From: lor@cbnewsk.cb.att.com (edward.lor)
Subject: Re: Hmmm...
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 03:42:40 GMT

In article <1993Jan21.182311.60433@uvmark.uucp> davem@uvmark.uucp (Dave Meeks) writes:
>>Oh, in that case, so someone who spent months arguing with me can't be anything
>>better than an idiot.
>Hey, argueing with an idiot does not make one an idiot.  Pointing out and 
>flaming your idiotic logic is an attempt to bring some sanity into your
>poor, wretched existance...
Yes, but your pointing out and flaming my logic didn't go anywhere. And usually 
after a month, you got no more arguments and wimped out. So your argument 
and logic must be more idiotic. Well, what makes of a person who spouts a 
month of more idiotic arguments? 

>>And since you wimp out on all arguments against me, then what does that make 
>>of you?
>Again, where's the proof... Arguments that are over does not mean that they
>have been wimped out on.  
But that's your style of arguing: try to outlast the opponent no matter how
long it takes, just like myself. The only yardstick is who quits first. 
I detailed all your quitting in our flame wars on 12/21/92. Check it out.

>You have disappeared from r.s.b.p, and the arguments
>could have gone on, but you just left and wimped out...
Which specific argument are we talking about here? Did I get into any
argument with you on basketball recently?

>Care to list your sources???  Mine include people like Gary Strand and a 
>variety of others.  
Yes, like who? Mine include Gary Myers, Gordon Forbes, the SF Chronicle,
John Madden .....

>The league?? Well, the team with the best record didn't
>make it to the SuperBowl, guess that didn't count.  
Yes, the team that beat Buffalo head-to-head didn't make it to the
SB either. Guess head-to-head didn't count either.

At least the league use record to determine div. champs, playoff berths, etc. 
Does it use head-to-head over record to determine these things?

>The Betting Public???
>Well, on many occasions the team with the better record is not the team to
>bet on.  
Then the odds will be adjusted. The last I saw (before the wildcard games),
SF was 3-2, Buffalo was 10-1. Seems like the betting public liked SF more.
And the Vegas line reflected that.

>Recently, money was on UNC over Virginia, despite Virginia being 
>undefeated.  
That's because it's not the final regular season record. Partial records
are not that indicative of merits.

>And, I seem to remember Buffalo actually being favored over 
>Miami, who was the higher rated opponent.  
I also seem to remember Dallas being favored over Buffalo in the SB. So
what's your point? 

>Also, I remember that Notre Dame
>had the odds over Texas A&M, who had the bette record.   
I also remembered that FSU had the odds over Nebraska, who had the worse
record.

>Polls, again,
>Texas A&M had the 2nd best record... What was their final polled position???
Yes, name a poll that a team 2-3 games behind getting ranked higher than
the team 2-3 games ahead. Haven't seen it. A&M's record of 12-1 may be 
"similar" to Miami/FSU's 11-1. Yet Buffalo's 11-5 isn't similar to SF's 14-2.

-- 
                                          Edward Lor
                                          lor@cbnewsk.att.com