Assuming way way too much
- Thread starter TarHeelEer
- Start date
Me too...
...but mostly because winning against Kentucky would be an instant classic regardless if we end up winning it all or not.
...but mostly because winning against Kentucky would be an instant classic regardless if we end up winning it all or not.
Yeah... if we win, it's a stunner
The instant college harlem globetrotters defeated by little ol' WVU. Couldn't happen.
Or could it?
The instant college harlem globetrotters defeated by little ol' WVU. Couldn't happen.
Or could it?
I'd point out how difficult it should be to beat a top 20 ranked WVU team 4 times in one year, but I'm with you. Bring on Kentucky.
3 times is enough with Baylor. Looking for a chance to slay a new "giant"
And Kentucky is it assuming WVU can get past the first two games. The Mountaineers can, but its the NCAA and one slip-up is all it takes so we can't take anything for granted.
And Kentucky is it assuming WVU can get past the first two games. The Mountaineers can, but its the NCAA and one slip-up is all it takes so we can't take anything for granted.
There is a statistical term for this called "the Gambler's fallacy"...
The chances of beating a team on the 4th meeting are not at all affected by the previous 3. Odds of starting from zero and having a coin flip come up heads 10 times in a row is 1 in 1024. Odds of a single coin flip coming up heads after the previous 9 all came up heads is still 1 in 2. Obviously there are multiple factors involved in a basketball game, but the results of previous events do not affect the odds of a single event happening.
All that being said, Baylor is a been there/done that team. Lets get some new opponents and hopefully ones that will be surprised by the press in person.
The chances of beating a team on the 4th meeting are not at all affected by the previous 3. Odds of starting from zero and having a coin flip come up heads 10 times in a row is 1 in 1024. Odds of a single coin flip coming up heads after the previous 9 all came up heads is still 1 in 2. Obviously there are multiple factors involved in a basketball game, but the results of previous events do not affect the odds of a single event happening.
All that being said, Baylor is a been there/done that team. Lets get some new opponents and hopefully ones that will be surprised by the press in person.
Lets just get there first, First two rounds are no gimmies ...
I hope for a shot at UK as much as the next guy, but WVU has to get past two teams (neither of which are just going to roll over) for that shot.
I hope for a shot at UK as much as the next guy, but WVU has to get past two teams (neither of which are just going to roll over) for that shot.
Re: There is a statistical term for this called "the Gambler's fallacy"...
That's been explained to him (before we played Baylor for a third time).
I think he understands.....but just felt compelled (since I posted in this thread) to make a joke about it.
I laughed....but at the same time I did take the time to see if its actually ever occurred. A fourth game has occurred many times but I have not seen if a team was ever 0-3 (or 3-0) before said game.
This post was edited on 3/15 9:39 PM by LowFatMilk
That's been explained to him (before we played Baylor for a third time).
I think he understands.....but just felt compelled (since I posted in this thread) to make a joke about it.
I laughed....but at the same time I did take the time to see if its actually ever occurred. A fourth game has occurred many times but I have not seen if a team was ever 0-3 (or 3-0) before said game.
This post was edited on 3/15 9:39 PM by LowFatMilk
Re: There is a statistical term for this called "the Gambler's fallacy"...
Ummmm not sure which lies in that post to start with so let's go with the biggest.
You made that post AFTER the third game, not before (as you claim in your post and the time and date stamp on your post that you linked proves).
Not everything is about you.
You going to tell us the lottery numbers after they have been announced and claim you knew those as well?
Ummmm not sure which lies in that post to start with so let's go with the biggest.
You made that post AFTER the third game, not before (as you claim in your post and the time and date stamp on your post that you linked proves).
Not everything is about you.
You going to tell us the lottery numbers after they have been announced and claim you knew those as well?
Re: There is a statistical term for this called "the Gambler's fallacy"...
You're right Doom...it was after the third game.
My mistake.
---------------
See that..? See how easy it can be to admit making a small mistake ?? You should take baby steps..because you make an ass of yourself on a regular basis (which would require 'big steps')
What I didn't do is act like I prefer (post that it's hard to beat a team a third time) playing a team that already beat us twice in the same season. I explained that I didn't want the 'true fans' to get upset so I waited until after the game to point out the OBVIOUS...
....plus... ...did you take notice how 0-2 teams in the Big12 did against teams they played a third time. ....I pointed that out too. NOT PRETTY.
No comment from you after that post... ....lol.....
You're right Doom...it was after the third game.
My mistake.
---------------
See that..? See how easy it can be to admit making a small mistake ?? You should take baby steps..because you make an ass of yourself on a regular basis (which would require 'big steps')
What I didn't do is act like I prefer (post that it's hard to beat a team a third time) playing a team that already beat us twice in the same season. I explained that I didn't want the 'true fans' to get upset so I waited until after the game to point out the OBVIOUS...
....plus... ...did you take notice how 0-2 teams in the Big12 did against teams they played a third time. ....I pointed that out too. NOT PRETTY.
No comment from you after that post... ....lol.....
Re: There is a statistical term for this called "the Gambler's fallacy"...
I don't read most of your posts, so my not commenting on something you said isn't shocking.
I never claim to make an ass of you or try to make an ass of you. You do just fine with that on your own. As I just pointed out, you were wrong here, and I'm sure if I cared enough to look, I'm sure I could find other things you are wrong about.
Again, not everything is about you, as much as you beg for it to be.
I don't read most of your posts, so my not commenting on something you said isn't shocking.
I never claim to make an ass of you or try to make an ass of you. You do just fine with that on your own. As I just pointed out, you were wrong here, and I'm sure if I cared enough to look, I'm sure I could find other things you are wrong about.
Again, not everything is about you, as much as you beg for it to be.
Re: Doom is married
I posted in this thread because you started it. It says SO much she thinks I posted because she posted in the thread.
Smh.
I posted in this thread because you started it. It says SO much she thinks I posted because she posted in the thread.
Smh.
Re: There is a statistical term for this called "the Gambler's fallacy"...
That makes it really odd because you'll give opinions/direct replies to comments I made in threads that you didn't even participate in when you share that 'rare' reply to one of my posts..... ....in a thread that has NOTHING to do with those comments in the first place.
By the way... .....since you're pretending you didn't read it...
Teams that were 0-2 against other Big 12 teams were 0-6 in the third game rematch during the Big 12 conference tourney. Yea I know.... ...it's hard to beat a team 3 times in a single season (as you advertised).
LOL.
That makes it really odd because you'll give opinions/direct replies to comments I made in threads that you didn't even participate in when you share that 'rare' reply to one of my posts..... ....in a thread that has NOTHING to do with those comments in the first place.
By the way... .....since you're pretending you didn't read it...
Teams that were 0-2 against other Big 12 teams were 0-6 in the third game rematch during the Big 12 conference tourney. Yea I know.... ...it's hard to beat a team 3 times in a single season (as you advertised).
LOL.
Re: There is a statistical term for this called "the Gambler's fallacy"...
I'm sure you see what you want to see.
I'm sure you see what you want to see.
Re: She's a stalker
She's pretty harmless for the most part. But the 'stalker' aspect.....there is some truth there especially with what she posted below.
She's pretty harmless for the most part. But the 'stalker' aspect.....there is some truth there especially with what she posted below.
I've known Doom a long long time
You, not so much. As far as I can tell you came from the other board. Quite frankly, I wish you'd go back. Both boards went downhill when you came over here.
You, not so much. As far as I can tell you came from the other board. Quite frankly, I wish you'd go back. Both boards went downhill when you came over here.
Re: I've known Doom a long long time
I certainly don't post here to antagonize posters like you TarHeelEer....but at the same time I will defend my opinions. I did take note that your 'tone' toward me clearly changed when Doom started engaging me. Maybe...just maybe....someone you haven't known a 'long time' isn't the monster that a retired mod is trying to expose.
...or maybe I am.
Either way, there's very few posters that have a problem engaging in a reasonable and respectable conversation with me.
I'm from many other boards. The fact is... ...I have access to the 3 major WVU recruiting/info subscription services.
I certainly don't post here to antagonize posters like you TarHeelEer....but at the same time I will defend my opinions. I did take note that your 'tone' toward me clearly changed when Doom started engaging me. Maybe...just maybe....someone you haven't known a 'long time' isn't the monster that a retired mod is trying to expose.
...or maybe I am.
Either way, there's very few posters that have a problem engaging in a reasonable and respectable conversation with me.
I don't see it that way at all
There's a time to defend, and there's a time to let things go. You NEVER let anything go. You're like the nagging woman that never lets up.
The board has went downhill way in addition to the Stew vs. Holgs fight that has subsided. It was a lot better in the old days. People like you have run the good posters off.
I don't usually call people out like this, but enough is enough. Think about what you're saying sometimes. A message board personae isn't your street cred.
This post was edited on 3/15 10:50 PM by TarHeelEer
There's a time to defend, and there's a time to let things go. You NEVER let anything go. You're like the nagging woman that never lets up.
The board has went downhill way in addition to the Stew vs. Holgs fight that has subsided. It was a lot better in the old days. People like you have run the good posters off.
I don't usually call people out like this, but enough is enough. Think about what you're saying sometimes. A message board personae isn't your street cred.
This post was edited on 3/15 10:50 PM by TarHeelEer
Re: I don't see it that way at all
Well TarHeel...
...this is the time I will 'let things go'.
I'm sincerely sorry that I sometimes get you upset. You're a great poster.. ...a long time poster... ...a person who's opinion is respected.... ...a loyal WVU fan.
No BS. No sarcasm.
Sorry.
--------------
How should I, in the future, share my opinions when they don't match (and they almost never do) the masses ??
Well TarHeel...
...this is the time I will 'let things go'.
I'm sincerely sorry that I sometimes get you upset. You're a great poster.. ...a long time poster... ...a person who's opinion is respected.... ...a loyal WVU fan.
No BS. No sarcasm.
Sorry.
--------------
How should I, in the future, share my opinions when they don't match (and they almost never do) the masses ??
Re: I don't see it that way at all
Yea.. ...sarcasm is the primary weapon that I often use while making posts.....
...but so is honesty. It typically catches people off-guard.
----------------
Didn't mean to catch you off-guard.
Yea.. ...sarcasm is the primary weapon that I often use while making posts.....
...but so is honesty. It typically catches people off-guard.
----------------
Didn't mean to catch you off-guard.
Re: Thank goodness someone pointed out that mistake...
This thread is full of errors. Most are ego driven as opposed to honest mistakes.
This thread is full of errors. Most are ego driven as opposed to honest mistakes.
When I finally see a thread with some replies and maybe some good WEST VIRGINIA discussion, it always ends up just being a pissing match over something irrelevant. In the past, at least the pissing matches were with rival schools and were hilarious.
Did you read the post?
I said there are several factors involved in a basketball game unlike a coin flip, however what happened in the previous games has very little to do with the game at hand. Saying its hard to beat a team three times in a season after 2 games is the definition of the gambler's fallacy. I do not need to try again, a smug "I'm right, you're wrong" post like yours shows how little you have to stand on.
I said there are several factors involved in a basketball game unlike a coin flip, however what happened in the previous games has very little to do with the game at hand. Saying its hard to beat a team three times in a season after 2 games is the definition of the gambler's fallacy. I do not need to try again, a smug "I'm right, you're wrong" post like yours shows how little you have to stand on.
Why do you think sarcasim is such a great tool?
It would have a chance of being more appreciated if you were using it among friend. That is not the case here. Your comments are slams at best. They become sarcastic only when you are called. That becomes an enduring exchange to give you some air time that you think you need. When multiple tell you that you are wrong, historically, you apologize and say it was only sarcasm. You have been punked again.
It would have a chance of being more appreciated if you were using it among friend. That is not the case here. Your comments are slams at best. They become sarcastic only when you are called. That becomes an enduring exchange to give you some air time that you think you need. When multiple tell you that you are wrong, historically, you apologize and say it was only sarcasm. You have been punked again.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
Grudges aside, do you think Rich Rod can still be successful at the P4 level?- Latest: Burt_MacklinFBI
-
-
