> On Sat, 20 Jan 2007 08:06:13 -0500, "Obveeus" aol.com> wrote:
>

>>
>>"Hunter Rose" newsguy.com> wrote:

>>> So much of what Rob did was to *look* clever for the cameras,
>>> but didn't really gain him any advantage in the race.

>>
>>Exactly. Doing something 'clever' means nothing when it gains nothing and
>>Rob's clever antics gained him nothing in the race.
>>

>>> He's not stupid,

>>
>>As you suggested, his antics alienated other teams. In this race, that is
>>a
>>stupid thing to do because of the Yield and because teams working together
>>can sometimes benefit from that joint effort.

>
> I expect other teams to band together against him this time, ...

> "Hunter Rose" newsguy.com> wrote in message
> news:trj4r21hpsctlumv74s91ntds35m7amkkd@4ax.com...

>> On Sat, 20 Jan 2007 08:06:13 -0500, "Obveeus" aol.com> wrote:
>>

>>>
>>>"Hunter Rose" newsguy.com> wrote:

>>>> So much of what Rob did was to *look* clever for the cameras,
>>>> but didn't really gain him any advantage in the race.

>>>
>>>Exactly. Doing something 'clever' means nothing when it gains nothing and
>>>Rob's clever antics gained him nothing in the race.
>>>

>>>> He's not stupid,

>>>
>>>As you suggested, his antics alienated other teams. In this race, that is
>>>a
>>>stupid thing to do because of the Yield and because teams working together
>>>can sometimes benefit from that joint effort.

>> ...

>
> Barbara L Sherrill wrote:

>> "Hunter Rose" newsguy.com> wrote in message
>> news:trj4r21hpsctlumv74s91ntds35m7amkkd@4ax.com...

>>> On Sat, 20 Jan 2007 08:06:13 -0500, "Obveeus" aol.com> wrote:
>>>

>>>>
>>>>"Hunter Rose" newsguy.com> wrote:

>>>>> So much of what Rob did was to *look* clever for the cameras,
>>>>> but didn't really gain him any advantage in the race.

>>>>
>>>>Exactly. Doing something 'clever' means nothing when it gains nothing
>>>>and
>>>>Rob's clever antics gained him nothing in the race.
>>>>

>>>>> He's not stupid,

>>>>
>>>>As you suggested, his antics alienated other teams. In this race, that ...

> "Ken McElhaney" hotmail.com> writes:

>> As every season of TAR shows, there are teams that shouldn't finish
>> in the top 3 that do, and those that should who don't.

> Which was kind of my point. Since Rob and Amber finished so well last
> time, they're much more likely to do worse this time, just based on
> the amount of luck involved in the game. There's a lot more room for
> them to go down than up.

>> Rob was actually pretty intense during the times needed to make
>> decisions, which was a big reason they made it as far as they did.

> For varying values of "intense," perhaps. He didn't panic under
> pressure and get tunnel vision and miss clues and landmarks the way so
> many "intense" teams do. (Reichen and Chip reading "on foot" OUT LOUD
> and then hopping in their car and driving to the pit stop, for
> example.) He could be very focused, yes, but not in a way that hurt
> them.

> In article <86wt3ewxzn....@cail.baugher.biz>,
> Aaron Baugher yahoo.com> wrote:
>

>>> As every season of TAR shows, there are teams that shouldn't finish
>>> in the top 3 that do, and those that should who don't.

>

>> Which was kind of my point. Since Rob and Amber finished so well
>> last time, they're much more likely to do worse this time, just based
>> on the amount of luck involved in the game.This "logic" applies to most of the racers involved. Maybe David and

> Mary *will* win!

> Like them or not, R&A were excellent racers -- with the bonus of their
> earlier fame gaving them an advantage at times. I admired them for the
> former, was irked at the show for the latter.

> "Romber Must Die Society & Tea Social".

> Ken McElhaney wrote:

>> "Romber Must Die Society & Tea Social".Got that on a macro, have you Ken?

>
> On Jan 28, 2:53 pm, "Karen E." kcnet.com> wrote:
>

>>Ken McElhaney wrote:
>>

>>> "Romber Must Die Society & Tea Social".Got that on a macro, have you Ken?

>
>
> Actually, I think the title is rather tame considering all that was
> written in this here newsgroup a few years ago during TAR7.
>
> And, it's probably tame to what will be written about Romber if they
> do anything "shady" during this TAR-AS bit.
>
> If the title makes one person who's dedicated his or her life to
> reminding everyone of how much they hate Romber...well...no, it won't
> make anyone think twice about it really, but it's a cool title.

> You appear to be the only one who thinks so. You seem to be as obsessed
> with those who hate Rob and Amber as they are with their hate. Whatever
> floats your boat, I suppose.

> I'm not a psychic, but I predict that the phrase "Romber Must Die...."
> will appear in at least 10 threads during TAR11.