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

Board Bets

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...

And then proceeded to use the other (conventional) definition to update the bet for the first half of the season. "You know that makes a difference".

I should caveat all my posts by saying I have no love for sensible, and hope he loses. But arguing about the terms, halfway through the season, when 3 parties have been consistent in their definition? Really?
 
I think it's lame that Sensible referenced goal differentials with SO numbers last year, made a bet immediately after with this definition in mind and then changed his definition when the Leafs started winning shootouts. But ultimately I still think the Leafs win this either way. Leafs just happen to be coming off an awful blowout game but they've been ahead the whole year.
 
Wayward DP said:
And then proceeded to use the other (conventional) definition to update the bet for the first half of the season. "You know that makes a difference".

I should caveat all my posts by saying I have no love for sensible, and hope he loses. But arguing about the terms, halfway through the season, when 3 parties have been consistent in their definition? Really?
Click to expand...

Yeah, sure. Once the tables turned and the Leafs no longer sucked at shootouts. Pretty convenient. But like I said, I think this works out for ME at the end of the day anyway.
 
Wayward DP said:
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.
Click to expand...

Because "goal differential" is an officially tracked statistic. Why do I have to clarify something that is already institutionally accepted? It's like making a bet about which team gets more wins during the regular season and then complaining that you really meant ROW (regular + OT) and to omit shootouts. "Wins" are a clearly tracked NHL statistic, just like goal differential is.

Sure, Sensi used the NHL differential when it benefitted him a few posts earlier.
Click to expand...

#salientpoint. When he did that, he set the clarification for what goal differential meant to him, and what he was then basing his wager on.

Since the season started, the trolling **** has been regularly updating the bet
Click to expand...

This is actually false. He mistakenly thought that the bet was on which team would score more goals, until HL dug up the original bet.

using straight goal differential. When there was a question about which one to use, everybody seemed to accept actual goal differential (not NHL).
Click to expand...

Clearly, everyone didn't. Player & Zeke allowed Sensible to change the original terms of the bet, I never did. That's entirely up to them.

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?
Click to expand...

Because I checked his numbers for the first time when he posted that both clubs were tied at -8. Prior to that I hadn't fact checked his use of goal diff numbers, when I did I posted the official NHL numbers and that has brought us to where we are right now.
 
Wayward DP said:
And then proceeded to use the other (conventional) definition to update the bet for the first half of the season. "You know that makes a difference".

I should caveat all my posts by saying I have no love for sensible, and hope he loses. But arguing about the terms, halfway through the season, when 3 parties have been consistent in their definition? Really?
Click to expand...

I'm the only one holding to the original terms of the wager. I'm the only one who has been consistent in the definition of the term "goal differential". You can argue that the definition I'm working under is a flawed one, and I'd agree...Shootouts suck, but the ****er made a bet with those included in the terms, I accepted the bet on his terms and here we are.
 
hockeylover said:
I think it's lame that Sensible referenced goal differentials with SO numbers last year, made a bet immediately after with this definition in mind and then changed his definition when the Leafs started winning shootouts. But ultimately I still think the Leafs win this either way. Leafs just happen to be coming off an awful blowout game but they've been ahead the whole year.
Click to expand...

#SalientPointII
 
hockeylover said:
I think it's lame that Sensible referenced goal differentials with SO numbers last year, made a bet immediately after with this definition in mind and then changed his definition when the Leafs started winning shootouts. But ultimately I still think the Leafs win this either way. Leafs just happen to be coming off an awful blowout game but they've been ahead the whole year.
Click to expand...
It might be careless and lame - but it's not like the clarification (when it was made with zeke and player) really gave anyone an advantage. It was just a clarification to make sure that everyone was on the same page with what "goal differential" means - and always has meant on this board.
 
MindzEye said:
Because "goal differential" is an officially tracked statistic. Why do I have to clarify something that is already institutionally accepted? It's like making a bet about which team gets more wins during the regular season and then complaining that you really meant ROW (regular + OT) and to omit shootouts. "Wins" are a clearly tracked NHL statistic, just like goal differential is.
Click to expand...

And when you agreed upon the bet, was there any explicit mention of using the "officially tracked NHL goal differential"? You've implied that term into the agreement, but at the time, nobody specified.

I'm waiting for somebody to argue the plain meaning of goal differential is anything other than goals for - goals against.

#salientpoint. When he did that, he set the clarification for what goal differential meant to him, and what he was then basing his wager on.
Click to expand...

A bit of revisionist history no? The bet was 'goal differential'. Which 'goal differential' was not clarified when the bet was made. The first evidence of 'clarification' can be found in this thread when there were conflicting numbers. And the overwhelming evidence is that all the participants, aside from you, accepted conventional goal differential as the measuring stick.

This is actually false. He mistakenly thought that the bet was on which team would score more goals, until HL dug up the original bet.
Click to expand...

Be that as it may, my statement is still true. He has been regularly updating the bet, even if he got it wrong to start.

Clearly, everyone didn't. Player & Zeke allowed Sensible to change the original terms of the bet, I never did. That's entirely up to them.

Because I checked his numbers for the first time when he posted that both clubs were tied at -8. Prior to that I hadn't fact checked his use of goal diff numbers, when I did I posted the official NHL numbers and that has brought us to where we are right now.
Click to expand...

This is pretty weak. It was mentioned explicitly in this thread a while back, and there seemed to be no opposition to using Sensible's numbers... in fact the consensus appears to have been using them up until this point. I find it hard to believe you weren't aware of this until now...although I concede it's possible, if you haven't read this thread since the start of the season...
 
MindzEye said:
What does my bet with Sensible have to do with anyone else but myself and Sensible?
Click to expand...

This is a fair point. I just think its disingenuous, after having measured goal differential excluding shootouts to this point in the season, to make a stink about it now.
 
This board has always defined goal differential as goals for minus goals against - largely due to our overwhelming mutual disdain for the shootout.

Unless it was explicitly stated that you are using the NHL standings for the bet, I think the board consensus should apply...as player and zeke make sure of.
 
Even then the solution is simple.

Come to an agreement on how the bet should operate moving forward - as Sensible tried to do - or void it.
 
Well, it shouldn't matter at the end of the day, the Leafs should handily win both.

And ****, I feel dirty inside agreeing with sensible.
 
Wayward DP said:
And when you agreed upon the bet, was there any explicit mention of using the "officially tracked NHL goal differential"?
Click to expand...

He explicitly used the officially tracked NHL goal differential as part of his argument in the run up to offering the wager, 9 posts prior to offering the wager.

You've implied that term into the agreement, but at the time, nobody specified.
Click to expand...

He did, quite clearly specify. And again, since when does something with an official designation require additional clarity. When you're introducing an alternative to the official meaning, then I agree that additional clarification would be necessary.

I'm waiting for somebody to argue the plain meaning of goal differential is anything other than goals for - goals against.
Click to expand...

Call NHL head office



A bit of revisionist history no? The bet was 'goal differential'. Which 'goal differential' was not clarified when the bet was made.
Click to expand...

Nor did Habsy and I need to clarify when we made a bet last season about the standings...the fact that the leafs and habs had an identical number of regular + overtime wins didn't mean shit. Habsy won the bet because as per official NHL tracking of statistics, he won the bet.

The first evidence of 'clarification' can be found in this thread when there were conflicting numbers. And the overwhelming evidence is that all the participants, aside from you, accepted conventional goal differential as the measuring stick.
Click to expand...

I wasn't aware of the discussion that took place and nobody cared to approach me with it.

Be that as it may, my statement is still true. He has been regularly updating the bet, even if he got it wrong to start.
Click to expand...

and I have regularly failed to fact check his numbers when he would update it. I once noted that we were still winning with the numbers he posted, that's been my only involvement in 'tracking' the bet until now. Why would I concern myself with the troll being a troll, for 82 ****ing games, every time he wants to troll on the subject?



This is pretty weak. It was mentioned explicitly in this thread a while back, and there seemed to be no opposition to using Sensible's numbers... in fact the consensus appears to have been using them up until this point. I find it hard to believe you weren't aware of this until now...although I concede it's possible, if you haven't read this thread since the start of the season...
Click to expand...


Why would I read a thread that was ****ing buried? The thread resurfaced on November 18th, and then disappeared until yesterday.
 
corksens said:
This board has always defined goal differential as goals for minus goals against - largely due to our overwhelming mutual disdain for the shootout.

Unless it was explicitly stated that you are using the NHL standings for the bet, I think the board consensus should apply...as player and zeke make sure of.
Click to expand...

How does him using the official NHL numbers, 9 ****ing posts prior to offer the bet, not count as "explicitly stating" something?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top