I believe he does not participate in the recreational part of the forum.
I guess I should have added: anymore?
BD does participate in the Recreational forum periodically. He responded to one topic in October and 2 in September. I find nothing wrong with that since his posts were straightforward and not offensive. Quite frankly, participation in the recreational forum has virtually dried up except for some diehards.
Apparently you missed the several posts where he dissed the intelligence level of rec. players compared to AP's. With no rational reason. Also the tweaking on several occasions of FP including the 7/26/19 post on the rec. forum,page 2,thread called "three weeks means...."
I suspect that anyone who accepts accepts dissing of their intelligence simply because of their choice of entertainment may deserve it.
The double standard of discipline back in august caused your observed drop-off in participation,not just on the rec. forum!!
I believe he does not participate in the recreational part of the forum.
I guess I should have added: anymore?
BD does participate in the Recreational forum periodically. He responded to one topic in October and 2 in September. I find nothing wrong with that since his posts were straightforward and not offensive. Quite frankly, participation in the recreational forum has virtually dried up except for some diehards.
Apparently you missed the several posts where he dissed the intelligence level of rec. players compared to AP's. With no rational reason. Also the tweaking on several occasions of FP including the 7/26/19 post on the rec. forum,page 2,thread called "three weeks means...."
I suspect that anyone who accepts accepts dissing of their intelligence simply because of their choice of entertainment may deserve it.
The double standard of discipline back in august caused your observed drop-off in participation,not just on the rec. forum!!
I was only pointing out that BD continues to participate in the recreational forum and that his last posts were civil. Having been the target of his acerbic comments in the past I can empathize with your perspective. He has not been the only one who has mocked or otherwise uncivilly denounced Phil, myself and recreational players in the past for the audacity of views or VP play not consistent with AP values. Over the years, I have started several topics along these lines that have elicited negative commentary, some of it hostile. For example, "The Recreational Forum Has Been Hijacked" in 10/2018, and "Musings of a casual recreational VP player" in 6/2018. Having said that I appreciate the paucity of that rancor the last few months.
Excellent thruout OT.
I read at the time, and re-read, both of those threads.
My point with bd is his sarcastic denigration,on several posts, of the intelligence level of RP,s, a totally baseless claim, which exposes his own intelligence level!!
Excellent thruout OT.
I read at the time, and re-read, both of those threads.
My point with bd is his sarcastic denigration,on several posts, of the intelligence level of RP,s, a totally baseless claim, which exposes his own intelligence level!!
Obviously, these last posts are off topic. I asked webman to restore two other Topics. One has been restored, the other hopefully will be as well. Those, in addition to the ones mentioned above, reflect my thinking . No need repeating what I posted in those threads nor the replies they elicited.
Too each his own Ot. You do not deserve the dissing of your posts. Rancor is an excellent description and you do not have to accept it!!
No one should be subjected to unwarranted language. I have no problem with anyone disagreeing with me or anyone else so long as it's done civilly. From my perspective, those who can't respond civilly are just demonstrating the bankruptcy of their character. Not worth getting into the gutter with them. Peace!
well im still waiting for my answer? my gut says stick with the smallest denomation they have to offer and capitalize on it (Which is quarters) but my mind says 5$ a hand on a 99% game maybe better then 1.25 97% game
well im still waiting for my answer? my gut says stick with the smallest denomation they have to offer and capitalize on it (Which is quarters) but my mind says 5$ a hand on a 99% game maybe better then 1.25 97% game
All things being equal, the $1 ($5 per hand) @ 99% game is a 5 cents expected loss per hand. The quarter ($1.25 per hand) @ 97% game is an expected loss of 3.75 cents per hand. Not hard math.
yes but which one is more likely to end a 100$ profit winner? if play a has 200$ BR and player b has 200$ BR and both players goals are to reach 1/3 of profit which one has the higher likelyhood?
98.9% (40 turns) or player b 97% (160 turns) that is a huge difference of turns.
is the same still not hard and clear? player a can easily go broke within 10minutes while player a continues the battle
again a computer animation of both scenarios playing out would give a average on who has the HIGHER chance of accomplishing the goal
well im still waiting for my answer? my gut says stick with the smallest denomation they have to offer and capitalize on it (Which is quarters) but my mind says 5$ a hand on a 99% game maybe better then 1.25 97% game
All things being equal, the $1 ($5 per hand) @ 99% game is a 5 cents expected loss per hand. The quarter ($1.25 per hand) @ 97% game is an expected loss of 3.75 cents per hand. Not hard math.
That's easy for you to say. . Jokes aside, we really appreciate your leveling influence.