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

Board Bets

JaysCyYoung said:
He's already said that he will pay up.

You've basically been granted a tremendous, tremendous advantage by him from the outset and still have the gall to complain. Stop being a whiner, you've got a leg up on him already.
Click to expand...

I've clearly stated that I will pay up if I lose both people understanding of the bet and that I don't expect him to pay up unless the same applies to him.

Currently, I'm minus 7 on his understanding and tied on mine. How is that any advantage to me?

And more importantly, what "tremendous advantage" do you mistakenly think he's offering me?
 
MindzEye said:
You understood the bet just fine. Your usage of NHL official goal differential minutes before the bet was offered underlines that fact. You've admitted that you're going to welch if you lose, I've accepted that fact and have moved on.
Click to expand...

Please show me where I stated IN THE BET that we would use the NHL tiebreaker column to decide the bet.

If you want to lawyer this thing, let's do it...

You inference from a previous post lead to your confusion and it is the reason I'm offering a compromise.
 
SENSible said:
Please show me where I stated IN THE BET that we would use the NHL tiebreaker column to decide the bet.
Click to expand...

You said goal differential. It only exists officially in one place.

If you want to lawyer this thing, let's do it...
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure it's done.

You inference from a previous post lead to your confusion and it is the reason I'm offering a compromise.
Click to expand...

You clearly used the official version of the definition in your most recent post referencing goal differential, and then made a bet using wording with an official NHL definition without offering up any alternative definition.

You wanted to "lawyer this thing", there you go: #lawyered
 
Your argument is "but Zeke & Player said" Vs "NHL's official definition"

You've already admitted that you're going to welch, just accept that you're a scumbag and move on. It's nothing that we didn't already know. Just like my being a pedantic ******* about it, you're not surprising anyone.
 
MindzEye said:
Your argument is "but Zeke & Player said" Vs "NHL's official definition"

You've already admitted that you're going to welch, just accept that you're a scumbag and move on. It's nothing that we didn't already know. Just like my being a pedantic ******* about it, you're not surprising anyone.
Click to expand...
Just admit that you are a rigid scumbag and move on.

He's provided more than enough avenues to allow the bet to continue in the vein that everyone understood.

But you don't want to lose your edge based on a technicality.

For every time you call him a welcher just remember you are being dishonest.
 
MindzEye said:
You said goal differential. It only exists officially in one place.
Click to expand...

Goal differential exists in every league where score is kept. It is a widely understood concept (by most)
If you wanted to use the NHL's tiebreaker column as the official arbitrator of the bet, you should have made that clear and saved yourself the confusion.

You wanted to "lawyer this thing", there you go: #lawyered
Click to expand...

Perhaps you should consider going back to law school...

Goal differential exist on the nhl standings page for the sole purpose of breaking ties.


The greater differential between goals for and against for the entire regular season. NOTE: In standings a victory in a shootout counts as one goal for, while a shootout loss counts as one goal against.
Click to expand...

That number exist for the standings only and is not an official stat or definition.

You've already admitted that you will welch on the bet if you lose based on the teams goals for vs goals against, so I've accepted that you are just playing true to form.

If you failed to make it clear that you would only accept the NHL tiebreaker column as the definition of the term, then it sucks to be you. YOU don't get to add it later on, when there are perfectly reasonable alternative interpretations.
 
corksens said:
Just admit that you are a rigid scumbag and move on.

He's provided more than enough avenues to allow the bet to continue in the vein that everyone understood.

But you don't want to lose your edge based on a technicality.

For every time you call him a welcher just remember you are being dishonest.
Click to expand...

He's been full of shit the whole time.

The funny thing is, the compromise I'm offering still gives him an advantage, just not as big a one as he thinks he can gain by his dishonesty.
 
corksens said:
Just admit that you are a rigid scumbag and move on.
Click to expand...

I believe that I just referred to myself as a "pedantic *******". I do somewhat object to the term scumbag as it suggests that there's no moral code at work, which would be inaccurate. But I've seen you twist yourself into about a half dozen hypocritical pretzels while making your "arguments" so far this afternoon so frankly, your judgements don't really concern me much.

He's provided more than enough avenues to allow the bet to continue in the vein that everyone understood.
Click to expand...

He's provided me an avenue where I can either accept altered terms of our original bet, or not have the bet be worth **** all to me. Nothing more.

But you don't want to lose your edge based on a technicality.
Click to expand...

You keep calling it a technicality, when it's the bet. I'm holding him to the bet. Not a technicality, the bet. The terms of the bet were absolutely clear.

For every time you call him a welcher just remember you are being dishonest.
Click to expand...

Rich.Creamery.Butter
 
You know. He knows. Everyone knows what the bet was on.

The bet was on which team would score and be scored on the most. Not what is listed in one column on NHL.com for tie-break purposes.
 
SENSible said:
Goal differential exists in every league where score is kept. It is a widely understood concept (by most)
If you wanted to use the NHL's tiebreaker column as the official arbitrator of the bet, you should have made that clear and saved yourself the confusion.
Click to expand...

Adorable. The only league that is pertinent is the NHL, and the only place that they track it is on their standings page. You yourself set that precedent, a fact I see you're spinning like crazy to try to get everyone to forget.



Perhaps you should consider going back to law school...

Goal differential exist on the nhl standings page for the sole purpose of breaking ties.
Click to expand...

Which is of slightly higher importance than Zeke & Player's statistical machinations, no?


That number exist for the standings only and is not an official stat or definition.
Click to expand...

It's absolutely an official statistic. It is an official team statistic that is used as part of the tie breaker process. If it wasn't an official team statistic, it couldn't be used to dictate the fate of multi million dollar franchises.

You've already admitted that you will welch on the bet if you lose based on the teams goals for vs goals against, so I've accepted that you are just playing true to form.
Click to expand...

So cute.

If you failed to make it clear that you would only accept the NHL tiebreaker column as the definition of the term, then it sucks to be you. YOU don't get to add it later on, when there are perfectly reasonable alternative interpretations.
Click to expand...

You set the precedent and then used a term with an official definition. This is pure hilarity.
 
corksens said:
You know. He knows. Everyone knows what the bet was on.

The bet was on which team would score and be scored on the most. Not what is listed in one column on NHL.com for tie-break purposes.
Click to expand...

I had no expectation that the leafs would be shootout pimps this season, none. I took the bet expecting them to be giving up a shootout handicap.
 
Zeke and Player took the same bet based on my same post and you are the only one trying to lawyer your way into an advantageous position...

The stats were posted multiple times based on pure goals for vs goals against. You have 50,000 ****ing posts on this board and comment on EVERYTHING. When the bet was going your way and the stats were being posted you didn't say a word. When the Sens tied the leafs you started with this BS routine and were trying to win on a technicality even before you found apart of mine using the term goal differential.

You aren't just a pedantic prick, you're full of shit.
 
MindzEye said:
Never seen anyone cry so much over being held to the terms of an agreement.
Click to expand...

You assumed that the term used in a previous post was pertinent in the terms of agreement.

Tell me lawyer-wannabe, how far does "assume" get you in court?

You wanted that in the terms, you need to put it there. Everyone else involved knew it meant goals for - goals against.

We're tied right now. I expect you to honour the bet as will I.
 
SENSible said:
You assumed that the term used in a previous post was pertinent in the terms of agreement.

Tell me lawyer-wannabe, how far does "assume" get you in court?

You wanted that in the terms, you need to put it there. Everyone else involved knew it meant goals for - goals against.

We're tied right now. I expect you to honour the bet as will I.
Click to expand...

#OfficialDefinition

You used to use it, then it didn't support your argument anymore.
 
And look what I found...back to back post on Dec 11th.

12-11-2013, 11:05 PM #1267
SENSible
Super-Star

Join Date
Jun 2007
Posts
3,222
Re: Leafs - Sens - Habs 2013-14
Goal differential update

Sens goals for 91 goals against 100 Differential -9

Leafs goals for 83 goals against 88 Differential -5

Leafs record just starting to come back to reality, as are many of their fans.

You'd think this board would be used to the Leafs fast start routine by now, but you never seem to learn.
Edit Post Reply Reply With Quote
12-11-2013, 11:52 PM #1268
MindzEye
Wayward Ditch Pig
Myth Busted
Join Date
May 2007
Location
The Dirty North
Posts
45,915
Re: Leafs - Sens - Habs 2013-14
Click to expand...

When the Leafs were still winning the bet, you commented on my post but didn't dispute the calculations.

Everyone on here knows how you will never let anything go, so you obviously had no problem with the calculations I posted.

Funny, you never disputed them at all, until it looked like you were going to lose the bet and then all of a sudden you want to add a proviso to the bet. Transparent BS
 
SENSible said:
Please show me where I stated (or you stated) we'd use the NHL tie breaking column for the bet.
Click to expand...

It's implied when you use a term with an official definition. If the bet was concerning "wins", "losses", "goals", etc the default is always to take the official definition of it unless explicitly stated otherwise. You didn't state otherwise and went even further by showing your familiarity and level of comfort with the official definition 9 posts prior. You set the precedent that you were both familiar with the official statistic and comfortable with it as the definition of goal differential. See my signature for proof of that. The only play the Leafs and Sens were tied in goal differential last season, was in the official NHL tracked team statistic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top