waving on your Anti-Lance diatribe ?

Give us details on your sources for this ..... Or better yet, shut the
fuck up.

Like pretty much everyone else here I've grown tired of your rhetoric.


Bill


--

William R. Mattil

http://www.celestial-images.com


== 10 of 17 ==
Date: Thurs, Aug 25 2011 11:51 am
From: Simply Fred


Fred Flintstein wrote:
> Trolling Laff isn't that hard. Mr OCD responds to everything.
> He can't help himself.

Dumbass,
That feature was in the spec.

== 11 of 17 ==
Date: Thurs, Aug 25 2011 12:05 pm
From: Jimmy July


On 8/25/2011 7:06 AM, BL wrote:
> On 8/24/2011 8:40 PM, Jimmy July wrote:
>> On 8/23/2011 11:03 AM, Brad Anders wrote:
>>> Feds respond to LA's leak complaints
>>>
>>> http://news.yahoo.com/feds-reply-armstrong-leaks-sealed-filing-141903038.html
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Not a bright move by the feds to leak what they did, my guess is they
>>> won't be sanctioned. Sure is taking a long time for the feds to file
>>> charges.
>>
>> Nice job of trolling Brian! You ROCK!
> Moron. Who did you think you were replying to?

Punctuation causes you difficulty, doesn't it?


== 12 of 17 ==
Date: Thurs, Aug 25 2011 2:05 pm
From: Brad Anders


On Aug 25, 9:45 am, BL <b...@verizon.net> wrote:

> Looks like Lance is firmly in the Feds cross-hairs.

Putting it in the cross-hairs is one thing, taking the shot is
another. You don't want your bow to start shaking.

== 13 of 17 ==
Date: Thurs, Aug 25 2011 3:09 pm
From: BL


On 8/25/2011 2:38 PM, Fred Flintstein wrote:
> On 8/24/2011 7:40 PM, Jimmy July wrote:
>> On 8/23/2011 11:03 AM, Brad Anders wrote:
>>> Feds respond to LA's leak complaints
>>>
>>> http://news.yahoo.com/feds-reply-armstrong-leaks-sealed-filing-141903038.html
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Not a bright move by the feds to leak what they did, my guess is they
>>> won't be sanctioned. Sure is taking a long time for the feds to file
>>> charges.
>>
>> Nice job of trolling Brian! You ROCK!
>
> Dumbass,
>
> Trolling Laff isn't that hard. Mr OCD responds to everything.
> He can't help himself.
>
> F
ROTFL!! Like you don't?


== 14 of 17 ==
Date: Thurs, Aug 25 2011 3:13 pm
From: BL


On 8/25/2011 2:47 PM, William R. Mattil wrote:
> On 8/25/2011 1:30 PM, BL wrote:
>
>>
>> As complex federal investigations go, this one seems to be proceeding
>> nicely. You won't have to wait much longer to read the indictment.
>>
>
>
> You don't have a clue about how the "indictment" is proceeding. Not hard
> to imagine this mind you. How would you know ? or is this simply more of
> your endless flag waving on your Anti-Lance diatribe ?
>
> Give us details on your sources for this ..... Or better yet, shut the
> fuck up.
>
> Like pretty much everyone else here I've grown tired of your rhetoric.
>
>
> Bill
>
>
Try re-reading what I wrote. I didn't say the indictment was proceeding.
I said the investigation seems to be going well. That is based on the
reports we've all seen in the press and with 60 Minutes. Do you read the
press and watch TV? And I've grow increasingly amused by your moronic
rhetoric. Keep it up.


== 15 of 17 ==
Date: Thurs, Aug 25 2011 5:11 pm
From: dave a


On 8/25/2011 9:57 AM, Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
> "BL"<bl@verizon.net> wrote in message
> news:jYSdnTkBo6vvysvTnZ2dnUVZ_oWdnZ2d@giganews.com...
>> On 8/25/2011 1:18 AM, Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
>>> "Brad Anders"<pbanders@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:4720cce1-6446-4335-a4a4-0c4d29c6d4df@y39g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
>>> On Aug 23, 11:41 am, Fred Flintstein
>>> <bob.schwa...@sbcremoveglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Go ahead, click on the link and see who he's referencing.
>>>
>>> ==========
>>> I wasn't surprised. I sure haven't heard much about this incident
>>> since it happened, if there really were some solid, incontrovertible
>>> evidence, you'd think the feds would have filed charges by now (2
>>> months).
>>> ==========
>>>
>>> These things take time. Remember, "The word is out: It's over."
>>>
>>> http://www.cyclingforums.com/t/182735/the-word-is-out-it-s-over
>>>
>>> 10/15/04
>>>
>>> --Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
>>> www.ChainReactionBicycles.com
>>>
>>>
>> It will likely be included in an indictment as an underlying felony
>> supporting a RICO charge. Duh.........Moron.
>
> Brian: The point is that we're coming up on SEVEN YEARS since "it's
> over." Or, to put it another way, over 350 Tuesdays. That's enough time
> to question the effectiveness of the long arm of justice. That's enough
> time to claim that justice delayed is justice denied. That's enough time
> to wonder if they were ever that serious about it in the first place, or
> intentionally delayed until the effect of any sort of "justice" was of
> little consequence to Lance.
>
> C'mon guy, why aren't you upset about this? If I felt the way you do
> about Lance, or anything else for that matter, and things were dragging
> out like this, I'd be a basket case. I'd be calling up my congressmen,
> writing letters, kicking the dog. This whole thing borders on the
> absurd.
>
> --Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
> www.ChainReactionBicycles.com
>
>

Maybe Bob Martin could post a regular count of the number of Tuesdays
it's been since "it's over".


== 16 of 17 ==
Date: Thurs, Aug 25 2011 8:22 pm
From: Fredmaster of Brainerd


On Aug 25, 7:29 am, Jim Feeley <jfee...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Fredmaster of Brainerd <bjwei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Troy Ellerman was a defense lawyer for the BALCO
> > principals, and he leaked the grand jury transcripts after
> > the BALCOns were indicted.  I assume that he received
> > the transcripts because the prosecutors were required to
> > disclose them to the defense after the indictments
> > were brought.
>
> > Prior to the indictment, I don't think a defense lawyer
> > would have had access to the GJ testimony.  Armstrong's
> > lawyer would know what Armstrong testified to, but not
> > the contents of others' testimony.
>
> > There is no literal "defense team" in this investigation yet
> > because there is no defense, as there are no indictments.
> > Obviously we all know that the investigation is looking at
> > certain people, but those people's lawyers don't have a
> > privileged status giving them access to grand jury testimony,
> > I don't think.
>
> > GJ members are unlikely to have leaked the information as
> > they would have a lot to lose and little to gain.
>
> > Fredmaster Ben
> > is not a lawyer
>
> Doh! I'm clearly timeline challenged. You're right about the indictment thing.
> But aren't witnesses at GJ's allowed, when faced with a tricky question from a
> prosecutor, to step outside the room and get advice from their lawyer (who isn't
> allowed into the room)?
>
> And though I've never spoken with a grand jury member (I don't usually cover
> courts...as is obvious from my previous post), I know some reporters who have.
> And witnesses can be chatty.
>
> Anyway, there are still sources of grand jury testimony other than prosecutors.
> Though prosecutors are a likely source.
>
> This article in yesterday's NY Daily News was kinda interesting:
>
> Lance Armstrong's attorneys say government response to cyclist's leak accusation
> shouldn't be sealed
>
> <http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/iteam/
> 2011/08/24/2011-08-24_lance_fires_back_at_feds.html>
>
> Same link shorter:http://nydn.us/nognrd
>
> Of course with laywers, sometimes where there's smoke there's smoke.

As I understand it, a witness is perfectly free to
disclose their own GJ testimony.

Sure, Hincapie's lawyer undoubtedly knows what Hincapie
said, and Hamilton's lawyer knows what Hamilton said, and
so on, but if you believe LANCE's flacks, several different
pieces of information have been slipped to the press -
certainly several things have been reported on - and it's
hard for me to imagine that the witnesses or their lawyers
have been collectively feeding all of these tidbits to the
reporters. I could believe that one or two came from
witnesses, but all seems like a stretch.

I suspect most reporters would not contact a member of a
sitting grand jury - only after the GJ is released. At that point,
I think the GJ members are still under a vow of secrecy, I'm
sure it's been broken now and then. Obviously GJs are
not the same as trial juries, but contacting a member of a
trial jury during the trial is a huge no-no. Both the reporter
and the juror could wind up in prison. Perhaps the rules of
engagement are different for grand juries, but the motivation
is much easier to understand for the investigators to be a
little leaky than for a GJ member.

Fredmaster Ben


== 17 of 17 ==
Date: Thurs, Aug 25 2011 8:29 pm
From: "Mike Jacoubowsky"


"BL" <bl@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:H4edncQ5oYFlVcvTnZ2dnUVZ_radnZ2d@giganews.com...
> On 8/25/2011 2:47 PM, William R. Mattil wrote:
>> On 8/25/2011 1:30 PM, BL wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> As complex federal investigations go, this one seems to be
>>> proceeding
>>> nicely. You won't have to wait much longer to read the indictment.
>>>
>>
>>
>> You don't have a clue about how the "indictment" is proceeding. Not
>> hard
>> to imagine this mind you. How would you know ? or is this simply more
>> of
>> your endless flag waving on your Anti-Lance diatribe ?
>>
>> Give us details on your sources for this ..... Or better yet, shut
>> the
>> fuck up.
>>
>> Like pretty much everyone else here I've grown tired of your
>> rhetoric.
>>
>>
>> Bill
>>
>>
> Try re-reading what I wrote. I didn't say the indictment was
> proceeding. I said the investigation seems to be going well. That is
> based on the reports we've all seen in the press and with 60 Minutes.
> Do you read the press and watch TV? And I've grow increasingly amused
> by your moronic rhetoric. Keep it up.

I'd say the 60 minutes report did a great job discrediting their *star*
witness. The story was built upon the revelation that Tyler was amazed
that Lance wasn't worried about a "positive" test at the TdS and, proof
of conspiracy, evidence that Lance met with the head of the lab!!! Good
heavens that was incriminating.

Except that the head of the lab explained that the test wasn't positive
because it didn't pass the threshold required (because the test wasn't
yet accurate enough to trust) *AND* that he met with many teams & riders
to explain the new procedures, nothing special with Lance & Johan.

THAT 60 minutes piece???

I'm not going to suggest that Lance was clean, partly because I don't
think it was possible to race at that time against known dopers and do
as well as he did without also doping, and partly because you can't
prove that someone's clean, only that they're dirty. But, as I've said
many, many times before, the anti-Lance crowd should be more demanding
of those investigating Lance, instead of cheerleading any and all
investigations and revelations simply because they're supportive of
one's belief.

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com

==============================================================================
TOPIC: USA Pro Tour Challenge, stage 2 summary
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/d60fba3fcdc99ee4?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Thurs, Aug 25 2011 1:31 am
From: Bob Martin


Stage 2 : Aug 24, Gunnison - Aspen, 209.8 km

1 George Hincapie (USA) BMC Racing Team 5.26.10
2 Tejay Van Garderen (USA) HTC-Highroad
3 Thomas Danielson (USA) Team Garmin-Cervelo
4 Eduard Alexander Beltran Suarez (Col) EPM - UNE
5 Janier Alexis Acevedo Colle (Col) Gobernacion De Antioquia - Indeportes Anti
6 Bruno Pires (Por) Leopard Trek
7 Cadel Evans (Aus) BMC Racing Team 0.45
8 Lucas Euser (USA) Team Spidertech Powered By C10
9 Levi Leipheimer (USA) Team RadioShack
10 Jeffry Louder (USA) BMC Racing Team


Changes in GC, stage 2 compared to stage 1 :

Biggest gainers by position :
+64 Pieter Weening
+49 Thomas Peterson
+47 Ivan Basso
+44 David Zabriskie
+40 William Dugan
+37 Davide Frattini
+33 Daniel Navarro Garcia
+32 Peter Velits
+31 Thomas Bonnin
+30 Vladimir Efimkin

Biggest losers by position :
-62 Ben Hermans
-56 Carlos Alberto Ospina Hernandes
-55 Patrick Gretsch
-50 Andre Steensen
-49 Sander Oostlander
-44 Danny Pate
-39 Carlos Eduardo Alzate Escobar
-37 Jeremy Powers
-34 Craig Lewis
-33 Fabio Calabria
-28 Benjamin King

Biggest gainers by time :
+0:21 George Hincapie
+0:17 Tejay Van Garderen
+0:15 Thomas Danielson
+0:11 Janier Alexis Acevedo Colle
+0:11 Eduard Alexander Beltran Suarez
+0:11 Bruno Pires

Biggest losers by time :
-24:55 Carlos Eduardo Alzate Escobar
-24:55 Kai Applequist
-24:55 Sam Johnson
-24:55 William Dickeson
-22:53 Ben Hermans
-21:25 Sander Oostlander
-20:06 Ryan Roth
-19:25 Bernard Van Ulden
-19:23 Jeremy Powers
-18:46 Fabio Calabria
-18:44 Elia Viviani

Favourites by position :
+64 Pieter Weening
+47 Ivan Basso
+44 David Zabriskie
+32 Peter Velits
+2 Tejay Van Garderen
-1 Frank Schleck
-2 Cadel Evans
-3 Rory Sutherland
-3 Robert Gesink
-3 Levi Leipheimer
-11 Ryder Hesjedal
-15 Jens Voigt
-25 Sylvester Szmyd

Favourites by time :
+0:17 Tejay Van Garderen
-0:34 Rory Sutherland
-0:34 Robert Gesink
-0:34 Pieter Weening
-0:34 Levi Leipheimer
-0:34 Frank Schleck
-0:34 Cadel Evans
-0:41 Ivan Basso
-2:40 Ryder Hesjedal
-3:44 Andy Schleck
-4:30 Peter Velits
-4:30 Jens Voigt
-7:51 David Zabriskie
-11:12 Sylvester Szmyd
-11:12 Laurens Ten Dam

Top 10 and favourites GC standings (previous stage in parens) :
1 Tejay Van Garderen 10:04:08 (was 3rd at 0:17)
2 George Hincapie 0:16 (was 8th at 0:37)
3 Thomas Danielson 0:22 (was 9th at 0:37)
4 Levi Leipheimer 0:34 (was 1st at 0:00)
5 Christian Vande Velde 0:45 (was 2nd at 0:11)
6 Cadel Evans 0:51 (was 4th at 0:17)
7 Janier Alexis Acevedo Colle 0:52 (was 23rd at 1:03)
8 Robert Gesink 1:04 (was 5th at 0:30)
9 Bruno Pires 1:08 (was 32nd at 1:19)
10 Rory Sutherland 1:09 (was 7th at 0:35)
.....
12 Frank Schleck 1:16 (was 11th at 0:42)
.....
27 Ryder Hesjedal 3:33 (was 16th at 0:53)
.....
30 Ivan Basso 3:47 (was 77th at 3:06)
.....
39 Pieter Weening 5:01 (was 103rd at 4:27)
.....
44 Andy Schleck 5:22 (was 44th at 1:38)
.....
48 Jens Voigt 5:50 (was 33rd at 1:20)
.....
67 Peter Velits 8:55 (was 99th at 4:25)
.....
73 Sylvester Szmyd 13:16 (was 48th at 2:04)
74 David Zabriskie 13:28 (was 118th at 5:37)
.....
87 Laurens Ten Dam 15:21 (was 87th at 4:09)

Top 10 on Points table with previous in parens:
1 Levi Leipheimer 17 (was 1st with 15 points)
2 Tejay Van Garderen 17 (was 8th with 5 points)
3 George Hincapie 15 (was 0 points)
4 Sergio Luis Henao Montoya 12 (was 2nd with 12 points)
5 Thomas Danielson 11 (was 14th with 1 points)
6 Cadel Evans 11 (was 4th with 7 points)
7 Janier Alexis Acevedo Colle 10 (was 9th with 4 points)
8 Frank Schleck 10 (was 3rd with 10 points)
9 Elia Viviani 8 (was 6th with 5 points)
10 Eduard Alexander Beltran Suarez 7 (was 0 points)

Top 10 on Mountains table with previous in parens:
1 Walter Pedraza 24 (was 5th with 5 points)
2 Sander Oostlander 15 (was 0 points)
3 Rafael Montiel 14 (was 0 points)
4 Rafael Infantino Abreu 12 (was 0 points)
5 Eduard Alexander Beltran Suarez 11 (was 1st with 10 points)
6 Levi Leipheimer 10 (was 0 points)
7 Alejandro Ramirez Calderon 10 (was 0 points)
8 Andre Steensen 9 (was 0 points)
9 Bradley White 9 (was 2nd with 9 points)
10 Christian Vande Velde 8 (was 0 points)

Retirements to date : Stage
Andrew Randell (Can) Team Spidertech Powered By C10 2 <<<
Daniele Callegarin (Ita) Team Type 1 - Sanofi 2 <<<
Dmitriy Muravyev (Kaz) Team RadioShack 2 <<<
Ken Hanson (USA) Jelly Belly p/b Kenda 2 <<<
Sergio Hernandez (USA) Jelly Belly p/b Kenda 2 <<<
Chris Barton (USA) BMC Racing Team 1
Total retirements : 6

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Titanium as a frame material
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/e1da65a14ff20185?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Thurs, Aug 25 2011 5:36 am
From: thirty-six


On Aug 25, 3:59 am, OccasionalFlyer <javaje...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Aug 22, 11:55 pm, thirty-six <thirty-...@live.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Aug 23, 6:38 am, OccasionalFlyer <javaje...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > >  Thanks for all the response. I wasn't trying to start a feud, and I
> > > don't have an ax to grind over Titanium, steel, aluminuim, or Carbon
> > > fiber.  I'm looking to move up to a better bike than the Trek 2100 I
> > > bought twenty years ago. I like it but just once I'd like better
> > > comjponentry, etc.  I was thinking Titanium, like a Litespeed, but
> > > Carbon fiber seems to be the material of choice for almost anything
> > > I've seen above $2500.00.  I was thinking that Titanium would give me
> > > the best ride but now I'm rethinking that.  I'm not getting it for
> > > racing.  I was never any good at that.  I am more concerned with a
> > > really nice-handling, higher-end bike for regular riding I do.  My
> > > 2100 has spoiled me for anything less.  Now I'm looking at a Cervelo
> > > R3 Rival, in case anyone has any comments. I'm assuming that a good
> > > racing bike will allow for a comfortable ride, as opposed to a Tri-
> > > kike.  Thanks.
>
> > > Ken
>
> > Think more on the lines of the sizing and geometry of the frame.
> > Whether the frame can accept the size of tyre (and mudguards) you
> > require.  Whether the frame can accept and has the clearance for
> > luggage racks.  Are the cranks the correct length for you, are the
> > handlebars and brake levers comfortable.  Is the saddle suitable.  All
> > are more important than actual materials used.  As a rule, stay with
> > what you are comfortable with, see if there are improvements to be
> > made in the wheels.   Many lack the stability required for hard riding.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Sorry, luggage rack?  I want to buy a high-performance racing bike

That's in the engine and wheels.
> (even if I don't have the knees for it) to go out riding with no
> specific destination, not a touring bike or commuter bike. That's the
> job of my MTB with street tires..  I'd never leave a high-level racing
> bike anywhere like outside my office, or even Starbucks, so I'm not
> looking for something with that sort of feature.

Try taking a picnic in your jersey pockets. I've tried carrying a
wine bottle on a pure racer, I had to use a toestrp to hold it tight
in the bottle cage while my water bottle went in my pocket to squash
the pastries. A bag is useful and the higher any weight is the more
the bike behaves well. Much of a bikes handling is a feature of the
handler's techniques and expectations. Touring bikes can be as fast
as any racer. They are only touring when you are. A racing bike
generally excludes the features required for touring but the touring
bike can also sport skinny treads and low handlebars. Adding an inch
or two to the wheelbase is not going to prevent high speed turns.
With time you should realise that the image of a sporting bike does
not give the user anywhere near the same pleasure as the function
available on a bilke with a little bit of tyre clearance.

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Thurs, Aug 25 2011 7:21 am
From: Jim Feeley


OccasionalFlyer <javajedi2@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Sorry, luggage rack? I want to buy a high-performance racing bike
> (even if I don't have the knees for it) to go out riding with no
> specific destination, not a touring bike or commuter bike. That's the
> job of my MTB with street tires.. I'd never leave a high-level racing
> bike anywhere like outside my office, or even Starbucks, so I'm not
> looking for something with that sort of feature.

Check out aluminum. The Cannondale aluminum racing frames are pretty
comfortable, at least compared to the SP steel frames of the past. And
they're pretty responsive and inexpensive. So more money's left over for
parts, esp wheels. I'm currently riding an aluminum Cannondale with
Ultegra and Mavic Elite wheels...rides great and I have money left over
to pay for the kids' colleges.

Or look at the newish category of "performance" bikes with slightly
longer wheelbases like the Specialized Roubaix. I think of them as being
fairly fredly, but some have eyelets for racks, and seem to ride pretty
well. I think these bikes are similar to what were once categorized as
century bikes by some here in the states.

Or get a cyclocross bike. You get a comfortable ride, sometimes eyelets,
something good enough for fast club rides, and endless style. And hipster
cred, if that's important to you.

Well, that's what I think.

Jim
--
Jim
Jim Feeley
POV Media


==============================================================================
TOPIC: Pitiful TV coverage of the USA "PRO" Cycling Challenge
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/af553971bb2ab7bc?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Thurs, Aug 25 2011 8:24 am
From: --D-y


I kept waiting for Phil to exclaim "I can't work under these
conditions!!!" and leave.

Which would serve this race organization right.
Not only "technical difficulties" (actually, "near-total inability")
to broadcast footage of the racing, but inept motorcycle drivers who
didn't follow the action.

If this had been the TdF, we could have seen the descent from
Independence Pass into Aspen. I rode that one "several" times during
the early 70's; I haven't seen it in recent years but I understand the
road is not vastly improved IRT width, guardrails, etc. Especially for
a large group, that's a fairly technical descent, and it was raining
(BTDT on that road, too, since it rains often in the afternoon-early
evening).

There were some gaps opened up, certainly.

Maybe we'll get to see some replay today? Since the replay during the
show seemed to work, maybe they should have just shown the whole stage
on replay?

"Ice on the wings"? Didn't they run even one test on the TV equipment
before the race started? Or at least fix it overnight, after Day 1 was
totally screwed?

What an embarrassment to my country. For shame!
--D-y


== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Thurs, Aug 25 2011 12:46 pm
From: DirtRoadie


On Aug 25, 9:24 am, --D-y <dustoyev...@mac.com> wrote:
> I kept waiting for Phil to exclaim "I can't work under these
> conditions!!!" and leave.
>
> Which would serve this race organization right.
> Not only "technical difficulties" (actually, "near-total inability")
> to broadcast footage of the racing, but inept motorcycle drivers who
> didn't follow the action.
>
> If this had been the TdF, we could have seen the descent from
> Independence Pass into Aspen. I rode that one "several" times during
> the early 70's; I haven't seen it in recent years but I understand the
> road is not vastly improved IRT width, guardrails, etc. Especially for
> a large group, that's a fairly technical descent, and it was raining
> (BTDT on that road, too, since it rains often in the afternoon-early
> evening).
>
> There were some gaps opened up, certainly.
>
> Maybe we'll get to see some replay today? Since the replay during the
> show seemed to work, maybe they should have just shown the whole stage
> on replay?
>
> "Ice on the wings"? Didn't they run even one test on the TV equipment
> before the race started? Or at least fix it overnight, after Day 1 was
> totally screwed?
>
> What an embarrassment to my country. For shame!


Much better today. Technically anyhow. I'm wondering how well they
will be able to cover multiple riders by moto-cam when they get to the
contenders.

DR


== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Thurs, Aug 25 2011 9:11 pm
From: "Mike Jacoubowsky"


"--D-y" <dustoyevsky@mac.com> wrote in message
news:62d32011-4d58-4f26-abf5-db0bf18030c9@f7g2000vba.googlegroups.com...
>I kept waiting for Phil to exclaim "I can't work under these
> conditions!!!" and leave.
>
> Which would serve this race organization right.
> Not only "technical difficulties" (actually, "near-total inability")
> to broadcast footage of the racing, but inept motorcycle drivers who
> didn't follow the action.
>
> If this had been the TdF, we could have seen the descent from
> Independence Pass into Aspen. I rode that one "several" times during
> the early 70's; I haven't seen it in recent years but I understand the
> road is not vastly improved IRT width, guardrails, etc. Especially for
> a large group, that's a fairly technical descent, and it was raining
> (BTDT on that road, too, since it rains often in the afternoon-early
> evening).
>
> There were some gaps opened up, certainly.
>
> Maybe we'll get to see some replay today? Since the replay during the
> show seemed to work, maybe they should have just shown the whole stage
> on replay?
>
> "Ice on the wings"? Didn't they run even one test on the TV equipment
> before the race started? Or at least fix it overnight, after Day 1 was
> totally screwed?
>
> What an embarrassment to my country. For shame!
> --D-y

Maybe, but it looks to be quite an impressive race & venue. Impressive
crowds in many places, especially Independence Pass and the last 4k or
so of the TT course today. I hope this race continues. The timing is
interesting, since it's after the Giro & TdF and during the Vuelta... so
even when you get the top guys (who aren't riding the Vuelta) they'll be
a bit on the downside from their TdF efforts and not highly-motivated.
On the other hand, the guys who didn't do as well as they'd have liked
at the TdF have something to prove.

It's become a more interesting race than I expected.

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Vuelta a Espana, stage 6 summary
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/eb31a7ee2c79f055?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Thurs, Aug 25 2011 11:54 am
From: Bob Martin



Stage 6 : Aug 25, Ubeda - Cordoba, 185.7 km

1 Peter Sagan (Svk) Liquigas-Cannondale 4.38.22
2 Pablo Lastras Garcia (Spa) Movistar Team
3 Valerio Agnoli (Ita) Liquigas-Cannondale
4 Vincenzo Nibali (Ita) Liquigas-Cannondale
5 Eros Capecchi (Ita) Liquigas-Cannondale 0.03
6 Jakob Fuglsang (Den) Leopard Trek 0.17
7 Joaquin Rodriguez Oliver (Spa) Katusha Team
8 Marzio Bruseghin (Ita) Movistar Team
9 David Moncoutie (Fra) Cofidis, Le Credit En Ligne
10 Sylvain Chavanel (Fra) Quickstep Cycling Team


Changes in GC, stage 6 compared to stage 5 :

Biggest gainers by position :
+44 Tony Martin
+40 Ivan Santaromita
+31 Enrico Gasparotto
+29 Peter Sagan
+27 Daniele Bennati
+24 John Degenkolb
+22 Pim Ligthart
+21 Oscar Freire Gomez
+21 Nelson Oliveira
+20 Simon Geschke

Biggest losers by position :
-37 Marc De Maar
-34 Mathias Frank
-27 Rein Taaramae
-26 Davide Vigano
-25 Francesco Bellotti
-25 Ruslan Pydgornyy
-23 Thomas Rohregger
-20 Manuele Mori
-20 Matthew Busche
-20 Tom Boonen
-18 Kevin De Weert

Biggest gainers by time :
+0:37 Peter Sagan
+0:29 Pablo Lastras Garcia
+0:25 Valerio Agnoli
+0:17 Vincenzo Nibali
+0:14 Eros Capecchi

Biggest losers by time :
-20:55 Adrian Palomares Villaplana
-20:55 Andreas Klier
-20:55 Angel Madrazo Ruiz
-20:55 Christopher Sutton
-20:55 Dario Cataldo
-20:55 Dario David Cioni
-20:55 Davide Vigano
-20:55 Francesco Bellotti
-20:55 Kevin De Weert
-20:55 Leigh Howard
-20:55 Marc De Maar

Favourites by position :
+44 Tony Martin
+10 David Blanco Rodriguez
+6 Andreas Kloden
+2 Vincenzo Nibali
+2 Michele Scarponi
-2 Bradley Wiggins
-2 Bauke Mollema
-14 Benat Intxausti Elorriaga
-27 Rein Taaramae

Favourites by time :
+0:17 Vincenzo Nibali
-0:06 Steven Kruijswijk
-0:06 Luis Leon Sanchez Gil
-0:06 Jurgen Van Den Broeck
-0:06 Janez Brajkovic
-0:06 Denis Menchov
-0:06 Carlos Sastre Candil
-0:06 Bradley Wiggins
-0:06 Bauke Mollema
-6:36 David Blanco Rodriguez
-14:05 Benat Intxausti Elorriaga
-14:05 Andreas Kloden
-20:55 Rein Taaramae

Top 10 and favourites GC standings (previous stage in parens) :
1 Sylvain Chavanel 22:41:13 (unchanged)
2 Daniel Moreno Fernandez 0:15 (was 2nd at 0:09)
3 Vincenzo Nibali 0:16 (was 5th at 0:33)
4 Joaquin Rodriguez Oliver 0:23 (was 3rd at 0:23)
5 Jakob Fuglsang 0:25 (was 4th at 0:25)
6 Fredrik Kessiakoff 0:41 (was 6th at 0:35)
7 Maxime Monfort 0:44 (was 7th at 0:38)
8 Jurgen Van Den Broeck 0:49 (was 8th at 0:43)
9 Sergio Pardilla Belllon 0:49 (was 9th at 0:43)
10 Marzio Bruseghin 0:52 (unchanged)
.....
13 Michele Scarponi 0:57 (was 15th at 0:57)
.....
15 Bauke Mollema 1:01 (was 13th at 0:55)
.....
17 Luis Leon Sanchez Gil 1:05 (was 17th at 0:59)
18 Janez Brajkovic 1:13 (was 18th at 1:07)
.....
22 Bradley Wiggins 1:26 (was 20th at 1:20)
.....
26 Carlos Sastre Candil 1:58 (was 26th at 1:52)
.....
30 Steven Kruijswijk 2:34 (was 30th at 2:28)
31 Denis Menchov 2:41 (was 31st at 2:35)
.....
101 David Blanco Rodriguez 42:37 (was 111st at 36:01)
.....
105 Tony Martin 44:34 (was 149th at 44:34)
106 Benat Intxausti Elorriaga 44:42 (was 92nd at 30:37)
.....
127 Rein Taaramae 53:08 (was 100th at 32:13)
.....
146 Andreas Kloden 59:29 (was 152nd at 45:24)

Top 10 on Points table with previous in parens:
1 Joaquin Rodriguez Oliver 48 (was 2nd with 39 points)
2 Pablo Lastras Garcia 48 (was 3rd with 28 points)
3 Daniel Moreno Fernandez 41 (was 1st with 41 points)
4 Sylvain Chavanel 32 (was 5th with 26 points)
5 Peter Sagan 30 (was 37th with 5 points)
6 Wout Poels 28 (was 4th with 28 points)
7 Bauke Mollema 26 (was 6th with 26 points)
8 Christopher Sutton 25 (was 7th with 25 points)
9 Valerio Agnoli 25 (was 26th with 9 points)
10 Vincenzo Nibali 23 (was 25th with 9 points)

Top 10 on Mountains table with previous in parens:
1 Daniel Moreno Fernandez 20 (unchanged)
2 Chris Anker Sorensen 15 (unchanged)
3 Koen De Kort 13 (unchanged)
4 David Moncoutie 10 (was 8th with 5 points)
5 Daniel Martin 10 (was 4th with 10 points)
6 Joaquin Rodriguez Oliver 6 (was 5th with 6 points)
7 Eduard Vorganov 6 (unchanged)
8 Thomas Rohregger 6 (was 6th with 6 points)
9 Rein Taaramae 5 (unchanged)
10 Przemyslaw Niemiec 4 (unchanged)

Retirements to date : Stage
Johann Tschopp (Swi) BMC Racing Team 6 <<<
Kurt-Asle Arvesen (Nor) Sky Procycling 6 <<<
Matti Breschel (Den) Rabobank Cycling Team 6 <<<
Nicolas Vogondy (Fra) Cofidis, Le Credit En Ligne 6 <<<
Jose Vicente Garcia Acosta (Spa) Movistar Team 5
Mauricio Ardila Cano (Col) Geox-TMC 5
Mark Cavendish (GBr) HTC-Highroad 4
Matthew Goss (Aus) HTC-Highroad 2
Total retirements : 8


(This report can also be seen at http://homepage.ntlworld.com/rvmartin2)

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Did Liquidas screw up the finish? (Vuelta)
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/24a8c2edffe5a5f6?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Thurs, Aug 25 2011 9:44 pm
From: "Mike Jacoubowsky"


I don't get it. Even the 8 seconds for 3rd place could be huge for
Nibali... he's 16 seconds out of red, 1 second off second. The latter is
irrelevant (who cares, 2nd is no better than 5th) but Liquigas could
have delivered at least 8 seconds to Nibali.

The whole thing about saving the team from embarrassment were Lastras
(Movistar) to win when there were 4 Liquigas riders present is
questionable, since they didn't even ensure that Nibali got at least the
3rd place 8-second bonus.

I would have thought the appropriate tactic would have been to sacrifice
Agnoli on the front, Nibali behind him, and then Sagan/Lastras or
Lastras/Sagan. When the back pair goes, Nibali hooks on and everyone
passes Agnoli. But for all I know maybe that's what happened and Nibali
simply had nothing left in the tank. The video quality wasn't good
enough to really tell what went on (hard to pick out the players; one
green & white jersey looked just like any other).

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com

==============================================================================

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "rec.bicycles.racing"
group.

To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing?hl=en

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rec.bicycles.racing+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com

To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/subscribe?hl=en

To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com

==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com/?hl=en

Medarticles Food Chemistry Article

Buzz It
Hello.
Kindly provide the article.

A rapid, simple and sensitive fluorescence method for the assay of angiotensin-I converting enzyme

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308814605004851

Food Chemistry
Volume 97, Issue 3, August 2006, Pages 546-554

Thanks.

Regards
Hema Rajwani

--
You can edit your Group Email settings by visiting the following link.
 
http://groups.google.com/group/medarticles/subscribe
 
You can choose abridged email or digest email so that you will receive only one email per day.

Medarticles Analytical Biochem article

Buzz It

Kindly provide this article.

A rapid and simple spectrophotometric assay of angiotensin-converting enzyme

Analytical Biochemistry
Volume 84, Issue 2, February 1978, Pages 361-369

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0003269778900532

Thanks.

Regards
Hema Rajwani



--
You can edit your Group Email settings by visiting the following link.
 
http://groups.google.com/group/medarticles/subscribe
 
You can choose abridged email or digest email so that you will receive only one email per day.

What does equal mean to you? Volatile food prices keep poorest on edge, and other updates...

Buzz It
Having trouble seeing this email? View it in your browser
World Bank Group Logo   facebook   twitter
August 25, 2011
Worldbank.org Weekly Update
 
Think EQUAL What Does Equal Mean to You?

Share your ideas on ways to overcome inequality faced by women and girls worldwide. Join a global chat and webcast, Sept, 20-21, 2011. Tweet your ideas at #thinkEQUAL.

Read more>>

 
Highlights
food price watch   Benin Water   tanzania entrepreneur   shandale scott
Volatile Food Prices Keep Poorest on Edge   Africa Closing Gap on Water Access   Tanzania's Women Tap Financing   What's It Like to Intern at the World Bank?
Food prices are in the danger zone, and the most vulnerable people are least able to cope.   African countries have an opportunity to sharply increase access to water and sanitation by 2015.   Loan program attracts female business owners once wary of banks..   Youthink! introduces you to a few bright high school students, interning at the World Bank.
Read More »   Read More »   Read More »   Read More »
FEATURED BLOG
south sudan South Sudan launches its first GDP estimate
"GDP per capita in 2010 was estimated at $1,546 compared to $769 in Kenya and just $189 in Burundi."

—Thomas Danielewitz, Aug 23

 

View Featured Blog | View all Blogs »
 
 
In the news

BLOG
Tonga: Banks Supports High-Speed Internet Access

 

PUBLICATION
A New Approach to Development: Lin, Stiglitz, Rodrik and Krueger Discuss

 

PODCAST
Yes Africa Can! Success Stories from a Dynamic Continent

View all News »

 

On Facebook
Blog: Can social media help increase citizen participation in development?
How? Share your views.
August 19 at 10:23am
82 likes, 17 comments
On twitter
It's time to #thinkEQUAL for women and girls. Share your ideas, join the Open Forum Sept 20-21. http://bit.ly/thinkequal
6 hours ago via HootSuite
Aug 23 at 11:00 AM
Follow us on:  
 
Events & consultations
gfdrr CONSULTATION
GFDRR Partnership with Civil Society
Aug-Sep, 2011
Help the global facility tackling disaster rethink how it partners with civil society.

View More Events »
 
Jobs
Begin a Subscription »

Access to Information »

Operational Summary »
 
 

issuu.com/worldbank.indonesia flickr.com/worldbank-indonesia facebook.com/bankdunia

gsk

https://secure.shareit.com/shareit/checkout.html?PRODUCT[300429992]=1&languageid=1&stylefrom=300429992&backlink=http%3A%2F%2Fforexguide.blogspot.com&cookies=1¤cies=USD&pts=VISA,MASTERCARD,AMEX,DC