As promised two blog posts ago, nine points from Charlton's next three games were assured and so it came to pass.
A pleasant two weeks in New York took in the superb US Open mens singles semi-finals, as well as the more sombre tenth anniversary of 9/11.
Sadly the club hasn't offered me a suitably attractive financial incentive not to attend MK Dons, although my effect on the team may be neutralised by the fact that I will be sat amongst the home fans, as I prefer to do these days.
The most recent two wins have demonstrated a healthy combination of spirit (Rochdale) and class (Chesterfield), and my continued belief that we have by far the best squad in League One remains firmly intact.
This is exemplified by the most recent signings of Cort and Kermogant, whose most recent domestic football was at a higher level (yet they don't just waltz into the side).
Whether or not we have the best team however has perhaps not yet been fully tested, the fixture computer having been quite kind so far.
Only 2 of our 9 opponents to date currently occupy the top half, although if we take say 4 or 6 points from MK Dons and Sheff Utd, then this hopefully irrelevant point will indeed be rendered moot.
Another interesting observation about this early League One table, is that nine teams are averaging 1.8 points per game or better, suggestive of 83+ points over a season.
In the interests of completeness, the other eight sides in this leading nonet have played the following number of fixtures against top half sides compared to our two: Sheff Utd (4), Hartlepool (3), Notts County (5), Preston (3), Brentford (4), Huddersfield (5), Sheff Weds (3), MK Dons (4).
The observation may be a form of data-mining, but in the case of Notts County, it appears to be more than merely spurious.
They took 6 points from their first 5 games (all against current top half sides), and then 13 from their second 5 games (all against bottom half sides).
1.8pts per game form is often good enough for automatic promotion, and always good enough for the play-offs, so early signs suggest a very bifurcated division.
The flipside of this rather tautologically, is that a different nine teams are currently averaging less than 1 point per game, usually poor enough form to ensure relegation.
If these trends persist, it implies some very disappointed teams in the upper echelons (and some most fortunate ones in the lower), thus our targets must continue to be ratcheted higher,
For now they are being comfortably surpassed (and in some style), and long may it continue (Huddersfield's current 35 game unbeaten run will take some beating though).
On the subject of great expectations but changing tack, a prominently positioned report on the BBC news website extolled Tottenham's aim of enhancing their global brand in the name of, "flair, style and adventure..."
My problem with the report was perhaps surprisingly not the slogan, because in fairness recently 'Arry's side have demonstrated a reasonable amount of all three.
Instead it was a ludicrous claim from executive director Charlie Wijeratna which really caught my eye, namely that the club has 179 million fans outside of the UK!
I assumed it was a misprint rather than a total misunderstanding of simple statistics, but then it was repeated for posterity: "...we drive zero revenues from these 179 million fans at present."
In order to prove that he maybe should have engaged his brain before speaking, this represents nearly 3% of the entire world's population (including women, children, assorted tribesmen and the billions living on less than $1 per day).
I don't doubt that Spurs are well-supported, but I've travelled far and wide and have never sensed from Sao Paolo to Singapore, or from Doha to Dallas, that approximately 1 in 30 people were eagerly awaiting knews of Ledley King's late fitness test.
Even in their home city of London, I would guess that approximately 60% of people could not care less about football, and that no more than 5% of the remainder would express an affinity for Spurs (that may sound unkind, but it's still 200,000 people).
So in London perhaps 2% of the folk might be considered fans, yet globally it's fully 3%!
How does someone who spouts such nonsense end up in a position of responsibility (and more relevantly uphold it)?