• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

Board Bets

corksens said:
I absolutely wouldn't pay. He didn't score 40 goals.

If the bet was that Kessel would score on a 40 goal pace with a minimum of 70 games then I would pay.
Click to expand...

yet you're having a problem with me holding Sensible to the letter of our wager?

Goal Differential officially includes the goals awarded to shootout winners. Just like 39 is officially not 40.

#TechnicallyCorky
 
Habspatrol said:
Probably... but what if you never thought to? The bet was just "I bet you that Kessel scores 40 this year" and you say "You're on!"

You'd definitely not be paying out if Kessel scored 39 in 70. Even though you understand that he's be considered a 40 goal scorer on this board.
Click to expand...

You know full well, having made similar bets yourself in the very recent past, that most goal wagers on here are contingent upon a specific number of games being played by the player (s) involved.

So people already take care of that contingency well ahead of time. There's simply no precedent in our history of board wagers for what SENSible is suggesting here: not using the officially-tracked statistics.
 
corksens said:
With 3 regulation/OT wins in the past 20 games I'm surprised in your confidence.
Click to expand...

That just means that the team is that much more likely to go on a torrid run.

The season is typically defined by 10 games that separate playoff teams from non-playoff teams. The rest of the campaign is alternating segments of stellar play and poor play.
 
MindzEye said:
yet you're having a problem with me holding Sensible to the letter of our wager?

Goal Differential officially includes the goals awarded to shootout winners. Just like 39 is officially not 40.

#TechnicallyCorky
Click to expand...
Goal differential is simple - goals for minus goals against.

If I made a bet that the Sens would score 200 goals and they scored 197 w/ 4 shootout winners for a total of 201, I wouldn't be trying to claim my prize.
 
JaysCyYoung said:
When in the history of your posting on this forum have you ever respected anything zeke has posted regarding numbers? You've systematically mocked, insulted, berated, and slammed him at every available occasion for twisting numbers, making them look beneficial to the Leafs, being biased, choosing limited sample sizes or too large a sample size, not including data, excluding data, and now during the one time that it has the potential to affect you negatively - strangely enough just when a monetary wager is now at stake here - you suddenly decide to put some stock into what he says?

I'm not buying the lemonade that you're selling, sorry.
Click to expand...

Zeke is part of the bet and accepts the numbers.

Player is part of the bet and accepts the numbers.

Jays is a pussy who wouldn't join the bet, so you can STFU about it as your opinion is worthless.
 
I'm pretty shocked they include the shootout goals in goal differentials. They don't count as goals against so it is weird as they count as goals for. Seems like it is a bit contradictory.

If I was betting on goal differential I wouldn't be thinking Shootout goals would be included. Does anyone know if they count all goals or just the game winning one? It's kind of an interesting thing they are doing.
 
corksens said:
Goal differential is simple - goals for minus goals against.

If I made a bet that the Sens would score 200 goals and they scored 197 w/ 4 shootout winners for a total of 201, I wouldn't be trying to claim my prize.
Click to expand...

But Sensible clearly referenced a different definition immediately prior to asking for a bet. You know that makes a difference.
 
corksens said:
Evidently.

But Mindz chose not to clarify the rules, despite the possibility for confusions and others bringing it up.
Click to expand...

And neither did Sensible... I can't say for certain if it was a mere oversight on one or both ends or perhaps it was calculated on one or both sides... but the fact is that there was no clarification from either of them so you absolutely have to go by the wording and it was just "goal differential" which as has been pointed out several times is an NHL tracked statistic. If the wording had been "team +/-" then I'd see an argument... but "goal differential" really does refer to what the NHL tracks. It's not like it's just a natural term that someone is likely to say if they aren't referring to the actual tracked statistic.

It's like saying they'll have a better Corsi but then saying "well I was only referring to shots on net" because who really cares about shots that don't hit the net?
 
Blueman said:
I'm pretty shocked they include the shootout goals in goal differentials. They don't count as goals against so it is weird as they count as goals for. Seems like it is a bit contradictory.

If I was betting on goal differential I wouldn't be thinking Shootout goals would be included. Does anyone know if they count all goals or just the game winning one? It's kind of an interesting thing they are doing.
Click to expand...

They only count the game-winner. Otherwise teams would be scoring a tremendous number of additional goals per game and the GF category in the standings would read like something out of a 1980s issue of Total Hockey.
 
Only "a" winner. Not even "the" winner.

The goal scorer himself doesn't get credit. The goalie who allows the goal doesn't have it count against his totals.

It's exclusively counted within the goal differential stat as a tie-break measure. It has no relevance when comparing two teams - and it most certainly hasn't been leaned on in the past in board discussions.

Notice how quiet zeke is on this topic? He agrees with Sensible, but doesn't want to sewer Mindz.
 
hockeylover said:
But Sensible clearly referenced a different definition immediately prior to asking for a bet. You know that makes a difference.
Click to expand...
Hardly "clear" and even then two other posters (both the boards goto numbers guys) made the appropriate clarification. Certainly early enough in the season to be valid.
 
but the fact is that there was no clarification from either of them so you absolutely have to go by the wording and it was just "goal differential" which as has been pointed out several times is an NHL tracked statistic.
Click to expand...
There was a clarification - by everyone but mindz.
 
corksens said:
Hardly "clear" and even then two other posters (both the boards goto numbers guys) made the appropriate clarification. Certainly early enough in the season to be valid.
Click to expand...

If it's not in the original agreement, it's never early enough to be valid.
 
MindzEye said:
The original terms of the bet were clear. Surely you're not going to work under the assumption that Sensible has always blindly accepted the way Zeke crunches numbers?
Click to expand...

C'mon Mindz, you're better than this. The original terms of the bet were "goal differential". Not 'official NHL' goal differential, just plain goal differential. The plain meaning of goal differential, I would think, is very obvious (goals for - goals against). Regardless, nowhere did either of you clarify specifically which 'goal differential' you were referring to, those were the only words used.

Far from clear. On the one hand, you have the plain meaning. On the other, you have the NHL tiebreak. Different sites use each in their standings.

Sure, Sensi used the NHL differential when it benefitted him a few posts earlier.
Since the season started, the trolling **** has been regularly updating the bet, using straight goal differential. When there was a question about which one to use, everybody seemed to accept actual goal differential (not NHL). There's been not a peep about it until now, and (I'm taking his word on this, which may bite me) zeke and player have been consistent with that approach. So I guess my question is why all of a sudden you feel the need to correct him on this?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top