• The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...

    Get involved!

Manager Antonio Conte

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

NDomBadBoy said:
"I wish sammyspurs sammyspurs and Ndombadboy would just go away so I can keep spreading false narratives about Kane and position him as a world class striker..."
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Last I checked Kane's xG for the entire season as a CF was about 1.90, which is fucking dreadful. He's under it but when the expected is that low, that isn't a fucking surprise. If he scored one more goal he'd be over it.

But applying context to stats isn't for you, is it? Service = terrible, Kane = having bad season in own right. It shouldn't be hard to understand, but somehow it is.
 
Flaneur said:
So, what's better for you, one spoon of sugar in your tea, or half a spoon and a sweetener? Genuine question. Assuming 3 cups of tea per day.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Sorry for Zesting again, but as pharmacist I can give accurate info - Sugar isn't good, meanwhile all the artificial sweeteners are thoroughly tested and proven very safe. You can get diarrhea if you overdose them, that's what sometimes happens to chewing gum addicts, but no long term risks. If you're good at controlling your diet three cups of tea with sugar won't hurt you. But since it's so easy to replace and it's hard to control your diet overall, cutting all carbs with high glycemic index (like sugar or white bread) is highly recommended.
 
Raumdeuterz said:
Last I checked Kane's xG for the entire season as a CF was about 1.90, which is fucking dreadful. He's under it but when the expected is that low, that isn't a fucking surprise. If he scored one more goal he'd be over it.

But applying context to stats isn't for you, is it? Service = terrible, Kane = having bad season in own right. It shouldn't be hard to understand, but somehow it is.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
"Maybe if I keep saying that Kane doesn't get service, people here won't realize that a striker needs to actually move in order to get into good positions to receive service."
 
Raumdeuterz said:
Me? When the fuck did I say that. Seriously you REALLY need to stop attributing what some people said to other people just because they maybe have similar opinions. I said in the match day thread the Everton game was going to be tough and Conte hasn't had enough time to change much.

And yes, we need huge squad turnover. I haven't fucking disagreed with that, stop throwing me in with a bunch of other people because you've also argued with them at some point ffs. The squad is mostly shit, said it LOADS.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
He's just a troll going fishing as usual.

It's a waste of time discussing things with a pathological liar.
 
Zest said:
Hypoglycemic catalyst for many. Drives up the sugars quickly, then plummets, for many.

Major issue Pauling institute found was when cold stored, the carbohydrate chains break down into what the body see's as simple sugars (didn't bookmark the study).

Fats to cook compound this issue (in some will be the key driver), nice fresh Jacket potato is much less iffy, in terms of mucous forming status.

50g a day Budwig said could be tolerated by many/most, but only if coated in a mix of Flax and Coconut oils (after cooking, no oils to cook was her modus).

The Glycemic Index of Potatoes​

Written byRogue Parrish
17 October, 2013
While a whole potato would seem on the surface to be a reasonably healthy choice compared with processed foods, spuds are a dud when it comes to their effect on your blood glucose level. Potatoes fall into the moderately high to high ranges on the glycemic index scale, which measures the effects of foods on blood glucose. Potatoes actually rank closer to table sugar, which consists of glucose and fructose, than to other starchy foods that contain long and complex chains of glucose, according to the Linus Pauling Institute.

Measuring Glycemic Index​

Determining the glycemic index of a food requires tests on human volunteers to see how the food affects their blood glucose levels. The Linus Pauling Institute’s website explains that volunteers receive 50 grams of a test food such as a potato, and a control food such as pure glucose that contains exactly the same amount of carbohydrate, on a later day. Volunteers’ blood is drawn before eating and for several hours after eating, and blood glucose is measured at regular intervals.

Significance​

The Linus Pauling Institute reports that a medium-sized baked Russet potato has a glycemic index of 76. This means that the change in blood glucose over time after eating a baked potato is 76 percent of the change in blood glucose that occurs after eating the same amount of carbohydrate as pure glucose. Foods with lower glycemic index values tend to produce lower blood insulin levels, in addition to lower blood sugar levels, according to Harvard Health Publications.

  • While a whole potato would seem on the surface to be a reasonably healthy choice compared with processed foods, spuds are a dud when it comes to their effect on your blood glucose level.
  • Potatoes actually rank closer to table sugar, which consists of glucose and fructose, than to other starchy foods that contain long and complex chains of glucose, according to the Linus Pauling Institute.

Potato Types​

The glycemic index varies depending on the type of potato -- Harvard Health Publications reports in its listing of the glycemic index of more than 100 foods. Using glucose to represent 100 on the glycemic index scale, boiled white potatoes have a glycemic index of 82, instant mashed potatoes have a value of 85, and sweet potatoes a value of 70. Potato chips, often criticized for processing that adds fats and sodium, actually have a lower glycemic index than other forms of potatoes -- at a value of 51.

Expert Insight​

Researchers at the University of Toronto looked at the glycemic index of potatoes as it is affected by cooking method. In a 2005 study reported in the "Journal of the American Dietetic Association," they found that boiled red potatoes consumed cold fell in the intermediate range at 56, while roasted California white potatoes at 72 and baked Russet potatoes at 77 fell in the moderately high range. The high range included instant mashed potatoes at 88 and boiled red potatoes at 89.

Considerations​

If you want to lower the glycemic index of the potatoes in your diet, precook the potatoes and consume them cold or reheated, recommends nutritionists at Oxford Brookes University in England who tested eight varieties of potatoes commonly eaten in the United Kingdom. They found that potatoes with a waxy texture had medium glycemic index values, while those with a floury consistency had higher glycemic index values.

  • The glycemic index varies depending on the type of potato -- Harvard Health Publications reports in its listing of the glycemic index of more than 100 foods.
  • Using glucose to represent 100 on the glycemic index scale, boiled white potatoes have a glycemic index of 82, instant mashed potatoes have a value of 85, and sweet potatoes a value of 70.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

You are fucking mental.
 
Trojanhorse said:
Sorry for Zesting again, but as pharmacist I can give accurate info - Sugar isn't good, meanwhile all the artificial sweeteners are thoroughly tested and proven very safe. You can get diarrhea if you overdose them, that's what sometimes happens to chewing gum addicts, but no long term risks. If you're good at controlling your diet three cups of tea with sugar won't hurt you. But since it's so easy to replace and it's hard to control your diet overall, cutting all carbs with high glycemic index (like sugar or white bread) is highly recommended.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Brilliant, thanks. I'll continue with the sweeteners, in moderation. They actually don't spoil the flavour of the tea, but they're horrible in coffee.

Now, back to Conte's nutritional news...
 
Bill Madrid said:
Nutritional experts, what's so wrong with ketchup in moderation? Do all other elite players eschew it all the time.

Full disclosure: fancied a bowl of chips for supper with the film I'm watching while the missus is out. Had ketchup. And mustard. Bit of nice wine now.

That said, I'm not turning out for any kind of demanding sports activity any time soon.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
there's not much wrong with ketchup in isolation, but it's high in sugar and salt and when eaten with anything carb-rich or fatty will make you put on weight, since it will spike insulin early in the digestive process.
 
Flaneur said:
So, what's better for you, one spoon of sugar in your tea, or half a spoon and a sweetener? Genuine question. Assuming 3 cups of tea per day.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Apparently there's not really much difference. Your body reacts with an insulin spike to artificial sweeteners and that's the thing you should be trying to avoid for weight-loss (or just to retain a healthy insulin sensitivity).

Your teeth won't be as furry with sweeteners, though.
 
NDomBadBoy said:
"Maybe if I keep saying that Kane doesn't get service, people here won't realize that a striker needs to actually move in order to get into good positions to receive service."
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Apparently he didn’t say it and I made it all up.
He has never claimed that Kane’s poor form was the fault of the midfield or tactics, he must have agreed with us the whole time.

Also, now he’s not screaming Golden Boot!!!!

It’s like it took him to November to realise that Kane scoring against the bottom ten last season isn’t helping us this season

“I never said the golden boot was good”

3……2……1
 
sammyspurs said:
He has never claimed that Kane’s poor form was the fault of the midfield or tactics, he must have agreed with us the whole time.

Also, now he’s not screaming Golden Boot!!!!

It’s like it took him to November to realise that Kane scoring against the bottom ten last season isn’t helping us this season

“I never said the golden boot was good”

3……2……1
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

It’s the Conte thread, just because nobody is giving you attention in the Kane thread anymore doesn’t mean you and your twin have to shit up other threads.
 
Raumdeuterz said:
Really shit. As I've said like 100 times .. but you're a Sammy clone, so


It’s the Conte thread, just because nobody is giving you attention in the Kane thread anymore doesn’t mean you and your twin have to shit up other threads.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
"Maybe people won't realize Kane has been shit even under Conte if I stop posting in the Kane thread and stop responding to sammyspurs sammyspurs and Ndombadboy..."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top