skinte1 t1_jbr8bpm wrote

>Also, why is it a bonus for Stenmark that he didn't compete in the speed events?

Because he had fewer events /tries to reach the same number of wins. As for Super G it didn't even exist until 1982 which was after Stenmarks prime. And parallel slalom, team events and combined weren't counted as WC wins back then but they are now etc. Another comparison is Stenmark has 155 podiums on 231 events and Mikaela has 135 podiums on 244 events.

But as you say Mikaela will probably win a lot more. Maybe even break 100 which would set her apart even from Stenmark.


skinte1 t1_jbqyv2n wrote

>The only comparison we can make is relative to their peers and by that metric Mikaela is the GOAT.

That would be GOAT together with Stenmark then... He still has as many wins and was arguably even more dominant in his time since he only competed in S and GS meaning he needed fewer events to reach his 86 wins. they even changed the rules because of him since he won the overall cup 3 years in a row despite not competeing in SG and DH...


skinte1 t1_jbqxqn8 wrote

>This would be analogous to how many matches a country has won in FIFA World Cup.

More like nr of games won in Premier league / La liga etc since it's a "series" over the whole season without playoffs like in the FIFA World Cup. With a big difference ofcourse. A game is only between two teems so your chances of winning is a lot higher than when competing against 100 other ski racers...


skinte1 t1_j9tdmsz wrote

No they don't. They close on the minute to avoid heavy fines from authorities. If a pilot calculate they wouldn't reach the destination airport until 1 minute after they close he won't take of. Obviously they would still let a plane land in an emergency or if they didn't have fuel to reach another airport.

Myself and 50 or so passenger once had to pretty much run from a plane that had issues with the door mechanism to the replacement plane because they had 20 minutes to closing time (22:00) and we would be stranded to next morning if we didn't make it.


skinte1 t1_j2bjqh4 wrote

Jokes aside the crew likely did survive the "explosion" (In reality the Shuttle was torn apart from aerodynamic forces) since several of the emergency airpacks had been activated manually in the seconds after the shuttle broke apart. The impact with the water at over 200 mph was what killed them.


skinte1 t1_j240qc1 wrote

>Why? They're building ships larger than Earth and space is huge and full of resources, the only possible reason for them to give our planet a second glance is for us and maybe to study life in general

Could be our planet is so small they're not even giving it a first glance... Like forestry machinery driving over an anthill to get to the area they are going to log. Using our sun for fuel before continuing on their merry way etc...