Warrior General Games

Originally posted by fnordish

If you don't see what 7 more points for us and seven less for you does to the final score there isn't much I can do to help you.

Hellvis has to step in for a second here... you're suggesting that without that fumble, the score would've been 25-23? Just take out that one little piece, and that equates to another 7 points to your team? When does it EVER work like that? Not in the real world, not in this virtual one. It's never that simple and Bort has programmed it that way.

If it weren't a fumble on the kickoff, it could've been an interception for a 45 yard DTD, it could've been a 4 and out with a few plays that resulted in a TD, it could've turned into a drive that only yielded a FG for you, leaving you with a 23-21 loss. Hell there could've been any number of things that would've made the loss even worse.

Sports fans attempt this type of argument repeatedly and they never win no matter how hard they try. Yeah, there are game changing events, no doubt, but trying to claim one when you're already two scores down is bordering on psychotic.


~ Hellvis loves ya, baby.

good point

I am saying without the fumble we go down and score a TD(which we did on the next drive). We hold them to a FG(which happen), and we are driving at the end of the game to try and tie it up at 23. In all likelyhood we still throw the pick on this last drive, but it's a more interesing game.

Of course fans have these discussions, if you are a fan you don't think about the bad breaks. You look at the points in the game where luck could have gone the other way and dream. I am a fan of my GLB team, excuse me for this 'problem' of mine.

I hereby bestow upon Hellvis the circle argument of the week award.

Explanation for the masses:

Hellvis states that Outcome #1 certainly wasn't going to happen especially since Outcome #1 had a starting point of being 2 scores down.

Justification for this argument is provided and basically takes the shape of saying that any number of random and indeterminable scenarios could have occurred that would cause Outcome #2 or #3 or #4 etc. Yet, at the same time he is also unwittingly providing an argument that also maintains that Outcome #1 is also possible.

So congrats Hellvis.

Tune in next week when we see which other Alpha team decides to jump into the Zeta fun.

Bottom line is that at the beginning of the 4th quarter it was 13-9 Wales. That's a close game. Wales made plays in the 4th quarter to win. Congrats guys, we'll get you next time!

Originally posted by fnordish
Originally posted by qjam6

Originally posted by fnordish


yes GG. If not for the damn kick off return in the 4th.

I know I look forward to a chance to try this again this season.

You guys were down 20-9 in the 4th quarter and fumbled a kickoff. I don't think that play cost you guys the game.

Not trying to be rude, I've just seen this twice now. Anyways, a posted this all in good fun and hope to face you again in the playoffs!

If you don't see what 7 more points for us and seven less for you does to the final score there isn't much I can do to help you.


You guys hadn't gotten a TD all game and had to go 80 yards. Possible? Yes. Likely? No.

And the later argument saying you guys scored on the next drive doens't help your argument at all. Our defense was running an entirely different scheme for the bigger lead later in the 4th quarter.

It's over so whatever. Good luck for the rest of the season.

Originally posted by Davedeuce
Bottom line is that at the beginning of the 4th quarter it was 13-9 Wales. That's a close game. Wales made plays in the 4th quarter to win. Congrats guys, we'll get you next time!

yes, gg.

Originally posted by pabloex
I hereby bestow upon Hellvis the circle argument of the week award.

So congrats Hellvis.


Aww, thanks there pabloex... love gettin' awards!

But Hellvis must decline as the point is that original hypothesis, which insisted that an un-fumble would definitively result in 7 points lost from the winner and 7 points gained from the loser and thereby invert the result of the game, is completely bonkers as demonstrated in the examples that followed. Of course SOMETHING else could have happened in favor of the losing team - but that was the original logic Hellvis extended to the winner's side and would rather not have repeated that which had already been established by implication of the original hypothesis.

~ Hellvis loves ya, baby.

Yummy!!!

Originally posted by Hellvis

~ Hellvis loves ya, baby.


thanks hellvis, couldnt have said it all better myself.