|
Sports » uk.sport.football » [SBL 05/06] - Week 37 results
| [SBL 05/06] - Week 37 results [message #980672] |
Tue, 02 May 2006 11:19 |
|
****House Of Hopeful Youks headed paper****
Hello there folks and apologies for the delay. Your TLHCotY was a bit
tied up on Bank Holiday Monday (and not in a nice way) so I didn't get
the results done. Apologies O Master.
Anyway, quite an interesting little week. Teh loosers only just
outnumber the ghambolling gheys. TMAK continues his serene progression
towards the title but Mikey may have just given himself an outside
chance of sneaking it on the line, due to a brave AMYer which came off.
Mikey therefore gets to lick the Sexiest Betcunt lollipop this week.
Plenty of wild spunking at the bottom end of the league but Dat gets to
wear the MICATBG bobble hat this week as he (probably) spunked away his
last chance of winning the whole thing.
Down below there's a Tiny Penis for Mr Conlan Snr and I have somehow
moved into mid-table respectability again.
One final thing, and a million thanks to Joe for letting me be the one
to do this. It gives me great pleasure to say: Kullrad - you are not a
proper betcunter. Fuck. Off.
=======================================================
*TonyMac (1212) 100 on Chelsea WIN v Man Utd [at] 2.14 ret. 214 = 1326
Dat (500) 200 on Birmingham LOSE v Newcastle [at] 2.8 ret. -200 = 300
*Mikey (499) 499 on Liverpool WIN v Aston Villa [at] 1.4 ret. 698.6 = 698.6
Steve H (388) 88 on Middlesborough WIN v Everton [at] 2.32 ret. -88 = 300
*General (233) 233 on Liverpool WIN v Aston Villa [at] 1.4 ret. 326.2 =
326.2
JdS (156) 156 on Birmingham LOSE v Newcastle [at] 2.8 ret. -156 = 0
Parkes (99) Retired = 99
*Ben (88) 58 on Man City LOSE v Fulham [at] 3.8 ret. 220.4 = 250.4
Roondog (23) 23 on Coventry LOSE v Cardiff [at] 3.75 ret. -23 = 0
*Bobby Int (15) 15 on Chelsea WIN v Man Utd [at] 2.14 ret. 32.1 = 32.1
Chopsy (5) 4 on Barcelona LOSE v Cadiz [at] 12 ret. -4 = 1
Poleson (5) 5 on Liverpool LOSE v Aston Villa [at] 9.2 ret. -5 = 0
Sid (5) 5 on Chelsea DRAW v Man Utd [at] 3.25 ret. -5 = 0
*Ryan (5) 5 on Man City LOSE v Fulham [at] 3.8 ret. 19 = 19
Kevin (5) Tiny Penis = 5
Vicky (5) 5 on Man City WIN v Fulham [at] 2.05 ret. -5 = 0
*Martin (5) 5 on Chelsea WIN v Man Utd [at] 2.14 ret. 10.7 = 10.7
Joe (5) 5 on Chelsea LOSE v Man Utd [at] 4 ret. -5 = 0
Kullrad (2) Not a proper betcunter! = 0
=======================================================
Balances:
TonyMac 1326
Mikey 699
General 326
Dat 300
Steve H 300
Ben 250
Parkes 99
Bobby Int 32
Ryan 19
Martin 11
Kevin 5
Chopsy 1
JdS 0
Roondog 0
Poleson 0
Sid 0
Vicky 0
Joe 0
=======================
Stats:
Betcunts placed: 16
Won Bets: 7
Lost Bets: 9
Froup Profit for this week: 113
Average odds: 3.69
Percentage of froup balance staked: 43.20%
Froup balls bigness: 1.59
Income: 80
Income so far: 4059
Froup balance: 3368
Are you being served? -691
========================================================
--
"VIVA Las BETCUNTS!!!1one!1!!!fuckoffbrummiecunt!!1!1!" - Elvis Presley
http://uksf.org.uk/betcunt/
|
|
|
| Re: [SBL 05/06] - Week 37 results [message #980675 ] |
Tue, 02 May 2006 12:18 |
|
"Martin" <news [at] mandab.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.1ec13458785f1b56989ac0 [at] news.individual.net...
> =======================================================
> *TonyMac (1212) 100 on Chelsea WIN v Man Utd [at] 2.14 ret. 214 = 1326
If you're going to cheat, at least try to even up the scores, and make it
more interesting, rather than extending the leaders lead, eh?
BTN
"Tony McChrystal" <tony.mcchrystal [at] hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns97B3BB586BB0Btonymcchrystalhotmai [at] 195.188.240.200...
> "Joe Horowitz" <my_name [at] youblunder.co.youghey> reduced the crowd to
> uncontrollable tears by saying
> news:Aec3g.21418$xt.18554 [at] fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk:
>
>> Chelsea v Man Utd (12:30 BST) 2.14 3.25 4
>
>
> 100 on the Utd win please Martin.
|
|
|
| Re: [SBL 05/06] - Week 37 results CORRECTION [message #980676 ] |
Tue, 02 May 2006 12:31 |
|
In article <4boq1oF127th4U1 [at] individual.net>, bennunn [at] depro.co.uk says...
>
> If you're going to cheat, at least try to even up the scores, and make it
> more interesting, rather than extending the leaders lead, eh?
>
er, OK. Maybe I shouldn't have bashed the whole thing together in 10
minutes this morning. I blame Joe's spreadshit assigning daft macros to
the CTRL-C combination.
****House Of Hopeful Youks headed paper****
So there is an inkling of a hint of a suggestion of a chance of a final
day change of leader, as Mikey closes to within 400-odd youks of the
long-time leader.
[snip all sorts of other bollocks]
Fuck. Off.
Revised results below:
TonyMac (1212) 100 on Chelsea LOSE v Man Utd [at] 4 ret. -100 = 1112
Dat (500) 200 on Birmingham LOSE v Newcastle [at] 2.8 ret. -200 = 300
*Mikey (499) 499 on Liverpool WIN v Aston Villa [at] 1.4 ret. 698.6 = 698.6
Steve H (388) 88 on Middlesborough WIN v Everton [at] 2.32 ret. -88 = 300
*General (233) 233 on Liverpool WIN v Aston Villa [at] 1.4 ret. 326.2 =
326.2
JdS (156) 156 on Birmingham LOSE v Newcastle [at] 2.8 ret. -156 = 0
Parkes (99) Retired = 99
*Ben (88) 58 on Man City LOSE v Fulham [at] 3.8 ret. 220.4 = 250.4
Roondog (23) 23 on Coventry LOSE v Cardiff [at] 3.75 ret. -23 = 0
*Bobby Int (15) 15 on Chelsea WIN v Man Utd [at] 2.14 ret. 32.1 = 32.1
Chopsy (5) 4 on Barcelona LOSE v Cadiz [at] 12 ret. -4 = 1
Poleson (5) 5 on Liverpool LOSE v Aston Villa [at] 9.2 ret. -5 = 0
Sid (5) 5 on Chelsea DRAW v Man Utd [at] 3.25 ret. -5 = 0
*Ryan (5) 5 on Man City LOSE v Fulham [at] 3.8 ret. 19 = 19
Kevin (5) Tiny Penis = 5
Vicky (5) 5 on Man City WIN v Fulham [at] 2.05 ret. -5 = 0
*Martin (5) 5 on Chelsea WIN v Man Utd [at] 2.14 ret. 10.7 = 10.7
Joe (5) 5 on Chelsea LOSE v Man Utd [at] 4 ret. -5 = 0
Kullrad (2) Not a proper betcunter! = 0
Balances:
TonyMac 1112
Mikey 699
General 326
Dat 300
Steve H 300
Ben 250
Parkes 99
Bobby Int 32
Ryan 19
Martin 11
Kevin 5
Chopsy 1
JdS 0
Roondog 0
Poleson 0
Sid 0
Vicky 0
Joe 0
Kullrad 0
Stats:
Betcunts placed: 16
Won Bets: 6
Lost Bets: 10
Froup Profit for this week: -101
Average odds: 3.80
Percentage of froup balance staked: 43.20%
Froup balls bigness: 1.64
Income: 80
Income so far: 4059
Froup balance: 3154
Are you being served? -905
--
"VIVA Las BETCUNTS!!!1one!1!!!ohbolloxIfuckedup!!1!1!" - Elvis Presley
http://uksf.org.uk/betcunt/
|
|
|
| Re: [SBL 05/06] - Week 37 results [message #980678 ] |
Tue, 02 May 2006 14:30 |
|
"Martin" <news [at] mandab.co.uk> wrote in message news:MPG.1ec13458785f1b56989ac0 [at] news.individual.net...
> Anyway, quite an interesting little week. Teh loosers only just
> outnumber the ghambolling gheys. TMAK continues his serene progression
> towards the title but Mikey may have just given himself an outside
> chance of sneaking it on the line, due to a brave AMYer which came off.
> Mikey therefore gets to lick the Sexiest Betcunt lollipop this week.
I'm very disappointed in you, Martin.
First off, TMAK's "serene progression towards the title" has seen
him blow 300 Youks in two weeks. Secondly, rather than having
an "outside chance", I actually think I'm now a certainty to win the
SBL. And thirdly, this is the first time I've won the Sexiest Betcunt
award and I don't even deserve it. Ben's Fulham betcunt was the
bet of the weekend by some distance.
I'll be reporting your poor performance to Joe.
--
Mike
|
|
|
| Re: [SBL 05/06] - Week 37 results [message #980679 ] |
Tue, 02 May 2006 14:47 |
|
In article <vhI5g.8648$j7.304253 [at] news.indigo.ie>,
superman [at] spamxxblockuksf.org.uk says...
>
> I'll be reporting your poor performance to Joe.
>
TBH, that's nothing less than I'd expect from you.
M
|
|
|
| Re: [SBL 05/06] - Week 37 results [message #980681 ] |
Tue, 02 May 2006 14:59 |
|
"Michael Cunningham" <superman [at] spamxxblockuksf.org.uk> wrote in message
news:vhI5g.8648$j7.304253 [at] news.indigo.ie...
> Ben's Fulham betcunt was the bet of the weekend by some distance.
>
Maybe it only felt like a sexy betcunt because it was all going very wrong
until right at the end?
Actually, regardless of the results, I think I made a horrible strategic
mistake in the size of my bet. If I'd lost, and been left with 35 to play
with in the final week, there probably would not have been any odds that
would enable me to win it, therefore I should have either bet AMY (whereby
winning would give me greater freedom in my bet selection in the final week)
or significantly fewer than 58, in order to maintain a mathmatical chance of
pipping TMAK in the final week.
I fucked up, and I think it was the psychological thing of not wanting to
join the cuntformist cuntwank pack on 0 Youks at the end of the season.
If I finish within about 400 Youks of the eventual winner, this will turn
out to have been a spectacularly bad decision on my part.
BTN
|
|
|
| Re: [SBL 05/06] - Week 37 results [message #980682 ] |
Tue, 02 May 2006 14:58 |
|
"Martin" <news [at] mandab.co.uk> wrote in message news:MPG.1ec1652bf96ef954989ac3 [at] news.individual.net...
> In article <vhI5g.8648$j7.304253 [at] news.indigo.ie>,
> superman [at] spamxxblockuksf.org.uk says...
>> I'll be reporting your poor performance to Joe.
>>
> TBH, that's nothing less than I'd expect from you.
Keep talking, Martin. Every anti-Mikey comment you make
just goes straight back to Joe.
He'll deal with you in his own time.
--
Mike
|
|
|
| Re: [SBL 05/06] - Week 37 results [message #980683 ] |
Tue, 02 May 2006 15:09 |
|
|
Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)
|
|
|
| Re: [SBL 05/06] - Week 37 results [message #980685 ] |
Tue, 02 May 2006 15:41 |
|
In article <SSI5g.8653$j7.304214 [at] news.indigo.ie>,
superman [at] spamxxblockuksf.org.uk says...
> "Martin" <news [at] mandab.co.uk> wrote in message news:MPG.1ec1652bf96ef954989ac3 [at] news.individual.net...
> > In article <vhI5g.8648$j7.304253 [at] news.indigo.ie>,
> > superman [at] spamxxblockuksf.org.uk says...
> >> I'll be reporting your poor performance to Joe.
> >>
> > TBH, that's nothing less than I'd expect from you.
>
> Keep talking, Martin. Every anti-Mikey comment you make
> just goes straight back to Joe.
>
Bloody hell, I hope he's got a big Inbox.
> He'll deal with you in his own time.
>
By the time he's finished shagging, I'll be long gone.
M
|
|
|
| Re: [SBL 05/06] - Week 37 results [message #980686 ] |
Tue, 02 May 2006 15:43 |
|
In article <p7me52hhpu40ut33nrf6l2d3m10sdrbgb0 [at] 4ax.com>,
demosthenes [at] theonering.net says...
>
> Dog's balls on a breadroll with BBQ sausce.
>
Chihuhahuhauhauha's balls?
>
> So, let's try this: Mikey is a cunt. Mikey is a cunt. Mikey is a cunt.
> Mikey is a cunt. Mikey is a cunt. Mikey is a cunt. Mikey is a cunt.
> Mikey is a cunt.
>
Where have you heard that? Not around these parts, surely?
I hadn't realised how much I'd missed you Demo. ILTCOYJ, IHYSA.
M
|
|
|
| Re: [SBL 05/06] - Week 37 results [message #980694 ] |
Tue, 02 May 2006 16:12 |
|
|
Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)
|
|
|
| Re: [SBL 05/06] - Week 37 results [message #980713 ] |
Tue, 02 May 2006 17:12 |
|
"Martin" <news [at] mandab.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.1ec13458785f1b56989ac0 [at] news.individual.net...
> ****House Of Hopeful Youks headed paper****
>
> Hello there folks and apologies for the delay. Your TLHCotY was a bit
> tied up on Bank Holiday Monday (and not in a nice way) so I didn't get
> the results done. Apologies O Master.
Yeah, I know how that feels. Anyway, you only have to apologise if you
don't get the results and odds posted by Tuesday night. On the subject of
which, if you could fire the ole' spreadshit back up my pipe any time today
that would be great.
> One final thing, and a million thanks to Joe for letting me be the one
> to do this. It gives me great pleasure to say: Kullrad - you are not a
> proper betcunter. Fuck. Off.
Feel's great, don't it? The HOHY is a nice company who values it's
customers, but people who take the piss get short shrift. At the end of the
day, they're just spoiling it for everyone else anyway.
> Vicky 0
> Joe 0
I like being down here with teh Vicky. I think it's fair to say we've both
enjoyed all the highs and lows the SBL has to offer this season, and the
middles as well, and I wouldn't swap that for anything. Okay, in retrospect
I'd have been a little more cautious over the last five or six weeks, but I
stand by my decisions and I'm pleased to have got myself into a potentially
winning position at one point. It's a fucking hard comp, that's for sure.
Martin, thanks. Aside from cocking up TMac's score you did a fine job,
faultless in all other respects. Without exception. Regardless of what
anyone else says or thinks.
Now give me back my fucking spreadshit you cunt.
--
Joe
Pay it fast it will be great..!!!
|
|
|
| Re: [SBL 05/06] - Week 37 results [message #980730 ] |
Tue, 02 May 2006 17:52 |
|
According to <my_name [at] youblunder.co.youghey>:
>> Vicky 0
>> Joe 0
>I like being down here with teh Vicky. I think it's fair to say we've both
>enjoyed all the highs and lows the SBL has to offer this season, and the
>middles as well, and I wouldn't swap that for anything. Okay, in retrospect
>I'd have been a little more cautious over the last five or six weeks, but I
>stand by my decisions and I'm pleased to have got myself into a potentially
>winning position at one point. It's a fucking hard comp, that's for sure.
You'd have been more cautious? I wouldn't. I enjoyed it, and I'd like
to have been a bit /luckier/, but other than the results not turning up,
I played exactly how I would play again if it was another season. Given
the gap between us and TonyMac, I don't think we had any choice. If it
had worked, it would have been spectacular. Unfortunately, WNVGATPG and
all that.
--
|
|
|
| Re: [SBL 05/06] - Week 37 results [message #980742 ] |
Tue, 02 May 2006 18:05 |
|
"Vicky Conlan" <comps [at] riffraff.plig.net> wrote in message
news:e37v8o$1iod$1 [at] magenta.plig.net...
> You'd have been more cautious?
Maybe.
> I wouldn't. I enjoyed it, and I'd like
> to have been a bit /luckier/, but other than the results not turning up,
> I played exactly how I would play again if it was another season. Given
> the gap between us and TonyMac, I don't think we had any choice.
GPWM, although at one point he and I both had about 700 - 800 Youks, and
three hundred more than our nearest rivals. That I'm not still in with a
shout going into the last three weeks suggests I maybe went a little wrong
somewhere down the line.
I did like placing those large wagers though.
> If it
> had worked, it would have been spectacular. Unfortunately, WNVGATPG and
> all that.
This is true.
--
Joe
Pay it fast it will be great..!!!
|
|
|
| Re: [SBL 05/06] - Week 37 results [message #980743 ] |
Tue, 02 May 2006 18:06 |
|
"Vicky Conlan" <comps [at] riffraff.plig.net> wrote in message news:e37v8o$1iod$1 [at] magenta.plig.net...
> You'd have been more cautious? I wouldn't. I enjoyed it, and I'd like
> to have been a bit /luckier/, but other than the results not turning up,
> I played exactly how I would play again if it was another season. Given
> the gap between us and TonyMac, I don't think we had any choice.
DWTWP. You and Joe have both had season-high totals that
would have put you in 2nd place if you had them now. With the
last week being a double-betcunt bonanza (and taking into account
the fact that the rules allow you to see TMAK's betcunt before placing
your own), you already had easily enough to win. There was no need
to keep up with him Youk for Youk.
I think TMAK psyched you all out.
--
Mike
|
|
|
| Re: [SBL 05/06] - Week 37 results [message #980744 ] |
Tue, 02 May 2006 18:10 |
|
"Sir Benjamin Nunn" <bennunn [at] depro.co.uk> wrote in message news:4bp3ekF12f4roU1 [at] individual.net...
> "Michael Cunningham" <superman [at] spamxxblockuksf.org.uk> wrote in message news:vhI5g.8648$j7.304253 [at] news.indigo.ie...
>> Ben's Fulham betcunt was the bet of the weekend by some distance.
>
> Maybe it only felt like a sexy betcunt because it was all going very
> wrong until right at the end?
No, it was a great bet. An away win for a team that hadn't won away
all season but had started to look more and more likely in recent weeks
against a team in freefall. All at delicious odds. I'd say that qualifies
as a very fine bet by any standards.
> I fucked up, and I think it was the psychological thing of not wanting
> to join the cuntformist cuntwank pack on 0 Youks at the end of the
> season.
Interesting. I think your principles have held you back a little this
season, Ben. I mean, I know you like to think of people who hit
zero Youks before the end of the game as sub-human scum -- and,
in a very real way, they are -- but needs must and all that so I don't
think you should be averse to an AYY bet when it's necessary. I
think it's okay in this instance for you to gamble everything that you
hold dear to give yourself a chance of victory. Nobody will judge you.
--
Mike
|
|
|
| Re: [SBL 05/06] - Week 37 results [message #980745 ] |
Tue, 02 May 2006 18:14 |
|
According to <my_name [at] youblunder.co.youghey>:
>> I wouldn't. I enjoyed it, and I'd like
>> to have been a bit /luckier/, but other than the results not turning up,
>> I played exactly how I would play again if it was another season. Given
>> the gap between us and TonyMac, I don't think we had any choice.
>GPWM, although at one point he and I both had about 700 - 800 Youks, and
>three hundred more than our nearest rivals. That I'm not still in with a
>shout going into the last three weeks suggests I maybe went a little wrong
>somewhere down the line.
Nah, it was just a case of Tony being a lot more lucky and the results
turning up for him. It could have been any of us that did it. He just
timed it right and flipped the coin the right way. Once you get to that
point, with one person ahead, there's nothing you can do to catch up unless
you are willing to take a decent risk.
>I did like placing those large wagers though.
It was fun, wasn't it? :-)
>> If it
>> had worked, it would have been spectacular. Unfortunately, WNVGATPG and
>> all that.
>This is true.
Which probably sorts out my team name for Yahoo next year, anyhow ...
--
|
|
|
| Re: [SBL 05/06] - Week 37 results [message #980746 ] |
Tue, 02 May 2006 18:15 |
|
According to <superman [at] spamxxblockuksf.org.uk>:
>I think TMAK psyched you all out.
Heh, maybe. You show us how it's done, then, Mikey. ;-)
--
|
|
|
| Re: [SBL 05/06] - Week 37 results [message #980747 ] |
Tue, 02 May 2006 18:22 |
|
"Joe Horowitz" <my_name [at] youblunder.co.youghey> wrote in message
news:crL5g.63823$tc.18235 [at] fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>
>
> GPWM, although at one point he and I both had about 700 - 800 Youks, and
> three hundred more than our nearest rivals. That I'm not still in with a
> shout going into the last three weeks suggests I maybe went a little wrong
> somewhere down the line.
You risked all your Youks in marginal siuations when you didn't need to - in
doing so you had the chance of opening up a big lead, but also risked going
broke like a poor gay child.
TMAK has played his big stack more conservatively, picking up a little here
and there and not putting large chunks at risk, and it seems to be paying
off. OTOH, he can still be caught in the final round of matches, whereas if
he'd gambled more in recent weeks he could be mathematically victorious
already.
Swings and Roundabouts.
I like Roundabouts.
BTN
|
|
|
| Re: [SBL 05/06] - Week 37 results [message #980748 ] |
Tue, 02 May 2006 18:28 |
|
"Vicky Conlan" <comps [at] riffraff.plig.net> wrote in message
news:e380hc$1jc3$1 [at] magenta.plig.net...
>
> Nah, it was just a case of Tony being a lot more lucky and the results
> turning up for him. It could have been any of us that did it. He just
> timed it right and flipped the coin the right way. Once you get to that
> point, with one person ahead, there's nothing you can do to catch up
> unless
> you are willing to take a decent risk.
Wow, that is so true, Vicky. What great insight into strategy. Next time you
see Gary Jones, you can explain that he makes his money because he just gets
dealt lots of lucky hands all the time...
Ahem.
>>I did like placing those large wagers though.
>
> It was fun, wasn't it? :-)
Yeah, TMAK could've got so much more out of the competition if only he'd
risked all his youks.
BTN
|
|
|
| Re: [SBL 05/06] - Week 37 results [message #980749 ] |
Tue, 02 May 2006 18:47 |
|
"Sir Benjamin Nunn" <bennunn [at] depro.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4bpfbaF12i3d1U1 [at] individual.net...
>
> "Joe Horowitz" <my_name [at] youblunder.co.youghey> wrote in message
> news:crL5g.63823$tc.18235 [at] fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>>
>>
>> GPWM, although at one point he and I both had about 700 - 800 Youks, and
>> three hundred more than our nearest rivals. That I'm not still in with a
>> shout going into the last three weeks suggests I maybe went a little
>> wrong somewhere down the line.
>
>
> You risked all your Youks in marginal siuations when you didn't need to -
> in doing so you had the chance of opening up a big lead, but also risked
> going broke like a poor gay child.
You have to take risks to win the SBL, and TonyMac might end up being proof
of this. His big risks paid off, mine mostly did but one or two didn't.
That's just the way it goes. Conlan might call it 'lucky', I'd tend more
towards 'better betcunting', but either way he wouldn't have the commanding
lead he has now if he'd played as safe as you or Mikey all season. He'd be
where you two are.
> TMAK has played his big stack more conservatively, picking up a little
> here and there and not putting large chunks at risk, and it seems to be
> paying off.
I'm afraid your memory is a little selective here. TMac staked AHY in week
28 (394) when he was already in the lead. He staked half his youks in week
31 (394 again), and then 650 of his 943 Youks in week 33. All these
betcunts were successful, and more than a little bit sexy.
I'm quite sure, looking back, that he doesn't regret the decision to bet AHY
in week 28, despite risking going broke like a poor gay child at the time.
I wouldn't agree that this was a stupid or needless bet for him to place,
like Dat says it's left him needing to take less risks on the final weeks
than anyone else.
> OTOH, he can still be caught in the final round of matches, whereas if
> he'd gambled more in recent weeks he could be mathematically victorious
> already.
Doubt it. Someone on 300 Youks right now could theoretically finish with
something in the region of 40,000, given some of the mismatched final
fixtures. Mathematically speaking. He'd have had to have gambled a _lot_
more in recent weeks, and given the paucity of shock results I'm not sure
that would have come off.
> Swings and Roundabouts.
And slides.
> I like Roundabouts.
I took teh slide.
--
Joe
Pay it fast it will be great..!!!
|
|
|
| Re: [SBL 05/06] - Week 37 results [message #980750 ] |
Tue, 02 May 2006 18:51 |
|
"Sir Benjamin Nunn" <bennunn [at] depro.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4bpfnjF12gnkaU1 [at] individual.net...
> "Vicky Conlan" <comps [at] riffraff.plig.net> wrote in message
> news:e380hc$1jc3$1 [at] magenta.plig.net...
>>
>> Nah, it was just a case of Tony being a lot more lucky and the results
>> turning up for him. It could have been any of us that did it. He just
>> timed it right and flipped the coin the right way. Once you get to that
>> point, with one person ahead, there's nothing you can do to catch up
>> unless
>> you are willing to take a decent risk.
>
>
> Wow, that is so true, Vicky. What great insight into strategy. Next time
> you see Gary Jones, you can explain that he makes his money because he
> just gets dealt lots of lucky hands all the time...
You really should have read my most recent post before you sent this one,
Ben. You're making yourself look a bit of a cunt. And this from the person
most prone, out of everyone I've ever encountered, to blaming absolutely
everything on luck.
Perhaps you should tell Gary Jones yourself.
> Ahem.
LMAO, lamo.
>>>I did like placing those large wagers though.
>> It was fun, wasn't it? :-)
>
> Yeah, TMAK could've got so much more out of the competition if only he'd
> risked all his youks.
He did, and he has. Do keep up.
--
Joe
Pay it fast it will be great..!!!
|
|
|
| Re: [SBL 05/06] - Week 37 results [message #980753 ] |
Tue, 02 May 2006 19:08 |
|
"Vicky Conlan" <comps [at] riffraff.plig.net> wrote in message
news:e380hc$1jc3$1 [at] magenta.plig.net...
> Nah, it was just a case of Tony being a lot more lucky and the results
> turning up for him. It could have been any of us that did it. He just
> timed it right and flipped the coin the right way. Once you get to that
> point, with one person ahead, there's nothing you can do to catch up
> unless
> you are willing to take a decent risk.
AWTWP. Like Mikey's recent big risks, which have thus far paid off. Ignore
the fat gheysayers.
If no-one bets ATY on the last week, Tmac will definitely win, and all
because he was brave enough to take some serious risks a few weeks back.
>>I did like placing those large wagers though.
>
> It was fun, wasn't it? :-)
Definitely. I think I started it all off, actually, we were all being
pretty sensible until I whacked everything on Madrid 3-0 and took a gutsy
stand against the boringcunts.
It all went mental from then on. It was like that Olympic 1500m when Steve
Cram broke halfway through the third lap and the commentator was all 'fuck
me he's gone early!11one!1' except he went on to win.
I was more Zola Budd, taking you down with me on the home straight.
> Which probably sorts out my team name for Yahoo next year, anyhow ...
I'm still in negotiations at the CojStad for next season. I'd like to stay
on, and they want me to stay on, but if I finish in second again I might
have to call it a Jellied day.
On an almost related note, fuck knows what's going to happen at The Valley
now. I could actually see Charlton getting relegated next year, they look
like a club on the brink of freefall.
--
Joe
Pay it fast it will be great..!!!
|
|
|
| Re: [SBL 05/06] - Week 37 results [message #980782 ] |
Tue, 02 May 2006 20:06 |
|
"Joe Horowitz" <my_name [at] youblunder.co.youghey> wrote in message news:W2M5g.64007$tc.31689 [at] fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
> You have to take risks to win the SBL, and TonyMac might end up being proof of this. His big risks paid off, mine
> mostly did but one or two didn't. That's just the way it goes. Conlan might call it 'lucky', I'd tend more towards
> 'better betcunting', but either way he wouldn't have the commanding lead he has now if he'd played as safe as you or
> Mikey all season. He'd be where you two are.
Firstly, you say that like it's a bad thing. I'm delighted with where
I am. 2nd position, 704 Youks heading into the last double-betcunt
weekend, getting to see TMAK's betcunt before I place my own. I'll
take that every time.
And secondly, you say it like Ben and I are in the same position.
That's very wrong.
--
Mike
|
|
|
| Re: [SBL 05/06] - Week 37 results [message #980800 ] |
Tue, 02 May 2006 21:45 |
|
"Joe Horowitz" <my_name [at] youblunder.co.youghey> wrote in message news:crL5g.63823$tc.18235 [at] fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
> GPWM, although at one point he and I both had about 700 - 800 Youks, and three hundred more than our nearest rivals.
> That I'm not still in with a shout going into the last three weeks suggests I maybe went a little wrong somewhere down
> the line.
I thought you played the SBL beautifully this season, Joe. I
liked your strategy quite a lot. Well, mostly. The one thing
I didn't get (and it wasn't just you) was how you seemed to
feel the need to keep up with TMAK's total.
If TMAK had 1400 Youks, people felt they needed to get to
1400 Youks, too. They didn't.
The final weekend of the SBL is a double-betcunt spectacular,
which allows you to incorporate the winnings on your first bet
into your second bet. Therefore, a difference of a couple of
hundred Youks is negligible. In fact, there's a very strong
argument that the leader is at a disadvantage considering
everyone gets to see exactly what they bet on before deciding
their own.
My one criticism of how you played the SBL, Joe, would be
that I got the impression you gave too much attention to the
league table before it mattered. Try to get it sorted before
next season, eh?
--
Mike
|
|
|
| Re: [SBL 05/06] - Week 37 results [message #980802 ] |
Tue, 02 May 2006 22:00 |
|
"Michael Cunningham" <superman [at] spamxxblockuksf.org.uk> wrote in message
news:OdN5g.8672$j7.304273 [at] news.indigo.ie...
> "Joe Horowitz" <my_name [at] youblunder.co.youghey> wrote in message
> news:W2M5g.64007$tc.31689 [at] fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>> You have to take risks to win the SBL, and TonyMac might end up being
>> proof of this. His big risks paid off, mine mostly did but one or two
>> didn't. That's just the way it goes. Conlan might call it 'lucky', I'd
>> tend more towards 'better betcunting', but either way he wouldn't have
>> the commanding lead he has now if he'd played as safe as you or Mikey all
>> season. He'd be where you two are.
>
> Firstly, you say that like it's a bad thing.
No, not at all. I'm just pointing out that Ben's assertion that TonyMac is
winning because he never took massive risks is a load of bollocks, and that
he currently has a massive total _because_ he took massive risks. Massive
risks that paid off.
Vicky and I have 0, because we took massive risks which didn't pay off.
More than anything, TonyMac has predicted a lot of correct football results
this season, and I actually think that has a lot to do with it.
> I'm delighted with where
> I am. 2nd position, 704 Youks heading into the last double-betcunt
> weekend, getting to see TMAK's betcunt before I place my own. I'll
> take that every time.
Quite right, you've played an excellent game all season, and taken risks
when you've needed to make up ground. You bet AYY on Liverpool last week,
did you not?
Was that foolish? I don't think so. Calculated risk, which paid off.
> And secondly, you say it like Ben and I are in the same position.
> That's very wrong.
GPWM. You've left him behind a bit because you took some big risks, betting
AYY and the suchlike.
I apologise and retract that part of my statement.
--
Joe
Pay it fast it will be great..!!!
|
|
|
| Re: [SBL 05/06] - Week 37 results [message #980820 ] |
Wed, 03 May 2006 00:22 |
|
According to <bennunn [at] depro.co.uk>:
>Wow, that is so true, Vicky. What great insight into strategy. Next time you
>see Gary Jones, you can explain that he makes his money because he just gets
>dealt lots of lucky hands all the time...
Rightyho.
>>>I did like placing those large wagers though.
>> It was fun, wasn't it? :-)
>Yeah, TMAK could've got so much more out of the competition if only he'd
>risked all his youks.
He wouldn't have, cos he didn't need to. There's no glory in winning from
the front.
--
|
|
|
| Re: [SBL 05/06] - Week 37 results [message #980831 ] |
Wed, 03 May 2006 03:08 |
|
"Michael Cunningham" <superman [at] spamxxblockuksf.org.uk> wrote in message
news:DFO5g.8674$j7.304199 [at] news.indigo.ie...
> I thought you played the SBL beautifully this season, Joe.
Thank-you.
> I liked your strategy quite a lot. Well, mostly. The one thing
> I didn't get (and it wasn't just you) was how you seemed to
> feel the need to keep up with TMAK's total.
You're close, but not quite right. As a general rule, I wanted to have more
Youks than anyone else, and for that to still be the case when the
competiton finished. I guess the ideal position to be in for the final week
would be 2nd, but only by a little bit, or fucking miles in front like
TonyMac.
There was a point at which TonyMac, Conlan and I were playing some
ridiculous game of chicken and one or more of us were bound to fall by the
wayside, but I hoped that it wouldn't be me.
> If TMAK had 1400 Youks, people felt they needed to get to
> 1400 Youks, too. They didn't.
Did I want to keep up with TonyMac? Not quite. I wanted to overtake him,
and have him blow all his Youks in his efforts to keep up with me. It was a
risky strategy, as percentages flew out the window and it came down to a
straight predictions face-off, which I lost, but I don't regret the fact
that I took that path. It was, as Vicky said, great fun.
> The final weekend of the SBL is a double-betcunt spectacular,
> which allows you to incorporate the winnings on your first bet
> into your second bet. Therefore, a difference of a couple of
> hundred Youks is negligible. In fact, there's a very strong
> argument that the leader is at a disadvantage considering
> everyone gets to see exactly what they bet on before deciding
> their own.
It's a flawed system in a way, and one I hope to address next season. Being
in first, i.e. having played the best for the first 37 weeks, shouldn't be a
disadvantage in the final week.
> My one criticism of how you played the SBL, Joe, would be
> that I got the impression you gave too much attention to the
> league table before it mattered. Try to get it sorted before
> next season, eh?
Pfft.
The league table always matters, Mikey, the league table always matters.
The player with the most Youks has the best options, unfortunately they need
big balls coupled with super-predicto skillz to press home that advantage.
TonyMac had bigger balls and superior predicto skillz than me this time, and
maybe even a little greater slice of luck, who knows. I won't be doing
things that much differently next time though.
--
Joe
Pay it fast it will be great..!!!
|
|
|
| Re: [SBL 05/06] - Week 37 results [message #980840 ] |
Wed, 03 May 2006 10:17 |
|
On 02 May 2006 Michael Cunningham blessed uk.sport.football
with this undeniable fact:
> "Martin" <news [at] mandab.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:MPG.1ec1652bf96ef954989ac3 [at] news.individual.net...
>> In article <vhI5g.8648$j7.304253 [at] news.indigo.ie>,
>> superman [at] spamxxblockuksf.org.uk says...
>>> I'll be reporting your poor performance to Joe.
>>>
>> TBH, that's nothing less than I'd expect from you.
>
> Keep talking, Martin. Every anti-Mikey comment you make
> just goes straight back to Joe.
>
> He'll deal with you in his own time.
>
>
I didn't see that as an anti-Mikey comment, more of a
compliment on your attention keeping everything running
smoothly.
--
poleson at gmail dot com
|
|
|
| Re: [SBL 05/06] - Week 37 results [message #980843 ] |
Wed, 03 May 2006 10:49 |
|
"Joe Horowitz" <my_name [at] youblunder.co.youghey> wrote in message
news:z6M5g.64034$tc.5764 [at] fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>
>> Wow, that is so true, Vicky. What great insight into strategy. Next time
>> you see Gary Jones, you can explain that he makes his money because he
>> just gets dealt lots of lucky hands all the time...
>
> You really should have read my most recent post before you sent this one,
> Ben. You're making yourself look a bit of a cunt.
Wow, somebody who just had a girlfriend move in with him points out that
someone else looks like a cunt...
> And this from the person most prone, out of everyone I've ever
> encountered, to blaming absolutely everything on luck.
Much of life is down to luck, yes, and all we can do is make decisions best
designed to manage that luck. Luck variance, obviously, is far less within
the rules of a competition with strictly limited variables and factors than
it is in real life.
In a world of myriad variables and unpredictable factors - like having a
happy life and successful relationships - I find that almost impossible.
Where odds and mathetmatics and logic reliably rule, I actually do rather
well. About as well as one can reasonably statistically expect, indeed.
I approached the SBL like a poker tournament, and in much the same way I'd
approach any betting proposition - to determine the optimum strategy and
stick to it. As it happens, I think I made a couple of bad plays, notably
last week, that I'm kicking myself over, and which I will make damn sure I
learn from.
The player I've admired most overall in this seasons SBL is Mikey. And if he
loses all his Youks in the final week, that won't change.
(Obviously it will change if he bets the same Youkage on the same result as
TMAK or something equally fucktard, but I'm pretty sure he won't. Mikey's
application of solid game theory has surprised and impressed me.)
> Perhaps you should tell Gary Jones yourself.
I'd like to. I've always admired the guy, and his friendly exterior always
suggests to me an inner anger, which I can identify with.
He'd be a formidable opponent in the betcunts league.
>> Yeah, TMAK could've got so much more out of the competition if only he'd
>> risked all his youks.
>
> He did, and he has. Do keep up.
Heh, OK, I concede that point about TMAK risking all of his Youks
unnecessarily once. I hadn't noticed that he'd ever done that, and now that
I know, I don't think it was an advisable move in the circumstances.
The SBL has illustrated, rather interestingly to me, the classic psychology
of the gambler, and their timeless mistake of being results-oriented, rather
than guided by sound decision making.
I'd love to see more people analysing their strategies in these threads,
because gambling psychology and game theory is a fascinating topic for me.
BTN
|
|
|
| Re: [SBL 05/06] - Week 37 results [message #980844 ] |
Wed, 03 May 2006 10:49 |
|
On 03 May 2006 Sir Benjamin Nunn blessed uk.sport.football
with this undeniable fact:
>
> Heh, OK, I concede that point about TMAK risking all of his
> Youks unnecessarily once. I hadn't noticed that he'd ever
> done that, and now that I know, I don't think it was an
> advisable move in the circumstances.
>
I'm not altogether sure that Tony wants to win and I think he
might have been secretly hoping to lose AHYs when he placed that
bet.
Just a feeling I have.
--
poleson at gmail dot com
|
|
|
| Re: [SBL 05/06] - Week 37 results [message #995240 ] |
Wed, 03 May 2006 12:40 |
|
"Michael Cunningham" <superman [at] spamxxblockuksf.org.uk> wrote in message
news:SvL5g.8666$j7.304222 [at] news.indigo.ie...
>>> Ben's Fulham betcunt was the bet of the weekend by some distance.
>>
>> Maybe it only felt like a sexy betcunt because it was all going very
>> wrong until right at the end?
>
> No, it was a great bet. An away win for a team that hadn't won away
> all season but had started to look more and more likely in recent weeks
> against a team in freefall. All at delicious odds. I'd say that
> qualifies
> as a very fine bet by any standards.
Strategically it should have been AMY though - either that or it should've
been a tiny Youkage, thus leaving enough for a 12/1 winner on the final day.
I played it badly, regardless of the outcome, and I hold my hand up there.
>> I fucked up, and I think it was the psychological thing of not wanting
>> to join the cuntformist cuntwank pack on 0 Youks at the end of the
>> season.
>
> Interesting. I think your principles have held you back a little this
> season, Ben. I mean, I know you like to think of people who hit
> zero Youks before the end of the game as sub-human scum -- and,
> in a very real way, they are -- but needs must and all that so I don't
> think you should be averse to an AYY bet when it's necessary. I
> think it's okay in this instance for you to gamble everything that you
> hold dear to give yourself a chance of victory. Nobody will judge you.
I'm really not sure what I was thinking, tbh. I guess I wanted to guarantee
staying ahead of the youkless cunts, which was a decision based on finishing
as high up the table as possible, rather than the glory of winning, which is
flawed.
Maybe I just didn't feel right about seeing a final table which looked like
this:
TMAK 1100
Parkes 99
somecunt 12
someothercunt 10
Poleson 1.2
Joe 0
Ben 0
Conlan 0
Everone else 0
BTN
|
|
|
| Re: [SBL 05/06] - Week 37 results [message #995241 ] |
Wed, 03 May 2006 12:56 |
|
On 03 May 2006 Sir Benjamin Nunn blessed uk.sport.football
with this undeniable fact:
>
> Maybe I just didn't feel right about seeing a final table
> which looked like this:
>
> TMAK 1100
> Parkes 99
> somecunt 12
> someothercunt 10
> Poleson 1.2
> Joe 0
> Ben 0
> Conlan 0
> Everone else 0
>
Looks perfect to me.
--
poleson at gmail dot com
|
|
|
| Re: [SBL 05/06] - Week 37 results [message #995242 ] |
Wed, 03 May 2006 13:08 |
|
"Joe Horowitz" <my_name [at] youblunder.co.youghey> wrote in message
news:imM5g.64151$tc.57493 [at] fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>
>> Nah, it was just a case of Tony being a lot more lucky and the results
>> turning up for him. It could have been any of us that did it. He just
>> timed it right and flipped the coin the right way. Once you get to that
>> point, with one person ahead, there's nothing you can do to catch up
>> unless
>> you are willing to take a decent risk.
>
> AWTWP. Like Mikey's recent big risks, which have thus far paid off.
> Ignore the fat gheysayers.
>
> If no-one bets ATY on the last week, Tmac will definitely win,
That's not strictly true though.
One only needs to bet sufficient Youks to end up with a total greater than
TMAK in the event of a certain pair of results. It might be ATY, it might be
83% it might only be 20%.
TMAK bets first. We will therefore know that his final tally will be one of
two Youkage amounts (or possibly a third in the highly unlikely event of an
abandonment, but this is scarcely worth considering).
For arguments sake, let's say that TMAK bets 200 of his 1112 Youks [at] 2. We
now have the information we need - after the game he will either have 912 or
1312 Youks.
Therefore Mikey (with 699) needs to place a betcunt that will return 1313
Youks or more to guarantee overtaking TMAC (not the same as winning because
other competitors who could overtake must be factored in), or a betcunt that
will return 913 Youks to guarantee overtaking TMAC in the event that TMACs
betcunt doesn't win. The net effect of the gamble is the same - Mikey will
need to overcome shorter odds if he believes that TMAC will lose, but TMAC
is more likely to lose if his own oddcunts are lengthier.
How can Mikey do this?
He could bet AHY [at] 1.9 and end up with either 1328 or 0
He could bet 399 Youks [at] 4 and end up with either 1896 or, more likely, 300
He could bet 50 Youks [at] 10 and end up with either 1149 or, much more likely,
649
What factors will influence Mikey's decision? Many, including:
- His perception of how TMAKs own betcunt is likely to do, and whether it's
worth taking a lower risk to return an amount of Youks above what TMAK will
have if loses, not what he will have if he wins.
- His observations of outsiders with a mathematical chance (like General,
Dat, Steve H and myself) and whether his betcunt would still be good to win
the league if a longshot came in for one of them.
- How much winning it outright matters as opposed to finishing high up the
table.
- Whether it's important to win it in style by a huge margin, or if pipping
TMAC by a single point would be satisfactory (subject to the risks of an
outsider overtaking them both)
My own strategy will take similar factors into account, but with a
difference because of my starting position. Likewise TMAC, who can either
play it defensively as he has been doing lately, or possibly take a chance
to protect against the outsiders backing all the long shots.
All in all, it's a fascinating contest, much like the final table of a poker
tournament. Of course, having a big stack is a massive advantage, but there
are still six of us in with a chance of winning this thing on the final day,
and that's great.
> On an almost related note, fuck knows what's going to happen at The Valley
> now. I could actually see Charlton getting relegated next year, they look
> like a club on the brink of freefall.
I don't usually credit managers with all that much impact, either for good
or for bad, but Charlton were treading water in the gutleagues and sharing a
ground with some cunts before Curbishley showed up. It /could/ all have been
timing and coincidence, but I suspect he achieved rather a lot, and Charlton
will miss him badly.
Conversely, I can actually see Coventry getting promoted next year, they
look like a club on the brink of the fast track.
BTN
|
|
|
| Re: [SBL 05/06] - Week 37 results [message #995243 ] |
Wed, 03 May 2006 13:15 |
|
"Robert Poleson" <sp [at] m.no> wrote in message
news:1146653788.4779.0 [at] ersa.uk.clara.net...
>>
>> Poleson 1.2
>>
>
> Looks perfect to me.
Everything looks perfect to you, Poleson. You have btnpierced.jpg framed and
hung on every wall, FFS.
BTN
|
|
|
| Re: [SBL 05/06] - Week 37 results [message #995244 ] |
Wed, 03 May 2006 13:32 |
|
"Sir Benjamin Nunn" <bennunn [at] depro.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4bram5F125396U1 [at] individual.net...
>
> "Joe Horowitz" <my_name [at] youblunder.co.youghey> wrote in message
> news:z6M5g.64034$tc.5764 [at] fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>> You really should have read my most recent post before you sent this one,
>> Ben. You're making yourself look a bit of a cunt.
>
>
> Wow, somebody who just had a girlfriend move in with him points out that
> someone else looks like a cunt...
LMAO, lamo. I'd have put money on you bringing that into this.
So, tell me, if a GYL liked you and wanted to move in with you, you'd
decline, right? You'd consider it cunty? I doubt it somehow.
Let's just stick to the SBL.
> I approached the SBL like a poker tournament, and in much the same way I'd
> approach any betting proposition - to determine the optimum strategy and
> stick to it. As it happens, I think I made a couple of bad plays, notably
> last week, that I'm kicking myself over, and which I will make damn sure I
> learn from.
>
> The player I've admired most overall in this seasons SBL is Mikey. And if
> he loses all his Youks in the final week, that won't change.
What if he'd lost all his youks last week?
The player I will admire most will be the cunt who wins.
> Heh, OK, I concede that point about TMAK risking all of his Youks
> unnecessarily once. I hadn't noticed that he'd ever done that, and now
> that I know, I don't think it was an advisable move in the circumstances.
That's all fair enough. We'll just have to agree to disagree, though,
because I think it was a fine move.
> The SBL has illustrated, rather interestingly to me, the classic
> psychology of the gambler, and their timeless mistake of being
> results-oriented, rather than guided by sound decision making.
Where I think you've missed something, though, is that you only ever
consider the odds with regards to your own score, as if this were real money
and the object were simply to amass as much as possible. If that were the
case, I'd agree about AMY bets and I wouldn't have placed any myself.
The way I always saw this was that the object was to finish with the highest
total, whatever that is. I'd rather have finished on ten Youks and won than
have 10,000 Youks and come second. It's not like we can spend them at the
end.
Therefore, odds of victory change relative to relative differences between
scores, and a low-wager carries a higher risk of not winning the comp in
some cases than a high one.
If Mikey had continued to place safe wagers over the last few weeks, he'd
have been ghambolling heavily on the long-odds of TonyMac blowing all his.
Therefore his AMY bet last week was less risky than a bet of three or four
youks, because it gave him a better chance of being in with a shout at the
end.
> I'd love to see more people analysing their strategies in these threads,
> because gambling psychology and game theory is a fascinating topic for me.
Of course. Why you felt the need to twist the conversation onto co-habiting
is beyond me.
FWIW, though, I stand by that decision as well.
--
Joe
Pay it fast it will be great..!!!
|
|
|
| Re: [SBL 05/06] - Week 37 results [message #995245 ] |
Wed, 03 May 2006 13:32 |
|
On 03 May 2006 Sir Benjamin Nunn blessed uk.sport.football
with this undeniable fact:
>
> "Robert Poleson" <sp [at] m.no> wrote in message
> news:1146653788.4779.0 [at] ersa.uk.clara.net...
>>>
>>> Poleson 1.2
>>>
>>
>> Looks perfect to me.
>
>
> Everything looks perfect to you, Poleson. You have
> btnpierced.jpg framed and hung on every wall, FFS.
>
True, but what I really want is btnpierced.png
I think it's fair to say we all do.
--
poleson at gmail dot com
|
|
|
| Re: [SBL 05/06] - Week 37 results [message #995246 ] |
Wed, 03 May 2006 13:41 |
|
"Sir Benjamin Nunn" <bennunn [at] depro.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4brhaiF134a6gU1 [at] individual.net...
>
> "Joe Horowitz" <my_name [at] youblunder.co.youghey> wrote in message
> news:imM5g.64151$tc.57493 [at] fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>> If no-one bets ATY on the last week, Tmac will definitely win,
>
>
> That's not strictly true though.
>
> One only needs to bet sufficient Youks to end up with a total greater than
> TMAK in the event of a certain pair of results. It might be ATY, it might
> be 83% it might only be 20%.
Yeah, I know. I should have said 'if no-one takes a massive risk'.
> I don't usually credit managers with all that much impact, either for good
> or for bad, but Charlton were treading water in the gutleagues and sharing
> a ground with some cunts before Curbishley showed up. It /could/ all have
> been timing and coincidence, but I suspect he achieved rather a lot, and
> Charlton will miss him badly.
AWTWP, sort of. It really depends who the next manager is. I think
Curbishley has a certain set of skills that would be an asset to any small
club, but I also think Charlton haven't managed to move forward one inch in
three years, despite at one point having a considerable transfer fund. I'm
not entirely convinced Curbs was ever going to take things any further with
Charlton, although I'd still disagree every time with the cunts who wanted
him sacked, because in the current climate simply kepping Charlton in the
Prem year after year was an achievement, and one which the next manager will
do well to emulate.
It's possible, though, that the next manager will bring some fresh ideas and
take the club forward to Europe'n'shit, in which case they won't miss Curbs
at all.
My biggest worry is that they simply won't be able to attract a decent
manager, just as they haven't really attracted decent players over the
years. Then they will miss Curbs.
> Conversely, I can actually see Coventry getting promoted next year, they
> look like a club on the brink of the fast track.
I'll be happy for you if that happens.
--
Joe
Pay it fast it will be great..!!!
|
|
|
| Re: [SBL 05/06] - Week 37 results [message #995247 ] |
Wed, 03 May 2006 13:47 |
|
"Joe Horowitz" <my_name [at] youblunder.co.youghey> wrote in message
news:Gx06g.85700$xt.50896 [at] fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
>>
>>
>> Wow, somebody who just had a girlfriend move in with him points out that
>> someone else looks like a cunt...
>
> LMAO, lamo. I'd have put money on you bringing that into this.
The odds would be very, very short.
> So, tell me, if a GYL liked you and wanted to move in with you, you'd
> decline, right? You'd consider it cunty? I doubt it somehow.
Yep, I'd be a big fucking cunt, and the guilt rush would hit me immediately.
Obviously I'd be less cunty than those who got a GTL moving in with them
before the age of 29 or before they were 60% through their life or whatever,
and less cunty than those who had a better relationship with their GTL, but
I'd be far more cunty than those who had even less than me in those
departments, and I'd never ever fucking forget it.
I caught myself complaining to myself about my miniscule payrise last week,
so I immediately gave a 'loan' to my unemployed friend who won't pay me
back, because he has less than me, and it alleviated the guilt.
>> The player I've admired most overall in this seasons SBL is Mikey. And if
>> he loses all his Youks in the final week, that won't change.
>
> What if he'd lost all his youks last week?
I also think he made the right kind of bet last week, as part of a
two-pronged final assault.
The only thing I would have done differently is to keep about 125 Youks in
reserve, to still give myself an outside chance in the final week in the
event of a loss in the penultimate week, without significantly affecting my
equity going into the final game in the expected event of a win.
> The player I will admire most will be the cunt who wins.
We're very different people, with different values.
Chelsea have won the Premiership this season, but I admire Wigan and West
Ham more.
>> The SBL has illustrated, rather interestingly to me, the classic
>> psychology of the gambler, and their timeless mistake of being
>> results-oriented, rather than guided by sound decision making.
>
> Where I think you've missed something, though, is that you only ever
> consider the odds with regards to your own score, as if this were real
> money and the object were simply to amass as much as possible. If that
> were the case, I'd agree about AMY bets and I wouldn't have placed any
> myself.
Not at all. I bet AMY when I needed to, and I should have done it again last
week, and made a mistake in not doing so.
The adjustment between SBL and real bets is like adjustment between cash
game and tournament poker, and something I'm very familiar with.
I do think, however, that there is some cachet to coming second, third etc.
in this competition, much like any other, and I don't like the mentality
that winning is everything, and second place is as good as last place.
> The way I always saw this was that the object was to finish with the
> highest total, whatever that is. I'd rather have finished on ten Youks
> and won than have 10,000 Youks and come second. It's not like we can
> spend them at the end.
What? You mean nobody told you?
Shit, I'll really feel bad when you see me, Mikey and TMAK driving around in
our new cars.
> Therefore, odds of victory change relative to relative differences between
> scores, and a low-wager carries a higher risk of not winning the comp in
> some cases than a high one.
AWTWP.
> If Mikey had continued to place safe wagers over the last few weeks, he'd
> have been ghambolling heavily on the long-odds of TonyMac blowing all his.
> Therefore his AMY bet last week was less risky than a bet of three or four
> youks, because it gave him a better chance of being in with a shout at the
> end.
AWTWP. And I discuss such scenarios in another strand of this very
threadcunt. It's what makes the competition interesting.
>> I'd love to see more people analysing their strategies in these threads,
>> because gambling psychology and game theory is a fascinating topic for
>> me.
>
> Of course. Why you felt the need to twist the conversation onto
> co-habiting is beyond me.
And yet you anticipated the twist well in advance. Subconsciously feeding me
all the way.
> FWIW, though, I stand by that decision as well.
Cunt.
BTN
|
|
|
| Re: [SBL 05/06] - Week 37 results [message #995248 ] |
Wed, 03 May 2006 13:46 |
|
On 03 May 2006 Joe Horowitz blessed uk.sport.football with
this undeniable fact:
>
> My biggest worry is that they simply won't be able to
> attract a decent manager, just as they haven't really
> attracted decent players over the years. Then they will
> miss Curbs.
>
I wish some club would bring back Ranieri. I miss him so much.
--
poleson at gmail dot com
|
|
|
Gehe zu:
aktuelle Zeit: Thu Jan 8 15:25:59 CET 2009
Insgesamt benötigte Zeit, um die Seite zu erzeugen: 0.18376 Sekunden |
