MonkeyF0cker Posted June 12, 2019 Report Share Posted June 12, 2019 And wrong... again. So playing FF and full game isn't highly correlated and opens the door to shot taking. It also wasn't an agreed upon rule previously in this contest. Understood. It's no wonder why you're a handyman with a job as a forum moderator. Fucking dipshit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharp Square Posted June 12, 2019 Author Report Share Posted June 12, 2019 So we can change the rules and extend the contest because of unforeseen circumstances but can't change a rule that YOU forgot to include to remove shot taking. Yeah. Not cheating. LOL. Sigh.... extending the contest was something that happened we could not anticipate. The contest isn't longer because of it as those days were missed because of something that happened outside of this contest so we added them to the end to make up for it. Players are just getting days back that were previously missed because of something they had no control over. How hard is that to understand. It's not a conspiracy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingRevolver Posted June 12, 2019 Report Share Posted June 12, 2019 So playing FF and full game isn't highly correlated and opens the door to shot taking. It also wasn't an agreed upon rule previously in this contest. Understood. It's no wonder why you're a handyman with a job as a forum moderator. Fucking dipshit. We're not doing parlays, idiot. It's just as easy to lose a bunch of plays than it is to win them. If it was going to be a big deal you should've said something from the beginning. Always easier to say something later on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MonkeyF0cker Posted June 12, 2019 Report Share Posted June 12, 2019 Sigh.... extending the contest was something that happened we could not anticipate. The contest isn't longer because of it as those days were missed because of something that happened outside of this contest so we added them to the end to make up for it. Players are just getting days back that were previously missed because of something they had no control over. How hard to that to understand. But we can modify the contest for that. Right? Can't remove the shot takers though! Go fuck yourself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharp Square Posted June 12, 2019 Author Report Share Posted June 12, 2019 But we can modify the contest for that. Right? Can't remove the shot takers though! Go fuck yourself. we gave back days that players would have had anyway if the hack had not taken place. I mean for fucks sake Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dingo Posted June 12, 2019 Report Share Posted June 12, 2019 because of the problems earlier, I feel like the deadline should be extended as we missed a couple few weeks of playsMonkey,I think it was your buddy WVU that asked for an extension He always was a shit disturber Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dingo Posted June 12, 2019 Report Share Posted June 12, 2019 I may be even more confused. Lol If no one has already done this, could be now stated that there is no more than one side and one total allowed per player per game....whether you want you use on FF or full game That would prevent doubling up or taking opposite teams FF/game....unless doing THAT is ok. I’m not trying to look at angles per se. I just have a lot of plays to make and knowing myself, I will put it off till last minute and wanted to clarify. I’m OK with anything.... Just as long as we are all playing by the same rules and have been under the same understanding. Unfortunately all the scenarios aren’t always thought of when drawing up the rules as SS said. I know he asked for input. I probably didn’t think about it enough personally.Doesn’t sound like someone wanting to take a shot!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingRevolver Posted June 12, 2019 Report Share Posted June 12, 2019 ZERO ADVANTAGE playing "correlated plays" in a contest when you're not getting parlay odds. That's a fact, Jack. Sorry. Doing these "correlated plays" can possibly give you a good swing up or a bad swing down because they're tied together, but you're not getting an actual advantage because you're not getting the parlay odds. Do I really have to explain this? Come on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deemer Posted June 12, 2019 Report Share Posted June 12, 2019 ZERO ADVANTAGE playing "correlated plays" in a contest when you're not getting parlay odds. That's a fact, Jack. Sorry. Doing these "correlated plays" can possibly give you a good swing up or a bad swing down because they're tied together, but you're not getting an actual advantage because you're not getting the parlay odds. Do I really have to explain this? Come on.Not really true here. If I’m down 14 units it’s much harder to go 14-0 on plays than 7 FF and 7 Full Game same 7 mlb games.... I’ve always been against that shit Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingRevolver Posted June 12, 2019 Report Share Posted June 12, 2019 Not really true here. If I’m down 14 units it’s much harder to go 14-0 on plays than 7 FF and 7 Full Game same 7 mlb games.... I’ve always been against that shitNo, it is true. No advantage other than trying to go for a big swing (that can go either way). Do I need to get Rito and Slim in here? I'm not saying it should or shouldn't be allowed in a contest (that's up to participants to decide BEFORE the contest starts), but there's no advantage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingRevolver Posted June 12, 2019 Report Share Posted June 12, 2019 Not really true here. If I’m down 14 units it’s much harder to go 14-0 on plays than 7 FF and 7 Full Game same 7 mlb games... I’ve always been against that shitNext time say it before the contest starts, and we can all agree to it. But let's not act like there's a big injustice here. OK, Monkey Jr.? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomorrow's Newspaper Posted June 12, 2019 Report Share Posted June 12, 2019 We're not doing parlays, idiot. It's just as easy to lose a bunch of plays than it is to win them. If it was going to be a big deal you should've said something from the beginning. Always easier to say something later on. you cant seriously say that it isn't a huge advantage for someone to play correlated plays, can you? If you are ten games back is it easier to go 5-0 or 10-0? The only reason I didnt bring it up after sharp sent out the rules is because he addressed that specific question and said of course it isn't allowed. Figured it was common sense. It is what it is. I appreciate what sharp does here and don't think he was heping anyone specifically. I do think he is wrong with this ruling those but understand how it would be hard to change it now even though most of us thought that was the way it was Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomorrow's Newspaper Posted June 12, 2019 Report Share Posted June 12, 2019 Next time say it before the contest starts, and we can all agree to it. But let's not act like there's a big injustice here. OK, Monkey Jr.? and it was discussed before the contest and ruled on. Here is what was said. This is one of the angles I didn't add in, will address it now and get it out the way, Will not be allowed to play both the side and First 5 in the same game. This will be added to the rules above on the next posting! Side + total in the same game is allowed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingRevolver Posted June 12, 2019 Report Share Posted June 12, 2019 It's just as easy to go 0-5, pal. That's why there's no advantage. Thank you for at least not being a bitch about it, TN. You're a good guy. Breath of fresh air seeing a level-headed guy on the forums. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharp Square Posted June 12, 2019 Author Report Share Posted June 12, 2019 you cant seriously say that it isn't a huge advantage for someone to play correlated plays, can you? If you are ten games back is it easier to go 5-0 or 10-0? The only reason I didnt bring it up after sharp sent out the rules is because he addressed that specific question and said of course it isn't allowed. Figured it was common sense. It is what it is. I appreciate what sharp does here and don't think he was heping anyone specifically. I do think he is wrong with this ruling those but understand how it would be hard to change it now even though most of us thought that was the way it was I do get what your saying and in retrospect i probably should have made a mention of it myself before going ahead with the new rules if not simply taking it into my own hands and not allowing it to be an option at all even after we scraped the first format for the second. I think it was a case of trying to hard to make as many people happy as possible in too short a time span and not crossing every single x off the list before moving ahead. I do apologize for any confusion that it may have caused now and I definitely didn't mean it to be beneficial to some over others in any way. I certainly appreciate the way in which you responded and I have no problem taking the blame for something like this when it's warranted. I simply took offense to the idea from others that I had done so in an effort to try and help one person over another. I know how hard it is to handicap MLB and how time consuming it can be and I in no way wanted to cause any unneeded situations. I certainly didn't want to contribute to the chance for any shot taking to occur or to lessen any advantage you or anyone else has because of good solid work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Machiavelli Posted June 12, 2019 Report Share Posted June 12, 2019 Any math of FF winners and full game winners being the same? If it's significant edge, should not be allowed period. I never once thought to do such since I assumed it's out of bounds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richsox24 Posted June 12, 2019 Report Share Posted June 12, 2019 I havent even been making my plays in this contest but why not just say starting now, that no 1st 5 plays and game plays on same side or total is allowed. Is it easier to go 10-0 by doing option 1 Red sox 1st 5 Red sox gameToronto 1st 5Toronto gameAtlanta 1st 5Atlanta gameCubs 1st 5Cubs gameMilwaukee 1st 5Milwaukee game. Or option 2 Red sox gameToronto gameAtlanta gameCubs gameMilwaukee gameDodgers gameGiants gameTigers gameAngels gameSeattle game By far its option 1...and it shouldn't be allowed. If it were allowed, TN would be up 50 units by now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingRevolver Posted June 12, 2019 Report Share Posted June 12, 2019 He'd be up 50 units because he's winning. He could just as well have been down 50 units doing that same thing if he were losing. You still have to win the games. We're not doing parlays, so there's no advantage. Like I said, it only allows you to go for bigger swings, up or down. I always knew I wasn't surrounded by geniuses, but Jesus Christ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingRevolver Posted June 12, 2019 Report Share Posted June 12, 2019 I havent even been making my plays in this contest but why not just say starting now, that no 1st 5 plays and game plays on same side or total is allowed. Is it easier to go 10-0 by doing option 1 Red sox 1st 5 Red sox gameToronto 1st 5Toronto gameAtlanta 1st 5Atlanta gameCubs 1st 5Cubs gameMilwaukee 1st 5Milwaukee game. Or option 2 Red sox gameToronto gameAtlanta gameCubs gameMilwaukee gameDodgers gameGiants gameTigers gameAngels gameSeattle game By far its option 1...and it shouldn't be allowed. If it were allowed, TN would be up 50 units by now.Go ahead and do option one. Show us how easy it is! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasson621 Posted June 12, 2019 Report Share Posted June 12, 2019 We're not doing parlays, so there's no advantage. You are either trolling or a stubborn idiot, I think I know which it is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richsox24 Posted June 12, 2019 Report Share Posted June 12, 2019 Go ahead and do option one. Show us how easy it is!Its much much easier kinger. If you don't think it is, have your pal Georgie start booking parlays 1st 5 and game. There's a reason books don't allow it. They're correlated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharp Square Posted June 12, 2019 Author Report Share Posted June 12, 2019 This isn't Kinger's fault in any way shape or form and he certainly shouldn't catch any flack for it! The switch from using the old format to the PPH happened quickly and there was a bit of a scramble to get everything setup as quickly as we could, so that we started as on time as possible to avoid any complaints of delays etc (switching had already put us a little behind). The new set of rules was put together with simplicity in mind. In a previous debate there were those arguing for both sides of that particular rule of being able to play FF/Full game wagers on same side and my first instinct was to not allow it which i stated in the thread but there still seemed to be others who wanted to reconsider it as there were mixed responses and wanted to talk about it some more before making a final decision which was fine by me, since we had multiple ideas going as to how it should go at that time. I wanted to hear what everyone had to say in an effort to try and make the contest rules fit for as many people playing as possible. But it was something that really didn't come to mind again when I was changing over everything to the PPH and making the new set of more simplified rules. If anything that was an error on my part and no one else's! Everything was sent out and no one mentioned it at all. These new rules do not state that making this combination of wagers was not allowed. Since the rules didn't specifically say you could not do it at this point I couldn't see saying but oh yeah well. The rules were sent to everyone and were accepted with 0 complaints or questions. So I didn't think it would be right altering them in an effort to be fair with so many plays already having been made. This was certainly not done with any ill intent or to create a chance for some players to use as an angle, and any insinuation of the sort i took offense to. I simply want to be part of a solution and not the problem which in this case doesn't seem to be what's happened here. For that I can only apologize and I as always will grade this thing in which ever way you guys want regardless of what that includes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasson621 Posted June 12, 2019 Report Share Posted June 12, 2019 SS, that's not the point, the fact that he insists there is no advantage is the problem. Any error allowing it isn't the issue it is the dipshit doubling down on his ignorance that is the problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yanks Posted June 12, 2019 Report Share Posted June 12, 2019 An apology to iag from monkey is due Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deemer Posted June 12, 2019 Report Share Posted June 12, 2019 If it’s been allowed to this point, you cannot retroactively change rules. I doubt anyone wants to audit people’s plays either which is why I stopped doing these contests Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.