Meh. - Page 127

greatwhitenorthchick · 11-02-2005, 11:08 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by paigowprincess
THere has been a lot of gratuitious and pointless tossing in of the "my boyfriend" of late. Are you getting co-dependent bc of the divorce finality?

It's possible. Good thing I have you to keep me on my toes.

Penske_Account · 11-02-2005, 11:09 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by nononono
You don't think it's a safe bet?

It's safe to say he has a overflow credit on his 2006 bullshit quota.

ThurgreedMarshall · 11-02-2005, 11:17 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by str8outavannuys
Here's what really bothered me about this game, and about lots of other NFL games. Why do coaches who have the superior team often try to "shorten the game," even when it's a close game. I think that the longer the game, i.e., the more plays that are run, would increase the more talented team's chances of winning.* So why does this always happen? Especially when I have a financial interest in the outcome?

*For a corrollary, I think it is self-evident that if tennis sets went to a tiebreak after 2 games, there would be a greater chance of upsets then if they went to a tiebreak after 20 games.

Your analogy makes no sense. Coaches try to shorten the game once they are up. I don't think many coaches with the superior team aim to shorten a game before they have the lead unless their strategy is to dominate Time of Possession because they have a great defense and/or running game.

In Tennis, there is no knock out shot and you can only score one point at a time. The better analogy would be boxing. If you're winning, you'd prefer a shorter fight because anyone can land a lucky punch. In football, no matter how good your team is, the other team has a guy that can probably make a few moves, grab an interception or do something to get seven quick points. If you're up, you want to reduce the number of opportunites the other team has to make such plays.

TM

ThurgreedMarshall · 11-02-2005, 11:24 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Penske_Account
It's safe to say he has a overflow credit on his 2006 bullshit quota.

Oh yeah? Well the Jerk Store called and they're all out of you!

TM

dtb · 11-02-2005, 11:26 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Penske_Account
It's safe to say he has a overflow credit on his 2006 bullshit quota.

Carryover bullshit, if you will.

Penske_Account · 11-02-2005, 11:28 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by ThurgreedMarshall
Oh yeah? Well the Jerk Store called and they're all out of you!

TM

"Ping! Pow!

ABBAKiss · 11-02-2005, 11:43 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Penske_Account
"Ping! Pow!

For some reason, this "phrase" just never gets old or loses its zing for me. I don't even know exactly what it means or where it came from, but the legend I have created in my mind makes me giggle. There's just something about the ".

sebastian_dangerfield · 11-02-2005, 11:50 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Oliver_Wendell_Ramone
Best. Beer. Ever.

Sam Smith's kicks its ass.

ltl/fb · 11-02-2005, 11:51 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by spookyfish
I had the converse happen. Went to a Mexican Restaurant that had just opened, and had not yet secured their liquor license. One of the longest fucking dinners of my life, especially after my then very young son started wailing. . . Eventually, they secured a license, but the Mexican jernt which opened down the street from them about six months later had better food, a tastier margarita, better selection of beer, and a license from the get-go. It was just too much to handle for them, and they disappeared quickly.

YOU have CHILDREN? Somehow I did not picture this. Though, this does help differentiate you from sparklehorse and soup sandwich -- them I can picture with kids.

spookyfish · 11-02-2005, 11:54 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by ltl/fb
YOU have CHILDREN? Somehow I did not picture this. Though, this does help differentiate you from sparklehorse and soup sandwich -- them I can picture with kids.

I did. Until I ate them.

This is a surprise?

Oh, and btw, it is now safe in L.A. to order pizza again. Thought you might like to know. . .

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9893291/

Spree: Story about "Pizza-Man" -- accused serial-killer.

greatwhitenorthchick · 11-02-2005, 11:57 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by ltl/fb
YOU have CHILDREN? Somehow I did not picture this. Though, this does help differentiate you from sparklehorse and soup sandwich -- them I can picture with kids.

Sparklehorse I do not picture with kids. Spooky and Soup Sandwich I picture with kids. Sparklehorse is a craigslist-savvy Bostonian with an avatar that I cannot figure out. I think she is single.

Mmmm, Burger (C.J.) · 11-02-2005, 12:01 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ThurgreedMarshall

In Tennis, there is no knock out shot and you can only score one point at a time. The better analogy would be boxing. If you're winning, you'd prefer a shorter fight because anyone can land a lucky punch. In football, no matter how good your team is, the other team has a guy that can probably make a few moves, grab an interception or do something to get seven quick points. If you're up, you want to reduce the number of opportunites the other team has to make such plays.

TM

There is no good analogy, because he's confusing ex ante and ex post strategy.

Before the game, the underdog will want to shorten the game because random chance evens out over a longer period, so if the game is "shorter" there's a greater chance luck will allow the underdog to win. This is the strategy villanova took in 1985--it kept the game slow from the start. They took, what, 28 shots, hitting 22 of them? It worked out, and then we got the shot clock so that strategy no longer works so well.

Once the game gets going and a team gets the lead, the leading team (regardless of whether they're stronger) will want to waste time, because it reduces opportunities for the other team to come back.

Of course, that doesn't work in untimed sports (except if rain is coming in baseball).

Replaced_Texan · 11-02-2005, 12:05 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by spookyfish
Excuse me? Brunch is never an acceptable non-alcohol event. Have you gone mad?

2. Even if you're anti-bloody mary/mimosa/bilini on girly drink princples, just drink champagne.

spookyfish · 11-02-2005, 12:13 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by greatwhitenorthchick
Sparklehorse I do not picture with kids. Spooky and Soup Sandwich I picture with kids. Sparklehorse is a craigslist-savvy Bostonian with an avatar that I cannot figure out. I think she is single.

I'm surprisingly kid-friendly/mother-approved.

FWIW, I'm pretty sure Sparkle's avatar is a plastic/ceramic tiger.

ThurgreedMarshall · 11-02-2005, 12:23 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Before the game, the underdog will want to shorten the game because random chance evens out over a longer period, so if the game is "shorter" there's a greater chance luck will allow the underdog to win. This is the strategy villanova took in 1985--it kept the game slow from the start. They took, what, 28 shots, hitting 22 of them? It worked out, and then we got the shot clock so that strategy no longer works so well.

Once the game gets going and a team gets the lead, the leading team (regardless of whether they're stronger) will want to waste time, because it reduces opportunities for the other team to come back.

I'm not giving you credit for saying essentially what I said in a better way.

Crap. That sounds like I just gave you credit. I take it back.

TM