In message , at 12:55:40 on
Thu, 3 Aug 2017, Recliner remarked:
By rail, I'd have thought it was nearly 20 miles further?

Very close in mileage.

Hardly: here are the actual figures:
Peterborough: 76m 29h (76.36m)
Leicester: 99m 07ch (99.09m)

I'm not going to fall out over 99-76 being not close enough to 20.

No, but you thought the difference was much less than that; 20 was my
guess before I checked.


So Leicester is almost 23 miles further from London, a bit more than my
quick initial guess. I note that you describe a 30% difference as 'very
close'. I'll remember that the next time you nit-pick over much smaller
differences.

Like I said, what's 3 miles?

You described 99.09 miles as "very close in mileage" to 76.36 miles.
It's actually about 30% more.

My guess of 20 miles difference was much closer (though still not
quite right).

I agreed that your estimate of 20 was "very close" to the actual answer.

Are you arguing just for the sake of it now?

The classic statistic is that Peterborough is further north than
Wolverhampton (few people believe that until you show them a map).

Quite possibly, but it's the rail distances that matter in this case,
not latitude.

Most people think it's the time onboard which matters most. But we've
seen that timing is not your strong suit.
--
Roland Perry