|
|
#101
09-13-2005, 11:55 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Ok, the old TSP is back . . . .
[ QUOTE ]
wtf u not excited about possibly meeting me? [/ QUOTE ] haha, come on man, dont get all personal here. i would, of course, relish the opportunity. but you can understand that the others i outlined meeting hold a good deal of precedence. and if you not being included in my post is the thing you took out of it then i dunno [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img] Barron 
|
|
#103
09-14-2005, 12:03 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: unfluctuation
[ QUOTE ]
How does one value deception? In other words how to you estimate the EV of deception? Serious question. [/ QUOTE ] Pr(deception is noticed)*Pr(it is acted upon in later hands)*EV of difference of play (i.e. clearness of an action and detriment of its alternative)*number of times the situation arises~= EV(deception) im sure ive forgotten alot but thats the spirit imo. Barron
|
|
#104
09-14-2005, 12:03 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Ok, the old TSP is back . . . .
As awesome as this all sounds, I cant believe you guys are wasting this much time talking about it. I dont see any way of it possibly happening. TSP was obviously just running his mouth and isn't going to back it up.
<font color="white"> I really hope I end up eating my words on this one</font>
|
|
#105
09-14-2005, 12:08 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Ok, the old TSP is back . . . .
[ QUOTE ]
TSP, schneids, and clark all have my #...or rather, i have given it to each of them at least once. [/ QUOTE ] You're right I don't have your number but really I don't think you've ever given it to me so I'm pretty sure it's not my fault I don't have it.
|
|
#106
09-14-2005, 12:08 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Ok, the old TSP is back . . . .
[ QUOTE ]
As awesome as this all sounds, I cant believe you guys are wasting this much time talking about it. I dont see any way of it possibly happening. TSP was obviously just running his mouth and isn't going to back it up. <font color="white"> I really hope I end up eating my words on this one</font> [/ QUOTE ] its fun to think about and would rule if it occurred. i like the white words and didn't notice them until i responded [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] Barron
|
|
#107
09-14-2005, 12:09 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Ok, the old TSP is back . . . .
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] TSP, schneids, and clark all have my #...or rather, i have given it to each of them at least once. [/ QUOTE ] You're right I don't have your number but really I don't think you've ever given it to me so I'm pretty sure it's not my fault I don't have it. [/ QUOTE ] yes i have...remember when you wanted to call me to hear me rap [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img] Barron
|
|
#108
09-14-2005, 12:23 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Ok, the old TSP is back . . . .
straight up isnt a fair bet worstplayer. i think thats obvious. i would give odds to someone who bets that it happens as long as im assured to be paid when i win. however, with scneids and dci agreeing its more likely than before for sure.
|
|
#109
09-14-2005, 12:27 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Ok, the old TSP is back . . . .
[ QUOTE ]
By 'straight up' I meant 1:1 odds. But we could negotiate. How much are you considering wagering? [/ QUOTE ] Say a friendly $100? I was kinda lookin for 2:1 though I guess I'll put out an open offer: My $100 against anyone's $200, if it happens I win If you are a respected poster (TWP included) I transfer $100 straight away
|
|
#110
09-14-2005, 12:28 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Ok, the old TSP is back . . . .
[ QUOTE ]
straight up isnt a fair bet worstplayer. i think thats obvious. [/ QUOTE ] Why is that obvious? [ QUOTE ] as long as im assured to be paid when i win. [/ QUOTE ] Don't you think you're being a little too picky on this one? People who wager with me don't have to pay if they lose. [ QUOTE ] however, with scneids and dci agreeing its more likely than before for sure. [/ QUOTE ] I agree. Maybe now I should be getting odds.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
